I am just curious on people thoughts about this. It popped into my head because my moms dog hurt some ligaments in her leg and needed surgury which she scheduled, but a few days before the surgery the dog was throwing up and limping on another leg. She found out the dog has cancer in the other leg. They cancelled the surgery because the dog would be immobile if they did it. Anyway, my mom decided that she would do her best to keep the dog comfortable, (she is doped up) and then would have her put to sleep when the pain became immposible to manage.
Then, a day or so later, we found out my aunt had cancer, (don't worry, nothing to serious). This got me thinking about how we are so quick to put an animal to sleep to keep it from living in pain, but rarely even concider doing the same to a human living in unbearble pain.
It also made wonder if that suggests we value a dogs life more than a humans, or vice versa or are both secenarios just a sign of how selfish we humans are.
2007-02-17 03:22:00 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
Doesn't it sort of suggest that we value an animal more than a human because we won't allow an animal to live in pain, but we force a human to do so.
Personally I think it is a sign of us selfish humans. We can't bear to feel the feelings associated with a pet being in pain because the pet can't tell you how they are feeling emotionally. We just assume they are miserable and it makes us miserable. When a human is in chronic unbearable pain, we keep them alive for because we fear losing their laugh, conversation, and memories. They can communicate verbally whether they want us to be happy or sad.
If you think about it, it is much more socially acceptable to "put a coma victim to sleep," than a person awake and chatting with you. On top of that, in the situation of coma victims, outcomes are often unknown, but when a person is living in unbearble pain they generally know if they are terminal or not. Society just says they have to suffer and wait it out...but a dog doesn't.
2007-02-17 03:41:05 · update #1
it isn't a double standard, it's ignorance. they value human life more than eliminating human suffering. they are willing to put an animal to sleep to allevieate it's suffering but they consider that some miracle will come along and save everyone. this is one of the greatest mysteries perpetuated by the medical field- the miracle of lengthening the human life span!
2007-02-17 03:31:06 · answer #1 · answered by de bossy one 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Probably because we consider a human life as having value (for the person him/herself and others) beyond physical pain/pleasure, and because people can tell us they want to live.
However, both of these reasons are eroding away; we're getting closer and closer to the day when everyone who's terminal or simply too expensive to care for will be automatically euthanized.
2007-02-17 03:29:09 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The law ALWAYS reflects the religious. Aminals are not recognized by virtually all of the states laws. They are considered POSSESSIONS like a radio, car, lawnmower, book, coffee cup... get it?
Dont be shocked but check with your town... an animal/pet is a possession, an ITEM and not a living object.
2007-02-17 03:27:27 · answer #3 · answered by larrydoyle52 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe because they are animals and we are human beings?!
Anyway, I'm in favour of euthanasia (under some circumstances, of course).
2007-02-17 03:26:27 · answer #4 · answered by Offkey 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
cause people are more important than animals. don't you think you are more important than a dog?
2007-02-17 03:26:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
becausew animals dont have a soul
2007-02-17 03:26:26 · answer #6 · answered by Belgrademitch 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋