Steph101 Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 Well done! What kind of vet makes such a comment anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poplars Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 We are very lucky where we are, our vet is great with chickens, and although he explains that in bigger flocks they would have their necks wrung, he offered an injection to Betty, and offered an operation if we wanted it (but there was very little hope for here, so we let her live for a bit longer until her pain was too much) I can understand where they are coming from, but I think they should accept that some people think differently, like most of the people on this forum! Eve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clootie Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 I'm sure they did Mrs A - I have a book, granted it's an old book, on the Inuit people called "Season of the Eskimo" and it's in that. I've even got a photo of a wee huddled figure sitting out in the wilderness just waiting. I live in Norfolk - there are so many nationalities living around us nowadays it wouldn't surprise me if there was an odd Eskimo or two. (no emphasis on odd intended) !! Okay you are painting a pretty bleak picture now. I feel sort of guilty for laughing. That is very random though! Wish there were more polar bears at 9.30am when all the old bugars are making my bus late for work! Damn free bus pass! But i digress... I've heard of this too, but it was my understanding that they fall asleep and die of hypothermia, rather than get eaten by polar bears! They wouldn't have felt a thing !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodge Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 Remember this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/hereford/worcs/7280121.stm Now that's what you call devotion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clootie Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 I'm not so sure I agree with you here Dodge. Devotion to your pets is one thing and should be applauded but in this case I wonder if the owner may just be doing this for herself and not really thinking about the welfare of her beloved chook. In my humble opinion this chicken is not leading the life it should. No doubt I will be shot down in flames but the lady in the article is correct in saying that you would move heaven and earth to save your pet but surely that's only if it's quality of life would be a good one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egluntyne Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 My sentiments exactly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 I have a chicken who can only use one leg, she hops and uses her wings to propel herself and for balance. We adopted her upon the request of a BHWT co-ordinator as we were told she still had "a quality of life" and she does. I'm sure she wouldn't let her girl suffer, judging from the comments in the article and I'm sure the vet would advise accordingly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clootie Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 I have a chicken who can only use one leg, she hops and uses her wings to propel herself and for balance. We adopted her upon the request of a BHWT co-ordinator as we were told she still had "a quality of life" and she does. I'm sure she wouldn't let her girl suffer, judging from the comments in the article and I'm sure the vet would advise accordingly. I'm sorry Poet, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angels4 Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 When I took one of our girls to the vets in a cat carrier a woman was asking what was in the box, when I told her she burst out laughing and said she leaves her sick hens out for the fox I guess it takes all sorts Karen x how cruel!!!! Wonder what she was actually doing at the vets and whatever pet she had with her, would she leave it out for the foxes I wonder!!!! Bet she was there for her scorpion! She sounds evil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodge Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 I may be responsible for this post going off at a tangent I had sighted this article as an example of a horrendous vet bill to spend on "Just A Chicken!!" The woman clearly loves her chook very much and I am sure that we can all identify with that, even us men Mrs Denney said she believed the pet still had "quality of life". I would hope that if this hen did not have any prospect of a "quality off life" then the owner and vet would agree to put it down. We have allready had the example of the harsh woman who would leave an ill chicken out for the foxes. All I can say is thank goodness for people like this Mrs Denney who is prepared to try anything regardless of cost, to give her pet another chance to live life too the full. Kind regards to all Dodge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutrix Farmers Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 I'm with clootie and egluntine on this. Just because we have the medical technology to keep animals alive does not make it right to do so. My SIL had a dog who was extremely ill for a long time but she kept it alive until it was suffering so much she couldn't afford to keep paying out. Sometimes we need to be cruel to be kind (and it's not cruel if they are humanely put to sleep, I don't advocate leaving a sick animal out for the fox!!!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 ... Just because we have the medical technology to keep animals alive does not make it right to do so.... I'd take issue with that comment. It all depends where you draw the line. My Lottie has a good chance of pulling through so, for now, we're going to give her that chance. If the vet felt felt there was no hope and she was suffering, we'd take appropriate action but there has been no mention of that and I'm hoping that there won't be. We had a pet rat that sadly got a tumour on his jaw, he couldn't eat and was clearly suffering so we had to have him put to sleep. The vet initially thought it was an abcess and we gave him antibiotics that didn't work. I used to mush up bananas with yogurt and hand feed him as he couldn't eat solid foods. I believe, if there's hope, then I have a duty of care to make sure my animal receives the best treatment she can get. If there was no hope, then it would be a different matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodge Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Poet said: I believe, if there's hope, then I have a duty of care to make sure my animal receives the best treatment she can get. If there was no hope, then it would be a different matter. My sentiments exactly: Neither myself nor I believe Poet (excuse me Poet for talking on your behalf) are advocating keeping a hen or any pet alive just for our own selfish gain. I personally would only agree to try to prolong a life only if my vet agreed that it would still have a reasonable quality of life. Thank God that these ethics don't concern the human world Just imagine the scenario: You take your Mother who has just turned 55 to the doctor because she has had a stroke and the doctor tells you “I’m sorry but your Mother will be paralysed down her right side permanently and her quality of life will be very poor, so I suggest that I put her to sleep now.” This is outrageous and unthinkable, and yet we don’t seem to give it a second thought when animals are involved. Medical science has made leaps and bounds in both the veterinary and human world. Tell me why we should not make use of these advances if the prognosis is good? Once again let me spell it out: I WOULD ONLY AGREE TO AN ANIMAL BEING KEPT ALIVE IF ADVISED BY MY VET THAT THE ANIMAL WOULD STILL HAVE A REASONABLE QUALITY OF LIFE. (Sorry for shouting, please do not take offence.) This is my duty of care to any animal that I am responsible for. Kind regards Dodge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clootie Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 So why are you shouting Dodge? We can all read and your message is clear enough. You obviously feel passionately about this subject which is admirable and I do respect your opinion but we don't all feel the same way and there's nothing wrong in that. Let me be clear on my position without shouting. I love my animals and chooks dearly and I would be heartbroken if anything was to happen to them. Having said that, if one of my chooks had one leg removed, was unable to walk and was being pumped full of drugs then I'm sorry, in my opinion, that is not anywhere near my interpretation of a good quality of life. No doubt this thread will be brought to an end by the Mods, which would be a shame because there is nothing wrong with healthy debate. We each have our own opinions and it most certainly does not mean that we care any less for the animals we have the priviledge of looking after. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chelsea Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 No doubt this thread will be brought to an end by the Mods, which would be a shame because there is nothing wrong with healthy debate. to me it reads exactly that , I dont see any disrespect on either side of the views on this thread. I cant see why a mod would bring it to an end IMO. The subject is bound to evoke passion which it does and being passionate about our chickens is something we all share. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clootie Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Thanks Chelsea - hope everyone else feels the same Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egluntyne Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Looks as if views are polarised, which is no surprise on a forum made up of a very wide cross section of society. That is not to say that one view is right and the other wrong. They just differ, that is all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodge Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 As I said, Sorry for shouting no offence intended. It sometimes gets very frustrating trying to put one's point forward. However shouting is out of order and deserves to be flame'd (thanks Clootie) Thanks for Egluntine's "Words of wisdom" to get everything back on track. Kind regards Dodge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angels4 Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 That is not to say that one view is right and the other wrong. They just differ, that is all. Hear, Hear Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 ....It sometimes gets very frustrating trying to put one's point forward. .... I know how you feel You write something and someone interprets it completely differently or sometimes you think they have Don't worry about it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clootie Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 As I said, Sorry for shouting no offence intended. It sometimes gets very frustrating trying to put one's point forward. However shouting is out of order and deserves to be flame'd (thanks Clootie) Thanks for Egluntine's "Words of wisdom" to get everything back on track. Kind regards Dodge I understand totally Dodge - no worries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
