It's a very tough, personal question, to be sure. I also consider the age of the pet. If my Westie has a life span of 12-15 years, comes down with a very expensive disease at 11, I'm going to weigh whether getting an extra couple of years out of her is worth the pain she'll go through and the emotional torture I'll go through, as well as the cost. To eke out a few more months for a pet that has already run through the vast majority of its life expectancy just doesn't make sense to me, especially when the pet likely is going to die soon anyhow. In that case, I think I would do what I can to treat the symptoms to allow the pooch to live as normal of a life as possible, and then do the right thing.

It's a tough, tough call, and in my opnion, a completely different one to make if the pet is very young and ordinarily would have years of life ahead. I'd have to reconsider in that case.

I opted for expensive surgery when my little terrier slipped a disc, and so many people felt the need to comment on it. Like CatMom mentioned, a lot of those same people spend ridiculous sums on new cars, fancy road bikes, designer clothes, big tvs, etc. But for some reason, they thinks it worthwhile to point out what I've chosen to spend my money on. My mom mentioned even how far that money could to help other dogs.

Here's the thing that rubs me the wrong way. I give a lot more money to charity than those people who criticized me . Since the surgery, I adopted a horribly unsocialized chihuahua. Now I'm fostering two more. They spend their money on big houses and stuff to fill them. I live below my means to a certain extent so that I can save and help others. I don't think that I'm alone. I would be tempted to say that other people who make the choice to save their animals are more likely to be caring people who give to charities and help others.

Jennifer - That may be an oldie, but it's also a "goodie," and one I'm going to file away for future use. We have 8 cats and 2 dogs. While I don't recommend it for everyone, our animals are all very well cared for, loved, and do not bother anyone else. Nothing irritates me more than to have someone make horribly negative comments about the number of animals we have and what this must mean about us. Next time that happens, I'm going to pull out that gem of a reply!

How can you condemn anyone for caring and loving an animal "too much." I wish I had $20,000 extra dollars to spend on my sweet little cat who is suffering from chronic renal failure. Sadly, I don't think any amount of money would change the course of this horrible disease. As she struggles through this I have had to consider that there may come a time when I have to chose to end her life. I cannot bear the thought. So I am doing everything I can to help her recover. Mostly, that means refusing to give up on her. It also means feeding her by syringe three times a day, administering sub-cutaneous fluids twice a day.

None of it is expensive but it is certainly emotionally taxing and time consuming. When I called in sick one day last week to stay home with my cat because she was vomiting, my boss said to me the next day: "It sounds like it's time to put her out of her misery." She isn't a mean or unkind person. But someone who has never loved an animal can simply never understand those of us who do...I feel so blessed to have this beautiful creature in my life. And I feel an enormous sense of responsibility for her well being and happiness. For many of us it's not a question of how much is too much. The question is, What else can I do to help my beloved pet recover?

"my paper plates were taking up in the landfill were considerably less than her kids' poo-poo diapers"

This is just classic!

To comment on the subject of the post - our clinic is in a relatively low income rural area. You wouldn't believe the number of people who balk at the cost of a DHPP vaccine! "Just rabies. I only want rabies. It's just a dog.", they say. Then they go out that weekend and cruise around from bar to bar on their $4K 4-wheeler or snowmobile. The whole things makes me sad!

I hope you'll all excuse me when I respond to the article at hand with the following simple response:

BULLSHIT.

Catmom, you hit the nail on the head.

A dear friend of mine owns 12 Rogers Wireless stores (and hence has ridiculous amounts of money to burn) and collects Ferraris. He recently purchased his first Formula 1 car for just over $1,000,000. This is a car that he will never actually race (his wife won't let him for obvious reasons) and is not street legal. They own several homes, more vehicles than I can count (anything that comes out new, he has to own it, from a Prowler to a Carrera to a Smart Car). He drives them for a year, gets tired of them when they are no longer the "new" thing he gets rid of them or adds them to his permanent collection, Jay Leno style.

After all that (and by the way, no one bats an EYE, other than to drool over his new four-wheeled acquisition) for anyone to DARE to criticize how ANYONE cares to spend his/her money is beyond reproach. Dr. Khuly, don't you feel guilty for one second spending money on Sophie. The only reason to feel bad is when it interferes with things that should take moral precedence. For example, spending your son's college fund on Sophie's treatment? Not exactly the same thing. Catch my drift? Spending your own damn money on a vacation, a house, a car, a donation, a cat clone, a surgery for a goose/rat/snake/amoeba/tarantula/earthworm/insert other absurd incident here, well quite frankly it's no one's business but your OWN because no one earned the money but YOU (and maybe the nice people at VISA or AmEx... lol).

Would I personally spend $20,000 to mend a dog of mine? I can be totally honest and say that no, I would not. Ten years ago, I would have, in a heartbeat. But after ten years of rescue, I know how many dogs I can personally save with that $20,000, and while you can NEVER put a price on a life, I would rather leave a legacy in the name of a dog I love than simply buy time. Can I understand why someone would choose the other way? ABSOLUTELY. At the same time, I don't feel it's anywhere approaching my right to make an opinion one way or another. It's not my dog (or goose!) it's not my situation, and it's not my decision.

To hell with those who would judge. There are those people who judge interracial couples, or handicapped reproduction... the list goes on and on and on. You can't turn around without someone having an opinion that you could have done it better, or worse, shouldn't have done it at all.

To all of you out there (and boy, do you know who you are!)... get a hobby!

Many of us struggle with this question. My foster cat was diagnosed last week with lymphoma, and she also has early CRF and diabetes which came out of remission around the time of her lymphoma DX.

She started chemo on Wednesday, thanks to the amazing rescue who "owns" her. She is one of two cats who they have in foster that are undergoing chemo on their dime.

Some people told me to "just put her down." Well, I have some input into the decision, but it's not mine. Even if it were, and I had the resources, I would be doing the chemo.

She's only been out of a cage for the year she's been with me, and as much of her life at the end she can spend out of the cage, the better as far as I can see. I am sad for her that on top of her other conditions, she gets this fatal diagnosis never having found a "forever home." I guess I'm it by default.

But how far do you push it when the diagnosis is ultimately terminal? It's a hard line, and I try to base it on what I think is best for the animal, but it is a gigantically subjective thing.

I can't behave differently with a pet than I would a person. Just can't.

Took me a long time to come to peace with the fact that I am a quality of death euthanizer, not a quality of life euthanizer. But now that I understand that about myself, I struggle less internally.

When there is hope for a better day ahead, I will exhaust my resources and become a nurse. When there is hope to stablize things I will do the same.

It is only when the animal is suffering (pain, not diminished quality of life, because by sacrificing much of my own quality of life, I can generally prop up quality of life for a sick animal) and there is no hope of stabilizing the disease to allow them to enjoy some things in life . . . or if the dying process has begun. That is when I can euthanize.

I can't euthanize just because my pet has gotten a terminal dx if they are still feeling OK or at least not suffering.

Lots of people are judgmental about this because we all have different philosophies about what constitutes acceptable quality of life and appropriate end of life care, and different tolerance levels for hospice type care. Also, some people think that allowing your pet to have to live through anything less than their usual, prior normal quality of life is "cruel." I guess that means we should all off our grandparents, too.

All valid points, Barbara, but the article does not give particulars on how uncomfortable this goose really is, it merely sets the stage for our understanding of why someone might want to provide this kind of care to a goose, just as for any dog or cat. With the limited information provided I feel I'm in no position to wonder whether Boswell is suffering.

Radiation treatments are not uncomfortable except for the anesthetic portion (masking or IV catheterization). Indeed Sophie fairly skips out of her treatments and now that she's used to the drill she skips in there as well, apparently looking forward to the attention of those who care for her there. She comes home and eats big happy meals and, except for some sleepiness immediately afterwards, she's none the worse for the experience.

As to amputation, geese don't do so well. Two legs is tough, especially if you weigh as much as a goose. I've seen ducks do OK with prosthetics but the other foot is constantly at risk of bumblefoot and other problems as a result of inappropriate weight distribution.

My dog is my child and the question coming to mind is: would I want my human child to be euthanized because of terminal disease? Of course not, then why should I consider euthanasia for my dog, my cat, or any pet I have and consider it a child? For me, hospice care will be the only alternative.

Oh, and I do offer "hospice" as an alternative. We can provide it at our hospital or we teach you to do it at home. It's a perfectly valid approach as long as pain is controlled and suffering absolutely minimized. But some cases just don't lend themselves to home care--respiratory cases, for example.

Hello,
I agree that how you decide to spend your money is a personal decision and if it means doing everything (within reason) that you can for your animal, then so be it. I recently lost my 11yr old Choc Lab to lymphoma. She had chemo at NEVOG on Waltham, MA for about 8 months and while the cancer was not reversible, it kept it in check and she had great quality of life. She contracted pneumonia shortly after a treatment and unexpectedly passed away at the vets while being treated. I actually have had a Pet Memorial business for 5 years and have spoken to hundreds of grieving pet owners and hear the stories of what lengths the went through to help their pets - some are just incredible. Bottom line, we love our pets and should not feel guilty for trying to save them - as long as it is the best course of action for the pet and they maintain a quality of life.