Costly medical procedures vs. humane euthanization - Page 3

You know you're tired when you read "costly medical procedures vs human euthanization"

A lot of the much-touted procedures for serious terminal conditions only buy you /your dog about three months,  not everything will  survive for a year and more (though obviously for the lucky few that can happen).  So on balance I
would agree that unless you have money to burn -  and perhaps even then, if its a question of giving them extra time but at huge cost of pain etc - you ought let let them go with their dignity intact.  Its one thing we CAN do for the animal members of our families that we are not able to do legally for humans.
I once heard a Vet say very eloquently what a privilege he considered it to be able to do this for animals.  If your Vet doesnt feel that way, maybe you change your Vet ?

"The hardest thing I've done recently was to let my sweet girl Kali slip away, because I didn't want to torture her with treatments I couldn't explain to her, just because I didn't want to lose her."

This is what it comes down to for me with something like chemo; the dog's quality of life is diminished, he doesn't understand what's going on, and you're only prolonging the inevitable anyway. 

My dads dog was told he should be put down not have and acl surgery(years ago), my dad went to a different vet who did the acl surgery and the dog lived a long happy life working as a field trial dog. Ran until he had a stroke and had to be euthanized at 11 years of age.  My current GSD has many health problems all of whicih cost money  to keep her alive (EPI, pannus, spondylosis, and a bad right hip)  I opted to do a stem cell treatment(3,000) on her whcih didn't work and now 3 years later they are recommending a hip replacement to the tune of 4500.00.  I am not doing it.  I am considering an FHO so she won't have alot of pain as she continues to age.  She is 91/2 am I a bad owner for not shelling out the 4500.00?  My vets have supported the decisions I have made not made me feel guilty for them.  Thats what vets are supposed to do.  Give you all the info and respect your decision.

Lyn

LynOD , have you tried Adequan or Cartrophen yet?  I have also heard positive feedback about Gold Bead Implants:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-409597/Injections-pure-gold-ease-arthritis.html 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090626084633.htm 

Biphosphate by IV may also help,  Its done quite often in horses, less so in dogs:

http://www.equinechronicle.com/health/navicular-disease-and-treatments.html 

Also, which stem cell separation procedure did your vet use?  Was it Medi-vet or Vet-stem ?

I made this decision on more than one occaision and would do so again.  I have a financial limit.  I had pet insurance on one of my dogs.. and finally canceled it when the dog was spayed and the co-owner was off the papers. 

I have an upper limit I will spend.  Period.  I will spend more on a young dog with a good prognosis than on an old dog with limited prognosis.. or any age dog with a poor prognosis but will not spend past the limit. 

The real difficulty is knowing when to do it.  I try to make sure the animal is still feeling pretty good when I take him in knowing full well that this is due to change in hours or days.  I try to make sure that Euthanizing is truly "easy death" and do not wait until the animal is in so much pain or is so ill that it is all hard. 

Honestly, I want the whole process.. from diagnosis to decision to be hard on ME and NOT hard on my Dog!!!

My dog should NEVER suffer.  Ever. 

Spooks -  I really sympathise, we also've had a splenectomy done, op. apparently successful, then only a few weeks later the dog is riddled with secondaries and has to be pts anyway.  On one level "its good to try"; on another you have to ask were the costs both to the dog and your own pocket worth it ?
My friend & colleague is convinced that opening them up for surgery makes the secondaries metastasize, where they would not have done if you had not disturbed the dogs body systems through operating !  I dunno if theres anything to her theory or not.
I reckon my way of looking at it  depends on the age of the dog:  if he/she is still relatively young & lively, it doesn't matter what you spend to try to put problems right.  But if the dog is getting on in years and maybe doesn't have such a good quality of life, arthitic or whatever, then let it go before it suffers.  The very last thing anyone should do, IMO, is to prolong a dogs life just to keep it with them because they can't bear to let it go.  Understandable, but selfish.

Had a cat with cancer.  Talked to the Vet.  He was honest.  He said, "You can spend $5k on chemo and in 5 months your cat will likely die and be sick the whole time.. OR you can give the cat Prednisone, make her comfortable and you will get the same 5 months."  I went with the Pred and the cat was happy.. even healthy acting.. for another 2 years. 

I would NEVER opt for Chemo on a dog or cat. 

Life is what it is.  No suffering is rule one.  If it looks like there might be a chance with surgery, first refer to rule one. 

Is it hard?  YES!  I will always opt for the loss to be harder on me than the care making it harder on the animal just to make me feel better.  It is NOT about me.  It IS about the animal. 


 

We also gave Prednisone to our dog, about 3 weeks after he was presciribed another medication for what our vet thought was a bacterial infection. He never bounced back to 100%, but there was a noticable difference in his energy level for about a month and a half. He just kept trucking along as if nothing was wrong even though he had lost a lot of weight. His health changed over night, he could barely stand up, he was wheezing and he had that look in his eye. We were going to take him to the vet the following day, but he past away in his sleep.