blonde poker forum

I have just been watching a TV programme which featured an old dog which has incurable bone cancer. The dog has already had one leg removed, and is now receiving chemotherapy.

Everyone involved was putting a positive spin on this, with quotes like, "He doesn't know it's terminal" and "This treatment will extend his life"

Is it me, or has the world gone mad?

I'm with you :)

Apart from the morale situation, it must be costing them a fortune.

http://blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?topic=11972.0

There is a line that has to be drawn - no matter how difficult a decision it is.

As this thread has now been started, how is Murph?

I completely Concur Red, It seems that a lot of people now a days treat a dog (other pets too) as a part of the family.
Nothing is too good for their dogs and they will think that this treatment is enhancing the dogs life and increasing life-expectancy.
When I was growing up, as my pets reached an old age the vets would put them to sleep to help them out of their misery. This was considered the kindest thing to do.
Unfortunately I think that the selfishness of the owner here would be why they choose to keep an animal alive for as long as they can.
On a side note, whilst in Pets-at-home last weekend purchasing 2 gold fish I joined the line behind a woman buying X-mas presents for her dog (Wrapped and all) so that it would have some presents to unwrap on the big day!!
I think this is a female thing but am not 100% sure of this so don't quote me.
Please don't take offence if you buy your dog a stocking or something, I just think it's daft. (The mrs prob has presents for all the streets pets hidden away somewhere!)

No it ceratinly is not daft to buy your dog pressies.

I have done so for many years - she expects them now and takes great pleasure in ripping them open!

My dog IS part of my family and is treated as such.

Dogs have feelings you know

All that is understood Paul but isn't it more humane to save a dog in this situation further suffering? I leave financial considerations completely aside.

I used to buy Charlie Xmas pressies, but Angell is a Plymouth Brethren.

is it against Plmouth Brethren's beliefs?

certainly is part of the family....we're driving to Poland tonight to pick up the wifes dog...... whos been on holiday with the mother-in-law !!

Certainly it is - I know that time is fast approaching me where I will have to make the decision, one which I am not looking foward to, but one I WILL make.

On a different issue, I also think this should be true of Humans as well, put them to sleep rather than make them suffer when so ill.

If you are a member of the Feline Plymouth Brethren sect, yes.

Couldn't agree more paul, both my boxers are getting on and costing a fortune in vet bills but it is old age niggles with one and a dodgy thyroid with the other so they are not suffering. If they were in constant pain then the decision would be made. Yes we are the type of muppets that will buy the dogs a stocking full of treats from Pets'r'us at Xmas and don't see a problem with it, it is only fun surely.

I also agree with the getting rid of humans to ease suffering..................................

There is nothing wrong with buying animals gifts!! :)

If anyone is feeling generous at this time of year:

Treehouse 6
Vine Lane
Jungleville
The Jungle
JU5 4GL

:)up

 Because you buy your dog treats and presents doesn't' make you a
muppet my friend far from it, it puts you in the category of making your
dog part of the family rather than just a pet.

 In many cases when dogs are pets they tend to be owned by the wrong
people, who didn't realise how much time and effort it takes to look after a
dog in the right way, and this is where the neglect sets in.

 They really are mans best friend well with the exception of the dishy blonde
or horny redhead who jumps between my sheets from time to time. ;)

   Seasons Pleasures to you all.
                 Neves.

I used to buy my cat a present at christmas - he could tell which one was his (smell it out) and pull it from underneath the tree. I did feel it was getting stupid though when my friend started to send cards and gifts from her pets to mine.

Don't get me wrong here, I have nothing against buying you pets prezzies, talking to them, paying for medical treatment etc. but amputation and chemotherapy for a terminally ill dog?

And your feelings on treating Humans with the same condition???

Humans can tell you how much it hurts, and refuse treatment if they wish.

So you think it is ok for the NHS to pay for treatment after treatment to make people "live that little bit longer" just because they want to? Or because our laws say you cant just let somedie die - no matter how ill they are.

But it should be different for a dog?

Please note, debate here, not an argument ;)

I lost one of a pair of cavaliers earlier this year and it killed me. I had to make the decision to put harley out of his misery and I could have maybe prolonged his life by maybe a day or 2 but it really wasn't the thing to do. A few months later Molly came down with a very bad chest infection and I had to take her to the vets prepared to make the same painful decision. Luckily for the family molly reacted to treatment (which cost a fortune- but I would've paid 10 times more) and is still with us. She will be getting christmas preseants the same as everyone else in the family. I personally think amputation and cheamo is too much but it has to be the owners choice. If I had been given the option of extending harleys life by maybe 6 months I think I would asked for whatever treatment neccessary.

It is different for a dog, they don't pay national insurance or get NHS treatment...

on a different note you've caught me on my 2 soft spots this week- kids and animals.

can we get back to debating things like "how badly did I play this had", "how old is tikay really?" or " can women play poker?" (ludicrous the last one obviously). If we continue with animals and kids people are gonna be thinking I've gone soft.

If we are debating Paul, you can't tell me what I think. The words above are yours, not mine.

Seeing as you've has a rough week Ariston here's one just for you ....

AAAWWWWWWWW what a wee cutie :-)

Sorry , but i agree with Red  ;shame;

I think you have mis understood me.

I actually agree that it is not good to do surgery on a terminally ill dog to preserve its life (in suffering) for a short while.

What I was saying is, that this should also be true for humans as well

Ahhhhhhh , gotcha , agree with you too  >:?

Sometimes it is nicer to say goodbye rather than let them go on suffering. I remember the last time I saw my dog who I had lived with for about 15 yrs, he was having lots of trouble with his legs and the vet said it would be better to put him down rather than try any more medicines. It was tough, but I said my goodbyes and tried to remember the good times. For about 6 months after he had been put down, I felt really guilty even though I knew it was the correct decision. I don't even kill insects, so letting a friend be put down is extremely tough, but sometimes it is the correct thing to do. I still miss him and can't shake off the feelings of guilt, but unfortunately animals have such a short life span, it is sad.

The worst part about it was, they seemed to think it was really uplifting, feel good type viewing

I forgot to say the Vet who put him down was an old guy and he was such a kind man, that made it even more upsetting because I knew he must have to do this for so many different people each week who are saying their goodbyes to good friends.

On the subject of both humans and animals i think it all comes done to quality of life and suffering. I would not wish to see either an animal or human suffer more than is necessary especially with a terminal condition. I had to make the choice with my dog earlier this year not the easiest decision but in my eyes the correct one.
I believe that as a human if you are terminal you wouldn't want to suffer so why prolong possible suffering in an animal.

;iagree; :goodpost:

That is my point, yet it is still illegal to "help" a human die

In some countries

Indeed James - I was talking about this country.

I think you missed the point, should we allow it in the UK?

YES! In my view

It's an emotive subject, often coloured by people's particular religious beliefs.

I think people in unbearable pain should be assisted to die, once various other pharmaceutical and psychological avenues of pain relief have been exhausted.

I think once someone's quality of life reaches a point they no longer wish to endure they should be allowed an assissted death. I don't think they should be required to be in continuous pain to qualify for this. Bit of a minefield I know but just my honest opinion.

agreed

Ok now someone has mentioned euphansaia now i'm going to open up a little on this. My dad is terminally ill at the moment and his will is to go sooner than later and without suffering. Due to his illness and his will on the matter if it was legal here i would have no qualms in opting for it as an avenue to go down. The idea of seeing someone so close suffer more than they have to is appalling, not only for them but also those who are close to them.

Best wishes to you and your dad barhell in what must be a difficult time.

My mum's  having chemotherapy treatment for cancer at the moment for the third time and has a very short life expectancy so I know what you are going through.

She's always been very anti euthanasia due to her religious beliefs but if she wanted it, i'd be happy to go along with her wishes.

Good luck to both you and your family

Thnks and best wishes to you and yours

For me, it's a no-brainer. "Assisted death" is a must, the problem of course is that it would get abused by mini-Shipman's, & that's hard to prevent.

30 years ago, this week in fact, my Dad died. I loved nobody more, man or woman, before or since, than Dad, he was Dad, Brother, best mate, the lot, still is, in fact.

He fell ill, & it soon became obvious that recovery was not possible, it was just a case of "when". They stuffed him full of medicine, & tablets, & intravenous drips, the lot. In doing so, they prolonged his agony, my agony, caused him to have an undignified death, wasted a hospital bed for 2 weeks & spent a bundle of money & used a stack of nursing resource.

There was me, praying for him to die, now, tonight, quickly, to ease his suffering, & here was the NHS at it's finest, doing everything to prolong his suffering.

It's a strange world we inhabit.

I'm really not good with words , but send Barhell's father and junglecats mother my heart felt good wishes at such a difficult time .

I really cant imagine what you both are going through , my dad has numerous health problems and every day that we have him is special , but with his particuler problems theres no great pain involved so thats one blessing .

Horrible Tony, but am i not mistaken that a person can refuse treatment?

Refusing treatment just doesn't cut the mustard with me. As the whole point is not suffering. If you refuse treatment you can still suffer a long slow undignified death. If you find a cat/dog by the side of the road thats been hit by a car and it was so badly injured that you know it wouldn't survive you'd have it taken to a vets and put to sleep. Take away treatment and it suffers for maybe a couple of hours maybe a day, 2 days? How long should it suffer?
So for humans if you take away treatment you can't stop the suffering or the undignified process.

Correct, but HE never realised he was dying, whereas we KNEW he had no way back.

A very horrible situation Tony, ty for posting about it though.

I was just helping M3Boy make the point James - it is just daft social conventions that cause so much unnecessary suffering in this life. I would not wish any human to die so slowly, painfully, when it could so easily be avoided. The law is a complete ass at times.

:goodpost: ;iagree;

Yeah it's hard to argue against it when you read things like what you wrote. I am a catholic and was raised as such going to a catholic boarding school and it was a discussion that was raised a lot in our RE/Theology lessons, partly down to the fact is was a major issue in the press at the time. It seems to me that while it may be against many religions and beliefs including my own, i also believe quite heavily that religion has no place in politics, separation of church and state should be a key principal in any democracy. So i think you are right it should be allowed for those that wish to end needless suffering.

I don't understand why euthanasia would be illegal anywhere really. Maybe it's because I'm Dutch and it's been legal for a fairly long time now (and tolerated even longer). I think it's rather offensive that it's illegal. If I become really ill and want it to be over I should have the choice to have it ended and the kind doctor who would help me out with that should never have to worry about being prosecuted...blah...less said the better on this subject from me as I'd get all ticked off again about what a ridiculous country this sometimes is.

Sorry Matt!

I don't spend as much time on here nowadays as I used to, and I've only just seen this thread.

Murph is ok, he has his wobbly moments, especially in a morning, but still has his puppy moments too.

His tablets have been reduced from 3 a day to 1 a day, and he's still on his metacam once daily.

For an old man he's holding his own perfectly at the moment.

This thread has reminded me that I haven't as yet bought him his Xmas stocking and if this morning's episode with Son opening Birthday Pressies is anything to go by, then Murph will be expecting one.

Thanks for asking.

I just wish this was the case here in the UK.