How much would you spend?

[SueA]

Did anyone see the lady on the news the other night who is going to spend upwards of about £1000 to try to save one of her hens? The hen had cancer in one of it's legs & this had been amputated & then was found to have developed it in it's other leg. It's going to have either chemo or radiotherapy (can't remember which) to try to save it. I know I would spend whatever I could to save a pet but I was wondering if this is fair on the hen & would anyone else go to such lengths?

[kirsty b]

At the risk of sounding callous, no, not for a hen. For a start how can a hen have a decent life with only one leg??

If it was one of my dogs, and I could be assured that they would have a good quality of life post-treatment then I most probably would.

[Tigerella]

Hi

I would eat it!

The hen, not the dog.

T

[SueA]

I just thought what kind of life does the poor hen have anyway with just one leg, it was a pet but she had several other hens & the 'poorly' one had to be kept indoors away from the others so they didn't bully her. As the report said she'd never be able to lay enough eggs to pay her bill!

[bluemoon]

Not sure. It does seem silly when the hen can't even mix with others (I heard that hens need to be part of a flock). Having just spent thousands (well the insurance company did) on attempting - and failing - to save my dog's life, I can sort of understand it, I grew truly sick of people saying 'It's only a dog' and if she feels anything for this bird as I did for him then she's probably desperate enough to try anything. I did in the end realize though that my boy's quality of life was gone and we made the decision to have him put gently to sleep. I told myself that it was the last kind thing that I could do for him, but four months on I'm still in a terrible state about it (I had my last sobbing session about it less than an hour ago). No matter how much you care for an animal eventually you have to accept that making these awful decisions is as much your responsibility as ensuring that they are adequately fed. Yes I'm suffering dreadfully, but at least my boy isn't and to have hung on to him any longer would have been selfish.

[jeannine]

You're absolutely right Bluemoon, sometimes you have to put the animal you care about first - even though it can be the hardest thing in the world to let go.

Losing a pet dog is like losing a member of the family, so it's completely natural that you still feel upset about your boy!

[SarzWix]

She must not have any kids to have £1000's to spend on a hen's vet bill...
I guess it's all relative really, I'd struggle to find hundreds for a vet's bill whichever of my pets it was for, but if you have 'spare' thousands lying around then I guess it doesn't seem like such a big thing? For me though, the fact that hens have such a short life anyway, & it was legless & unable to 'display it's natural behaviour' would be enough to decide me to have it put to sleep I think.

[farmerjim]

I would have eaten it before it even had the chance to lose its first leg. I cant understand how people can end up with farm animals as pets. They were bread for a reason and that was food.

Sorry to sound so callous but what is the difference between growing your own veg and rearing your own animals. They are there for the same purpose.

[Tigerella]

Hi

I have a pet cat, and I would not spend £1000 on that.
If I had won the lottery I would still find it wrong to spend £1000 on a pet.
People die because they are hungry, the Channel 4 program where a millionaire gives poor people money to change their lives for the better.

T

[Paul Wagland]

Sorry to sound so callous but what is the difference between growing your own veg and rearing your own animals.

Well, a central nervous system for one thing

I think there comes a point when killing a sick animal quickly is the kindest thing to do, and it's a shame we can't legally help each other out in the same way. That said if medical treatment preserves the animal's quality of life then there's no reason, in my view, not to pay for it if you are fortunate enough to be able.

[jeannine]

I read that they are both accountants, so i guess you are right Paul about them being able to afford it.

It's interesting that the gutter press gets judgemental about someone spending £1,000 on an animal they care about, and yet these papers rarely bat an eyelid when their readers throw away £2,000 a year on their 20-a-day fag habit.

[hedgie]

Well, a central nervous system for one thing

I think there comes a point when killing a sick animal quickly is the kindest thing to do, and it's a shame we can't legally help each other out in the same way. That said if medical treatment preserves the animal's quality of life then there's no reason, in my view, not to pay for it if you are fortunate enough to be able.

Nice one Paul!!!!

[farmerjim]

central nervous system or not, fundamentally they are for the purpose of consumption. Yes animals should be reared to the highest standards but in the end tis just for the plate!

[jeannine]

I think it's helpful to remember that different cultures have different ideas of food.

Here in the UK we'd be horrified about eating dogs, but in many countries they are 'reared for the plate'. Nevertheless, anyone who has had a pet dog knows how intelligent and individual they can be and so even if they were just being reared for 'consumption' we would want them to have a good life.

Most chickens that are eaten in this country don't get that luxury.

[Seahorse]

As I understand it, the hen in this case was never intended 'for the plate'. As much as I would prefer all animals to have the very best quality and longest of lives, I feel Tigerella's point above is the most salient one - how many starving and/or sick children could such a large amount of money benefit?