What I wouldn't do for my cat

Bobcat wrote:
There's a lovely article in the Toronto Star by a cat lover who writes
about how much money she'd spend to preserve her cat's life. I know
we've gone the distance financially at the vets for our cats, and been
richly rewarded by prolonging their lives. How about you?

I guess I'm the 'black sheep' here, but there is a certain amount (that is
variable, depending on the current financial situation) that I simply
couldn't go over, because it would put the rest of my family at risk. For
example, it would be very irresponsible of me to sell the house to save one
animal yet render the two other animals plus Cary, Joel & myself homeless.
Or even unable to pay the bills or buy adequate food. I have yet to be in a
position to find out exactly how much that upper limit is, but I do know
there is an upper practical limit. There's also the difference in my ability
to cope with a 'one off' payment versus an ongoing payment, for example,
finding an extra $1000 to pay for prescription food over the year is going
to be alot less painful than having to find $1000 up front for payment
*now*.

Fact of life is that not all of us can afford the 'best' of everything. I
cannot afford to send my own son to the best school in the area or the best
clothes or even the absolute best food or house. We are nto parenting him in
the 'best' way because one of us has to go out of the hosue to work for 10
hours a day and it would be 'better' if we both together raising him. He
doesn't go to dance classes, music classes, swimming classes and pre-school
classes like some toddlers not because he doens't deserve the best start in
life but simply because we can't afford such things. Cary will not get the
'best' of anything except *our* best. Would anyone dare say to me I should
not have had a baby?

It strikes me that having a pet is a similar thing. Some pets will be fed
generic pet food and if they have a major medical issue that is beyond the
owner's means, be put to sleep. Other pets will fed top of the line
prescription food and have the very best of vetinary care given to them 'no
expense spared'. Now tell me, which pet was loved more? Which one was the
happier pet? Which pet was the more deserving? Which owner was more
deserving? Would it be better for the cat that belonged to the poorer owner
to be PTS at the shelter rather than live its life with generic cat food and
lots of love?

Yes, in an *ideal* world, every child and every pet would get the best of
everything all the time. Its not an ideal world, however, and there are just
certain practicalities that have to be acknowledged. I don't want to put a
dollar value on my loved ones, but sadly, there is only so much of my net
worth (such that it is) that I can give them.

Just remember, even the pets that only get generic food and would be PTS if
they had a major health issue still have a better quality of life than many
humans in this world. Lets not judge so harshly those that do their best
with less resources than we have.

Yowie

And all of God's Children said AMEN!
"Yowie" wrote in message
...
Bobcat wrote:
There's a lovely article in the Toronto Star by a cat lover who writes
about how much money she'd spend to preserve her cat's life. I know
we've gone the distance financially at the vets for our cats, and been
richly rewarded by prolonging their lives. How about you?

I guess I'm the 'black sheep' here, but there is a certain amount (that is
variable, depending on the current financial situation) that I simply
couldn't go over, because it would put the rest of my family at risk. For
example, it would be very irresponsible of me to sell the house to save
one animal yet render the two other animals plus Cary, Joel & myself
homeless. Or even unable to pay the bills or buy adequate food. I have yet
to be in a position to find out exactly how much that upper limit is, but
I do know there is an upper practical limit. There's also the difference
in my ability to cope with a 'one off' payment versus an ongoing payment,
for example, finding an extra $1000 to pay for prescription food over the
year is going to be alot less painful than having to find $1000 up front
for payment *now*.

Fact of life is that not all of us can afford the 'best' of everything. I
cannot afford to send my own son to the best school in the area or the
best clothes or even the absolute best food or house. We are nto parenting
him in the 'best' way because one of us has to go out of the hosue to work
for 10 hours a day and it would be 'better' if we both together raising
him. He doesn't go to dance classes, music classes, swimming classes and
pre-school classes like some toddlers not because he doens't deserve the
best start in life but simply because we can't afford such things. Cary
will not get the 'best' of anything except *our* best. Would anyone dare
say to me I should not have had a baby?

It strikes me that having a pet is a similar thing. Some pets will be fed
generic pet food and if they have a major medical issue that is beyond the
owner's means, be put to sleep. Other pets will fed top of the line
prescription food and have the very best of vetinary care given to them
'no expense spared'. Now tell me, which pet was loved more? Which one was
the happier pet? Which pet was the more deserving? Which owner was more
deserving? Would it be better for the cat that belonged to the poorer
owner to be PTS at the shelter rather than live its life with generic cat
food and lots of love?

Yes, in an *ideal* world, every child and every pet would get the best of
everything all the time. Its not an ideal world, however, and there are
just certain practicalities that have to be acknowledged. I don't want to
put a dollar value on my loved ones, but sadly, there is only so much of
my net worth (such that it is) that I can give them.

Just remember, even the pets that only get generic food and would be PTS
if they had a major health issue still have a better quality of life than
many humans in this world. Lets not judge so harshly those that do their
best with less resources than we have.

Yowie

as the vet assistant told me recently, even if you can't do all you want to
do, anything you do to make the life of another being better is still an
improvement, Lee
Granby wrote in message
...
And all of God's Children said AMEN!
"Yowie" wrote in message
...
Bobcat wrote:
There's a lovely article in the Toronto Star by a cat lover who writes
about how much money she'd spend to preserve her cat's life. I know
we've gone the distance financially at the vets for our cats, and been
richly rewarded by prolonging their lives. How about you?

I guess I'm the 'black sheep' here, but there is a certain amount (that
is
variable, depending on the current financial situation) that I simply
couldn't go over, because it would put the rest of my family at risk.
For
example, it would be very irresponsible of me to sell the house to save
one animal yet render the two other animals plus Cary, Joel & myself
homeless. Or even unable to pay the bills or buy adequate food. I have
yet
to be in a position to find out exactly how much that upper limit is,
but
I do know there is an upper practical limit. There's also the difference
in my ability to cope with a 'one off' payment versus an ongoing
payment,
for example, finding an extra $1000 to pay for prescription food over
the
year is going to be alot less painful than having to find $1000 up front
for payment *now*.

Fact of life is that not all of us can afford the 'best' of everything.
I
cannot afford to send my own son to the best school in the area or the
best clothes or even the absolute best food or house. We are nto
parenting
him in the 'best' way because one of us has to go out of the hosue to
work
for 10 hours a day and it would be 'better' if we both together raising
him. He doesn't go to dance classes, music classes, swimming classes and
pre-school classes like some toddlers not because he doens't deserve the
best start in life but simply because we can't afford such things. Cary
will not get the 'best' of anything except *our* best. Would anyone dare
say to me I should not have had a baby?

It strikes me that having a pet is a similar thing. Some pets will be
fed
generic pet food and if they have a major medical issue that is beyond
the
owner's means, be put to sleep. Other pets will fed top of the line
prescription food and have the very best of vetinary care given to them
'no expense spared'. Now tell me, which pet was loved more? Which one
was
the happier pet? Which pet was the more deserving? Which owner was more
deserving? Would it be better for the cat that belonged to the poorer
owner to be PTS at the shelter rather than live its life with generic
cat
food and lots of love?

Yes, in an *ideal* world, every child and every pet would get the best
of
everything all the time. Its not an ideal world, however, and there are
just certain practicalities that have to be acknowledged. I don't want
to
put a dollar value on my loved ones, but sadly, there is only so much of
my net worth (such that it is) that I can give them.

Just remember, even the pets that only get generic food and would be PTS
if they had a major health issue still have a better quality of life
than
many humans in this world. Lets not judge so harshly those that do their
best with less resources than we have.

Yowie

"Bobcat" wrote in message
...
There's a lovely article in the Toronto Star by a cat lover who writes
about how much money she'd spend to preserve her cat's life. I know
we've gone the distance financially at the vets for our cats, and been
richly rewarded by prolonging their lives. How about you?
Here's a link to the article.

http://www.thestar.com/article/309350

I've gone pretty far, both in terms of one time repairs and of long term
maintenance.

But I figure at some point I'm doing that for me, not for them.

Nearly forty years ago we had a meezer named Sam. He was hit by a car and
broken up pretty bad. But for one reason or another, there was never a
point to say enough. Let him go.

We spent a lot of money. Still remember the trips on payday to take the vet
his share. And Sam went through a pretty tough recovery.

I would never intentionally do that to another animal. He was in pain and
kept immobile for a very long time. He had no idea he would ever get well.
And he ended up with a steel pin in one leg the rest of his life.

But for us, I'm glad we did it. He lived a very long time a was a memorable
part of our lives and my daughter's life.

I have no idea how many bad knees or dislocated hips I've paid the vet to
fix. How many abscesses we've had drained. Shots and x-rays and dentals
and special food and medications.
And they have been worth it. Again more so for me than for the pet
involved.

Because, I remind myself that there are many perfectly lovely cats out there
that do not have homes and who will live short and brutal lives. There is a
right time to let go of one we love and take in another who needs us.

Jo

When I see people spending thousands of £ on paliative
care, with no quality of life for the pet, I really do wonder who they
are doing it for. I recently had to help a friend take her dog, Fudge,
to the vet to be PTS. Fudge had been ill for months and months, and
should have gone to RB 6 months earlier. For Fudge, money wasn't an
object, but quality of life was.

The same goes for people. There's a hypnotic documentary by Fred
Wiseman, 6 hours long, about an American intensive care unit,
following what happens to six patients. One figure mentioned in
passing is that HALF OF ALL THE MONEY SPENT ON HEALTH CARE IN THE
US is devoted to people in the last three weeks of their lives.
The figure is probably not much less disproportionate in other
health care systems.

The most expensive thing we've ever had done for a cat was getting
Courtney's hip fixed. As she was four months old, a bright and
bouncy little bundle of love, and the issue was preventing lifelong
pain and disability, that was a much easier decision.

==== j a c k at c a m p i n . m e . u k === http://www.campin.me.uk ====
Jack Campin, 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland == mob 07800 739 557
CD-ROMs and free stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, and Mac logic fonts

Charleen Welton wrote:

"Yowie" wrote in message
...
Bobcat wrote:
There's a lovely article in the Toronto Star by a cat lover who
writes about how much money she'd spend to preserve her cat's life.
I know we've gone the distance financially at the vets for our
cats, and been richly rewarded by prolonging their lives. How about
you?

snip

Just remember, even the pets that only get generic food and would be
PTS if they had a major health issue still have a better quality of
life than many humans in this world. Lets not judge so harshly those
that do their best with less resources than we have.

Yowie, you are so wise, you always have been and I'm so sure you
always will be.

Not at all. I just *sound* wise. Its one of the best impersonations I can do
:-)

Yowie

jofirey wrote:
"Bobcat" wrote in message
...
There's a lovely article in the Toronto Star by a cat lover who writes
about how much money she'd spend to preserve her cat's life. I know
we've gone the distance financially at the vets for our cats, and been
richly rewarded by prolonging their lives. How about you?
Here's a link to the article.

http://www.thestar.com/article/309350

I've gone pretty far, both in terms of one time repairs and of long term
maintenance.

But I figure at some point I'm doing that for me, not for them.

Agreed! ...And it's at that point I make the hard decision. I'm not
even that convinced there is an "afterlife" for any of us (feline OR
human), but I cannot see prolonging suffering if there is not hope for
full recovery or at least a reasonable quality of life. (I only wish we
could make the same decision for ourselves, when the time comes!)

--- In , "Bobcat" bob_catt@...
wrote:
There's a lovely article in today's Toronto Star by a cat lover who
writes about how much money she'd spend to preserve her cat's life. I
know we've gone the distance financially at the vets for our cats, and
been richly rewarded by prolonging their lives. How about you?
Here's a link to the article.

http://www.thestar.com/article/309350

On Mar 9, 8:21 am, Bobcat wrote:
This letter to the editor from Judy and Allan Fleisher of Toronto
appeared in the Toronto Star a couple of days after the article was
published:

"We had to face the same agonizing decision after our dog, Ben,
ingested tainted dog food about a year ago. He was bleeding through
the rectum, and the vet asked us how much we paid for the dog. I said
it was irrevlevant, since I had promised Ben that I would take care of
him for the rest of his life. Since he was only 5 years old, I could
justify putting him down because of the expense to save him. The vet
did a remarkable job and Ben survived.

From the moment we open our eyes in the morning to the moment we say
good night, Ben makes us laugh. Can you put a price on that? As for
the vet bill, shortly after our Bomaberdier stock took off, more than
recovering the vet bill. A sign from above?

Caring for an animal is not about cost: it's about doing the right
thing."