If you thought it had been a long time since you heard about last year’s would-be Triple Crown champion, it’s because it has been a long time. Barbaro had been doing remarkably well for a long stretch. A recent bout of laminitis,...
We once had a cat with kidney disease: among the options our vet listed were in-patient radiation treatment at Davis Vet School (two hours away) or a $15,000 kidney transplant. We didn't have the resources for either of those, and quite frankly, I wouldn't have subjected a 15-year-old cat to those torturous (from her point of view) treatments even if we had.
Our new kitten, Balthazar, is currently recovering from an upper respiratory infection that had him hospitalized in our area's Emergency Animal Center last weekend. Our $65 shelter kitten racked up a $600 vet bill in two days. (He is FIV/FeLV negative, by the way. Hurrah!) We can afford that, but a lot of people couldn't. A woman in the waiting room told me a story about becoming homeless so she could afford her dog's cancer treatment: the day she learned how expensive it would be, she told her landlord, "Just evict me now." The dog died anyway, of course. Listening to her story, I thought, "I wouldn't put a dog that age through those procedures." But everyone's different.
Driving home from AEC after picking up Balthazar, I thought bleakly about how much good that $600 could have done for people in the Third World. A lot of people would criticize me for spending so much on a kitten when there are other humans dying for lack of basics like food and clean water. And while I could afford the $600 for the vet bill, I can't afford to match that with donations to OxFam or Doctors Without Borders.
The ethics of all of this are incredibly complicated, and I'm not sure there are any right answers -- except that, for me, I couldn't accept giving my kitten anything but the best treatment.
The thing that I'm left wondering, however, is whether or not it's worth putting Barbaro through this treatment. Whether his family can afford it or not does not even touch upon the ethical issues of putting this horse through more treatment. Is it WORTH it?
Just two days ago, I made that sort of decision... We had ended up at the shelter and were 'just looking' when this sad little Jack Russell mix with the body of a Dachshund and flying nun ears stopped me with her sad gaze... Came to find out she'd been at the shelter before and was returned because the owners said she had distemper- they even signed an euthanasia form for her. The shelter vets, however, decided she did not have distemper and put her back out for adoption. She was passed over time and time again due to the vagueness of whether she was ill or not...
Until I, the ultimate sucker, came along... I took her home, I bathed her, I gave her a soft bed, and then I took her to the vet who did the work-up on her before... Where the vet was very saddened to inform me that she had already been subjected to two distemper titers and both times tested positive and although she had been on antibiotics for two months- the strongest antibiotics they had available- she never seemed to improve. She simply stayed stable- but she did not wag her tail, she barely ate any food, she was not enjoying her life.
Did I have the money to drag out MORE treatment? Yes. Yet after two months of antibiotics, of not eating, of a hacking cough, of dripping mucus out of her nose, of turning into a skeleton dog with no meat on her bones, of no happiness... Was I going to put this little Poppin through more? I decided, no- enough was enough. I had made the promise to her that if she was ill, I'd let her go. So I held her tight and kissed her cute wirey head and let her go to sleep in my arms...
That's just my opinion. I don't think people should keep animals alive 'just because' they have the funds. It's a fine line, however, and I know I second-guess myself with each rescue I've let go... But in the end, I try to comfort myself with the idea that I made the right decision.
I put Colin through $2000 worth of tests at Cornell University. He had a definite neural condition, located T2-T12 and had trouble with his back legs. They gave him a MRI, ultrasound, and spinal tap among other tests. They did not find what was wrong. He survived a year, never improving. Do I regret torturing him or wasting the money I didn't have on him? No. Because if they could have fixed it, it would have been so wonderful. Spinal surgery was suggested initially as a cure, and we would have done it. However with the tests coming back negative, they'd have flown blind, so no surgery was done.
I spent over $1,000.00 on a chinchilla I had that developed kidney stones.
After the surgery, I contacted the company that I was purchasing his food from as it was one of those across the board diets that was said to be safe for all chinchillas including females that were pregnant and or lactating.
After contacting a friend of mine, it was decided that these stones developed due to too much calcium being added to the diet to accomodate the pregnant chinchillas. Six months later, he developed the stones again and I decided to have him put down as he wasn't right after the first surgery. Chinchillas and anesthesia do not get along and it would have been cruel for me to put him through it again.
Since then I've also learned that alfalfa hay also has a high calcium content, so I won't let Shakespeare have it on a regular basis. He gets hay treats that has some mixed it, but the majority of it is Timothy Hay. He also gets Timothy Hay as part of his regular feedings and pellets that are Timothy hay based. He'd love nothing more than to eat all alfalfa because it's sweet, but I'm paranoid now she can deal with it. He gets all kinds of others to curb his chinchilla junkfood taste buds so losing the alfalfa isn't that big of a deal.
The company that put out the diet ( and still does today) didn't have anything to say other than their product makes them alot of money, so there couldn't possibly be anything wrong with it.
On the other hand, maybe they are willing to spend so much on their pet horse because their spending crazily on this big wad of glue is giving New Bolton Center the chance to learn a lot. I mean, it's gone from being let's play jenga with itty bits of bone to new frontiers in long-term horse hospitalization and rehabilitation, and high end approaches to laminitis. All of this is going to trickle down to more salvagable horses, and eventually to the working and pet horses of mere mortals...
These dollars are going down a far more interesting rabbit hole than a donation would...
Just out of curiosity, if he can't breed normally can his sperm be artificially collected? Or would that still be out of the question due to his illness?
Thoroughbreds cannot be registered if they were artificially inseminated. A live cover (the old fashioned way) is required. So even if it were possible to collect semen, his foals could not be registered as thoroughbreds. But they`ve said repeatedly they`re not thinking about that. They just want him to live and be pain free. And if it came about that he could actually cover a mare that would be a bonus.
Interesting comment, Thing One, about the trickle-down to treating other horses in future. I agree they`re probably learning a lot from this opportunity, and if it helps other horses in future it will be some good coming out of a very bad thing.
Stacy, that`s a good point about the chinchilla and "one feed fits all" mentality of the feed company. Pressure in the bottom line is probably the only way to get them to change and put out different formulas for different dietary requirements. Shameful really. How hard can it be to make slightly different versions for different animals? Other companies do it routinely for horses, cats, and dogs. They probably don`t have enough competition to induce them to change though.
The whole "how much ($) do I love my animal" question is agonizing. It`s usually pretty easy to decide when the animal is old. I weigh what I`d be putting him/her through against how much meaningful, quality time it would add to the lifespan. Sometimes we forget that dying is part of living. If the animal has had a good long life it`s a bit easier to say goodbye. It`s a lot harder if it`s a young animal though. Then you`re weighing how much you can afford against the ability of the procedure to cure the animal or at least give it a reasoable chance for a quality life. Talk about ethical and moral dilemmas!
Our new kitten, Balthazar, is currently recovering from an upper respiratory infection that had him hospitalized in our area's Emergency Animal Center last weekend. Our $65 shelter kitten racked up a $600 vet bill in two days. (He is FIV/FeLV negative, by the way. Hurrah!) We can afford that, but a lot of people couldn't. A woman in the waiting room told me a story about becoming homeless so she could afford her dog's cancer treatment: the day she learned how expensive it would be, she told her landlord, "Just evict me now." The dog died anyway, of course. Listening to her story, I thought, "I wouldn't put a dog that age through those procedures." But everyone's different.
Driving home from AEC after picking up Balthazar, I thought bleakly about how much good that $600 could have done for people in the Third World. A lot of people would criticize me for spending so much on a kitten when there are other humans dying for lack of basics like food and clean water. And while I could afford the $600 for the vet bill, I can't afford to match that with donations to OxFam or Doctors Without Borders.
The ethics of all of this are incredibly complicated, and I'm not sure there are any right answers -- except that, for me, I couldn't accept giving my kitten anything but the best treatment.
Just two days ago, I made that sort of decision... We had ended up at the shelter and were 'just looking' when this sad little Jack Russell mix with the body of a Dachshund and flying nun ears stopped me with her sad gaze... Came to find out she'd been at the shelter before and was returned because the owners said she had distemper- they even signed an euthanasia form for her. The shelter vets, however, decided she did not have distemper and put her back out for adoption. She was passed over time and time again due to the vagueness of whether she was ill or not...
Until I, the ultimate sucker, came along... I took her home, I bathed her, I gave her a soft bed, and then I took her to the vet who did the work-up on her before... Where the vet was very saddened to inform me that she had already been subjected to two distemper titers and both times tested positive and although she had been on antibiotics for two months- the strongest antibiotics they had available- she never seemed to improve. She simply stayed stable- but she did not wag her tail, she barely ate any food, she was not enjoying her life.
Did I have the money to drag out MORE treatment? Yes. Yet after two months of antibiotics, of not eating, of a hacking cough, of dripping mucus out of her nose, of turning into a skeleton dog with no meat on her bones, of no happiness... Was I going to put this little Poppin through more? I decided, no- enough was enough. I had made the promise to her that if she was ill, I'd let her go. So I held her tight and kissed her cute wirey head and let her go to sleep in my arms...
That's just my opinion. I don't think people should keep animals alive 'just because' they have the funds. It's a fine line, however, and I know I second-guess myself with each rescue I've let go... But in the end, I try to comfort myself with the idea that I made the right decision.
(the chain of posts about our Colin for the curious http://www.runningscared.org/posts/1116548139.shtm... )
One does the best one can.
After the surgery, I contacted the company that I was purchasing his food from as it was one of those across the board diets that was said to be safe for all chinchillas including females that were pregnant and or lactating.
After contacting a friend of mine, it was decided that these stones developed due to too much calcium being added to the diet to accomodate the pregnant chinchillas. Six months later, he developed the stones again and I decided to have him put down as he wasn't right after the first surgery. Chinchillas and anesthesia do not get along and it would have been cruel for me to put him through it again.
Since then I've also learned that alfalfa hay also has a high calcium content, so I won't let Shakespeare have it on a regular basis. He gets hay treats that has some mixed it, but the majority of it is Timothy Hay. He also gets Timothy Hay as part of his regular feedings and pellets that are Timothy hay based. He'd love nothing more than to eat all alfalfa because it's sweet, but I'm paranoid now she can deal with it. He gets all kinds of others to curb his chinchilla junkfood taste buds so losing the alfalfa isn't that big of a deal.
The company that put out the diet ( and still does today) didn't have anything to say other than their product makes them alot of money, so there couldn't possibly be anything wrong with it.
These dollars are going down a far more interesting rabbit hole than a donation would...
Interesting comment, Thing One, about the trickle-down to treating other horses in future. I agree they`re probably learning a lot from this opportunity, and if it helps other horses in future it will be some good coming out of a very bad thing.
Stacy, that`s a good point about the chinchilla and "one feed fits all" mentality of the feed company. Pressure in the bottom line is probably the only way to get them to change and put out different formulas for different dietary requirements. Shameful really. How hard can it be to make slightly different versions for different animals? Other companies do it routinely for horses, cats, and dogs. They probably don`t have enough competition to induce them to change though.
The whole "how much ($) do I love my animal" question is agonizing. It`s usually pretty easy to decide when the animal is old. I weigh what I`d be putting him/her through against how much meaningful, quality time it would add to the lifespan. Sometimes we forget that dying is part of living. If the animal has had a good long life it`s a bit easier to say goodbye. It`s a lot harder if it`s a young animal though. Then you`re weighing how much you can afford against the ability of the procedure to cure the animal or at least give it a reasoable chance for a quality life. Talk about ethical and moral dilemmas!