Recently I have been doing an exceptional amount of reading. I know that this seems like out of the ordinary behavior for a dog, but the reading program at the local library inspired me (the kids I live with enrolled).
Yesterday in the Wall Street Journal there was an editorial with the headline "How far Would You go to Keep your Dog Alive?" The owner of Booger was willing to spend $50,000 to bring her dog back from the dead. So I pose the question, how much would you spend? And how much is it worth to spend? Does one consider quality of life? And who gets to define that, the dog or the human who is spending the money?
The mother of the kids I live with works in health care. She frequently engages in cerebral, philosophical discussions about healthcare and the costs in the human world. I can't get all of what she says and she doesn't always make sense. However, from what I can gather, it is humans who are driving the cost of care not the health problems themselves. In the dog world, if there are no humans, a dog gets sick, it dies. Now, that has changed due to human intervention. It would be my opinion, that the same is true in the human world.
In this article, a reader is quoted as saying that to add six months or 12 months to his dog's life for $18,000 was worth it because he didn't have anywhere else he had to spend his money, except to perhaps spend it on things he didn't need like a bigger t.v. I don't disagree that one could feel one has done the right thing, but did anyone ask the dog? I just wonder how the dog felt. This particular dog had colon cancer, an impacted colon and pneumonia.....I wonder how the dog was feeling the last few months of his life? Could the dog go for a walk or chase a ball or roll in the grass or even eat? Just wondering.....


No comments:
Post a Comment