Cat Pregnancy Questions?

"Upscale" wrote in message
...
"Wendy" wrote in message news:S9idnSXf49-
group. We do adoptions from a Pet Smart store on Saturdays. Last weekend
we
had a man bring us a kitten who was obviously on death's door. It
appeared
to have injested some type of poison and was having convultions. It was
beyond helping so one of our volunteers took the kitten to the local SPCA
to
get it euthanized. When she arrived there the person at the shelter told
her
they couldn't help us because they didn't have room.

I have to ask. When confronted with this problem, why did *you* not force
yourself to take action? You had a kitten that was obviously in great
distress, you knew it had to be put down and you couldn't immediately find
a
vet to do it. All the time and effort you spent trying to do the right
thing
and the kitten was suffering. A few seconds of submerging it in a sink and
it's agony would have been over. Relatively quick and painless.
---------
I don't necessarily dispute your premise of putting an animal out of its
misery yourself. My husband once had no choice but to do this for a baby
bird with a broken neck who had fallen out of its nest. He chopped off its
head with a hoe. Death was instant. But drowning the kitten would not be the
least bit quick or painless. Suffocating and having one's lungs fill up with
water would IMO be the worst death imaginable. It would be a horrible way
for the kitten to die.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.



That takes
real guts and real love of animals, putting an animal down that you care
for.

I had to do that once to a dog I owned after she got run over by a car.
The
way her guts were splayed out on the road and she was still alive yelping
in
agony, all I could do was run to get a tire iron and crush her skull. Then
I
buried her in my backyard garden. I cried for over a week and it was the
hardest thing I've ever had to do, but I knew it was the right thing to
do.

I still cry sometimes when I think of what I had to do, but I know that
under the same circumstances, I'd do it again. Putting aside society's
laws
for a moment, if the situation was reversed, I'd want someone to do the
same
thing for me. That was the only way I could rationalize myself into doing
what I knew I had to do.

"cindys" wrote in message
least bit quick or painless. Suffocating and having one's lungs fill up
with
water would IMO be the worst death imaginable. It would be a horrible way
for the kitten to die.

Possibly. But, balance the few seconds it would take to become unconscious
against the hours the kitten was in agony while someone was looking for a
vet to euthanize the kitten. Reverse the roles and I know which method I'd
prefer to die.

On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:52:55 -0400, Upscale wrote:

"cindys" wrote in message
least bit quick or painless. Suffocating and having one's lungs fill up
with
water would IMO be the worst death imaginable. It would be a horrible
way for the kitten to die.

Possibly. But, balance the few seconds it would take to become
unconscious against the hours the kitten was in agony while someone was
looking for a vet to euthanize the kitten. Reverse the roles and I know
which method I'd prefer to die.

Why do you think the U.S. gov't uses simulated drowning to extract
information from prisoners? Answer -- because it works. And why does it
work? Answer -- because it's painful and terrifying.

Charlie

Charlie Wilkes writes:

On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:52:55 -0400, Upscale wrote:

"cindys" wrote in message
least bit quick or painless. Suffocating and having one's lungs fill up
with
water would IMO be the worst death imaginable. It would be a horrible
way for the kitten to die.

Possibly. But, balance the few seconds it would take to become
unconscious against the hours the kitten was in agony while someone was
looking for a vet to euthanize the kitten. Reverse the roles and I know
which method I'd prefer to die.

Why do you think the U.S. gov't uses simulated drowning to extract
information from prisoners? Answer -- because it works. And why does it
work? Answer -- because it's painful and terrifying.

Can't see how water boarding could that be painful.
Prisoner holds his breath, if he inhales, they have a problem.
I don't believe they want that.

It's scary thats for sure and I'm not a torture advocate.

I like to swim as far as I can under water,
as you run out of air, panic sets in.

In the cat's case, sure the cat is scared.
It's going to inhale sooner or later but I don't
believe the water in the lungs is all that painful.
Yes, I've breathed in water, it hurts but it's not the
worst pain I've ever had.
It's just water. By the time it inhales it's going to
be light headed anyway. Death follows soon after.

No I don't want to try it.

When you have a cat with it's guts hanging out,
what's more painful, the trip to the vet or
5 minutes under water?

I thought it was common practice to put down dogs
thru suffocation?

Nasty subject anyway...

On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:30:48 -0400, Dan Espen wrote:

When you have a cat with it's guts hanging out, what's more painful, the
trip to the vet or 5 minutes under water?

I don't know. If I had to euthenize a cat without drugs, my first choice
would be to shoot it in the back of the head, using a rifle or handgun,
and my second choice would be to strangle it with a cord.

Charlie

"Charlie Wilkes" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:52:55 -0400, Upscale wrote:
Why do you think the U.S. gov't uses simulated drowning to extract
information from prisoners? Answer -- because it works. And why does it
work? Answer -- because it's painful and terrifying.

Charlie

The government currently uses tactics which violate the Geneva convention
because we have a despicable worm as President who has brought shame on the
office and on the nation as a whole. If anyone should be tortured it is
Bush, but lets not stray off the subject of cats.

"Upscale" wrote in message
...

"cindys" wrote in message
least bit quick or painless. Suffocating and having one's lungs fill up
with
water would IMO be the worst death imaginable. It would be a horrible
way
for the kitten to die.

Possibly. But, balance the few seconds it would take to become unconscious
against the hours the kitten was in agony while someone was looking for a
vet to euthanize the kitten. Reverse the roles and I know which method I'd
prefer to die.



It wasn't hours. The SPCA was close by as was the vet who did euthanize.

W

"Professor" wrote in message
news:v32xi.7970$%t4.6778@trnddc03...
"Charlie Wilkes" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:52:55 -0400, Upscale wrote:
Why do you think the U.S. gov't uses simulated drowning to extract
information from prisoners? Answer -- because it works. And why does it
work? Answer -- because it's painful and terrifying.

Charlie

The government currently uses tactics which violate the Geneva convention
because we have a despicable worm as President who has brought shame on
the office and on the nation as a whole. If anyone should be tortured it
is Bush, but lets not stray off the subject of cats.

Errr.....The government was doing things like that long before Bush, but if
you must Bush-bash, then be my guest. (It's not like you're alone....:^)

On 16 Aug, 21:53, "Wendy" wrote:
"Upscale" wrote in message

...



"cindys" wrote in message
least bit quick or painless. Suffocating and having one's lungs fill up
with
water would IMO be the worst death imaginable. It would be a horrible
way
for the kitten to die.

Possibly. But, balance the few seconds it would take to become unconscious
against the hours the kitten was in agony while someone was looking for a
vet to euthanize the kitten. Reverse the roles and I know which method I'd
prefer to die.

It wasn't hours. The SPCA was close by as was the vet who did euthanize.

W

It wasn't hours. The SPCA was close by as was the vet who did euthanize.

I "know" that you did the right thing by that kitten Wendy, & so does
every other person who knows you on here. I find it very tacky that
others feel the need to pick over the fact that you did what was best
@ that time for the kitten concerned.

You have spent a long time helping kittens, cats & all manner of
rescues for several years, & during that time, you have saved untold
amount of cats, pregnant Queens & their litters, because of others
thoughtless attitudes towards spaying & neutering their own cats. It's
sad that someone feels that they have the right to come along & nit
pick about what you did for that one kitten, without recognising the
years that you have spent devoting your life towards saving cats &
homing the most needy ( & yes, that includes me whilst I continued to
breed cats too!!)

If I can see this, then so can they too- I feel/ think this is
selective & downright inventive. No hours, were mentioned @ all in
your passage! Some are selectively choosing to see what they want to,
rather than the facts in front of them.

I say well done to you for doing what you could @ the time. It was no
easy task & I'm certain that you found no happiness in what you had to
do to put the poor mite out of it's misery. You should be thanked for
what you had to do, not criticised.

All I can see here is speculation, about what they "might/ or should"
have done.
I only agree with one of them, & only then if I had no other choice.
Lets thank the powers that be that they were not faced with your
agonising choices, & the poor mite wasn't in their care @ the time.
You did what you had to in as short as time as was reasonably
possible. You have my utter respect, it was no easy thing to have to
handle, & I am so sorry that you were faced with that situation. It
was a terrible position to find yourself in.
Best Wishes,
Sheelagh"o"

"Sheelagh o" wrote in message
ups.com...
On 16 Aug, 21:53, "Wendy" wrote:
"Upscale" wrote in message

...



"cindys" wrote in message
least bit quick or painless. Suffocating and having one's lungs fill
up
with
water would IMO be the worst death imaginable. It would be a horrible
way
for the kitten to die.

Possibly. But, balance the few seconds it would take to become
unconscious
against the hours the kitten was in agony while someone was looking for
a
vet to euthanize the kitten. Reverse the roles and I know which method
I'd
prefer to die.

It wasn't hours. The SPCA was close by as was the vet who did euthanize.

W

It wasn't hours. The SPCA was close by as was the vet who did euthanize.

I "know" that you did the right thing by that kitten Wendy, & so does
every other person who knows you on here. I find it very tacky that
others feel the need to pick over the fact that you did what was best
@ that time for the kitten concerned.

You have spent a long time helping kittens, cats & all manner of
rescues for several years, & during that time, you have saved untold
amount of cats, pregnant Queens & their litters, because of others
thoughtless attitudes towards spaying & neutering their own cats. It's
sad that someone feels that they have the right to come along & nit
pick about what you did for that one kitten, without recognising the
years that you have spent devoting your life towards saving cats &
homing the most needy ( & yes, that includes me whilst I continued to
breed cats too!!)

If I can see this, then so can they too- I feel/ think this is
selective & downright inventive. No hours, were mentioned @ all in
your passage! Some are selectively choosing to see what they want to,
rather than the facts in front of them.

I say well done to you for doing what you could @ the time. It was no
easy task & I'm certain that you found no happiness in what you had to
do to put the poor mite out of it's misery. You should be thanked for
what you had to do, not criticised.

All I can see here is speculation, about what they "might/ or should"
have done.
I only agree with one of them, & only then if I had no other choice.
Lets thank the powers that be that they were not faced with your
agonising choices, & the poor mite wasn't in their care @ the time.
You did what you had to in as short as time as was reasonably
possible. You have my utter respect, it was no easy thing to have to
handle, & I am so sorry that you were faced with that situation. It
was a terrible position to find yourself in.
Best Wishes,
Sheelagh"o"

This is always the hardest decision for someone to make....Our desire to
wait and see if the cat recovers is so great, that it is very hard to, "give
it up" and decide to put it down.....At such times, it is usually best to go
with the veterinarians decision, because they don't have the emotional
involvement that you are burdened with......