You Don't Understand

This has to be fast because I need to shower before class. I just wanted to vent a little about how people think a pet should be put to sleep the second they find out it has a terminal illness. Guess what: life is terminal. I'm one of the growing number of people who look at pets as a member of the family, and if you found out a family member had terminal cancer but could have two or three good, happy months left you wouldn't deny them that.

I'm still coming to terms with the fact that Sabriel isn't going to be around when I have kids and live to be an old, grumpy cat. To me that makes the time we have left with her even more precious. I think if you asked most small animal vets how they felt they would voice irritation that people choose to euthanize when their pet could still have a good quality of life just because it's easier for them (money-wise, time-wise, and emotionally). My sister and probably my parents--although I haven't talked to them yet--thinks it would be better to euthanize and that I need to look at it from "an outside perspective". I don't understand. Why would it be better for me to look at this unemotionally? I don't think there's anything wrong with allowing your feelings to help you make a decision as long as it's not a selfish one. If the drug combo doesn't bring down her fever and give her a better appetite, she won't have an improved quality of life and we'll have to put her to sleep. But we have to give her the chance.

Mood: dealing