When I wrote yesterday about Julie Pippert’s dog, there was a bit more I wanted to say, but I didn’t feel that writing about it in that post was appropriate. She had a very rude commenter that wrote in response to  her post:

When there are 40 million people — lots and lots of them children –
in this country who can’t afford to get near a doctor it’s a huge waste
of resources to operate on a dog for cancer.

While I totally agree that all Americans- actually, all people regardless of where they live- need access to affordable medical care, this was a post about Julie’s dog. Not a place to proselytize about politics. But all handslapping aside, let’s take a look at the commenter’s statement.

Animals are important members of most people’s families. Heck, I know people whose animals are far better than their own family. Treating an animal for a disease, regardless of expense, is just the right thing to do. If, of course, you can afford it.

We had a beloved cat that developed cancer. Unlike Julie’s case, we did not realize that she was sick or hurting until it was really too late. Our veterinarian said we could try to treat her, but likely she would die anyway. It was the most heartbreaking decision I have ever had to make. Do I try to treat her, at expense we really could not afford in hopes that she has a miracle recovery? Or do we put her down, knowing she is in pain and the pain would be relieved by her death?

We opted to put her down. If I had had unlimited money, I still probably would have put her down because the vet was so discouraging about her chances, and I hated to see her in pain. But what if it had been treatable? I don’t know, we were just so poor at that time. We had some money put away, but not that kind of money.

No matter what, though, I don’t think it is ever a waste of resources to seek medical care for your animal, even if they are very costly treatments. Not  providing your animals with medical care is just irresponsible.