Something so sad... Kept for only 2 hours...

chul3l3ies1126 · 10-31-2008, 10:17 AM

I found this to be a very controversial topic and had it confirmed while I read the comments at the bottom of the article. Some say it was completely wrong to do this after only 2 hours... then the other argument, which is also part of mine is it is PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY to microchip or have a collar on your cat. Identification would have saved this cat. Either way very sad.

http://www.wfsb.com/iteam/17851832/detail.html#-

Nessa

Dakota Spirit · 10-31-2008, 11:27 AM

Yeah, you know, it's sad that the cat died and that more wasn't done to find his rightful owners. Do I blame the veterinary hospital, though? No, not at all.

Especially when I see quotes like this:

Quote:

She said that when outside, Lono normally stayed near the house, but on that day, he disappeared.

This is precisely why animals need to be MONITORED. I won't get into the whole indoor vs. outdoor debate...I will only say that if you choose to allow your pets outside then you are 100% responsible for their safety. Trusting the animal to automatically do what it 'normally does' is ridicules. The outdoors is not a controlled environment, there's no telling what may prompt an animal to act outside it's typical nature.

Furthermore, as you read on there appears to be some sort of differing of opinions as to the health of the cat. According to the clinic, the cat was dropped off by a neighbor (in poor shape) who neglected to take financial responsibility for the animal. It's also stated that they tried calling two separate shelters to no avail. So really, it's not as if they took the cat and automatically stuck it with a needle.

The bottom line is this, though:

Quote:

"The ultimate responsibility of pet safety lies with the owner," she said.

You don't want to go through a situation like this? Then you better make sure you are being the responsible owner that your pet deserves.

Katzyn · 10-31-2008, 04:29 PM

I do think it was wrong that the clinic euth'd without giving much time to see if there was an owner looking for him, but I also agree with Dakota Spirit; if she wasn't supervising him, then this is her fault. If he'd died by being hit by a car, it would have been her fault.

She has no one to blame but herself, sadly.

I do still feel, however, that the clinic should NOT have euth'd so soon.

ladyshadowhollyjc · 10-31-2008, 11:32 PM

The first thing I do whenever one of my animals has gone missing, is to call and alert the vets in our area. I call and ask if anyone brought an animal fitting a certain description, and if they say no they're all more than happy to write down the description and take my number.
Yes, as a pet owner it's your responsibility to monitor your pets. Yeah, I've had a dog escape and a cat, but they have microchips and collars, so they were easily found. So as a small expense a 35$ microchip saved my dog and cat.

Either way, 2 hours isn't a fair amount of time to help find a stray's family. I guess our vet is way too ethical... they would take in any animal in hopes of finding it's home or a new home for it. I've seen them do it before. I mean they wouldn't spend $10,000 on surgery for a stray, but if in a "fixable" state they'd do the best the could to help it. (They actually work closely with the shelters and anyone who wants to rescue animals)

Willowy · 11-01-2008, 08:40 PM

It's weird that Animal Control wouldn't take the cat.....a vet clinic has no business euthanizing strays anyway. AC is required to do a stray hold for a certain period of time, and, if a clinic is going to deal with strays, they should be held to the same requirements.

When AC in my town finds a cat, they bring it to my vet's office. Abiding by the stray hold rules and everything. But he never euths them unless their condition is hopeless.....they have so many "office cats", it's kind of funny. Most of them get adopted eventually, though; only 2 are permanent and are not up for adoption.

I don't think the vet clinic did the right thing. Now, I do believe that if you let your cat outside unattended, you're taking your chances, and you can't get too mad if something happens----that's the risk you chose to take. But, it's just not right to take someone's cat and put it down without giving them time to locate their pet. That's why AC is there, to discourage people from dealing with strays by themselves.

Love's_Sophie · 11-02-2008, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willowy

It's weird that Animal Control wouldn't take the cat.....a vet clinic has no business euthanizing strays anyway. AC is required to do a stray hold for a certain period of time, and, if a clinic is going to deal with strays, they should be held to the same requirements.

I don't think the vet clinic even called AC...at least that is what I understood from the article.

As far as what happened...that is why my kitties NEVER step out the door without a leash, and harness on (which has their tag on it). I know accidents happen, but if a person knowingly allows pets out the door w\out ID...then that can make even an accident more tragic, should the outcome wind up like this.

I do feel the clinic should have called the AC or a humane society, though, as they normally have their own vets on staff, and if the cat was supposedly in such 'bad' shape, they would have taken care of it, AND given the cat a chance to find his or her owner, or a chance to be adopted out. So I do think the vet clinic was a bit at fault too, for not caring enough to get the kitty into hands that COULD help him.