animal cruelty ?

This is a placeholder text
Group text

by tarekallam on 08 February 2010 - 18:02

Sorry moons I do not call it cruelty , the guy was just attempting to help his body with the available means. The harm was unintentionally done may be due to lack of expertise. However it does not stop him of being held liable for underestimating the extent of damage he caused to the dog & the results of his actions. He should be verbally blamed with a written commitment not to repeat it otherwise ......

By the way even professional vets also make pretty mistakes that lead to fatal problems.

by VomMarischal on 08 February 2010 - 18:02

I'm going to guess you mean fatal problems.

Tess, my cowboy ex didn't lose any of them, but that's because he was doing it from training by his father, grandfather, and other old cowboys. Almost as good as vet school, and in breeding matters, MUCH BETTER.

by tarekallam on 08 February 2010 - 19:02

You guessed rightly. I edited for your satisfaction only.

by MaggieMae on 08 February 2010 - 19:02

Actually, I wish now that I had not read the story. The man should have called a Vet from the get-go to see if they would take his dog at a "reduced fee" or asked the Vet if there were any Services that may have provided help. In this day and age, there is no excuse for operating on your own dog.....geez, poor dog.

by tarekallam on 08 February 2010 - 19:02

Yes Maggie I agree with you to an extent, however what if you have a suffering dog whom you love so much & you do not have the means to afford a "reduced fee" vet, would you at this stage leave to face a dark destiny. i assume you would give it a try

by MaggieMae on 08 February 2010 - 19:02

Tarek - No, I would NEVER try to "operate" on my dog....I am certainly not talking about a minor scrape or a splinter, etc., but to actually cut into the dog to "remove" a cyst/lump --- No Way ! Like I said, the Vet may have been able to refer him to some type of Service available for his dog at "no cost" or "reduced cost."

To me, it is no different than performing surgery on a person.

by ShadyLady on 08 February 2010 - 19:02

So, he only got busted because the dog developed an infection? Was it that the dog wasn't in pain due to the cyst or was the dog not in pain due to the surgery and painkillers?

Anyway, I think it would be cruel if the dog was in pain over the surgery and if the guy did a hack job. It doesn't say if the man had any previous experience. Shouldn't this be taken into consideration?

Old timers in cropped breeds used to do ear crops on their own - with anesthesia of course. They were excellent at it and better than the vets could do.

by Liesjers on 08 February 2010 - 19:02

Why are dogs different than any other animal? I grew up in the city but my farmer friends tell me about how their animals are treated and it's far worse than the dog in the article.

by tarekallam on 08 February 2010 - 19:02

Sorry, Dogs are not animals and German shepherds are not normal dogs they are a higher race.

by MaggieMae on 08 February 2010 - 20:02

Shadylady -- What I got from the article was that the cyst was benign (according to the Vet) and the dog would not have been in pain. With the hack job done by the man and the resulting infection, surely the dog would have been in pain.
I also "surmised" from the article that the man had NO experience.

Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top

animal cruelty ? - Page 3

Pedigree Database