Value of Life

Recently a dear friend of mine told me that she was considering having her pet dog “put down”.   I then recalled a time last year when a family dog had to die after she ate anti-freeze put out by a neighbor who dislikes animals.

These experiences elicited a series of questions within me about the value of life and the similarities and differences we have in our value systems toward people and animals.

My self-inquiry as to the reasoning for putting these dogs to death exhibited the physical and mental dysfunctions that the dogs had.  Pain was present and there seemed to be no way to ease it.  

One had bodily functions that were not working which caused problems for the dog and the humans around him.   Being able to hear had virtually disappeared.  He had behavior around the family with depression-like characteristics. The other was going to die soon due to poison and immediate death seemed kinder.

What are the values of letting these dogs die when their body and mind reach a high degree of dysfunctionality?   Do we have an obligation to release them from misery by administering a system of humane death?  Who makes the choice and what is the appropriate degree of dysfunctional characteristics necessary for a decision of life or death to be made?

Do we make every effort to keep the animal alive regardless of his condition?   Do we make financial investments in the animal health care system that place a strain on our own financial resources?   Do we keep the dogs alive out of our own love for them and our own unwillingness to let them leave our lives and being part of our family?  Many persons really do love and care about their pets equally, if not more, than they do their relatives and make their pets ‘human’.

These questions come to mind each time I see the choices being placed on human beings who have family members who are experiencing some of the same characteristics as the dogs described above.  Is there some point where it is best for all concerned to cease intervention in the degeneration of a person’s mind and body so that our loved ones can follow the natural progression of life that ends in death?  Are we kinder to our animal family than we are to our human family with all of the efforts made to keep humans alive?

While willing to discuss the pros and cons of taking an animal’s life, our society has a difficult time facing the issue of whether an individual has reached a point in their life journey where their body and/or mind indicates that being allowed to die is the most humane outcome for that person. And the discomfort may grow with the role of investing extensively our personal and societal financial resources in their care.

How each one of us feels about this different way we treat the severe illness of humans and animals usually depends on our personal value system.  There are those who see no need to discriminate between treatment of humans and animals regarding the death process.  We should/should not intervene in either.

There are people who believe we should encourage death in both animals and humans when certain illness characteristics are met.

Other see the value of humans as being totally different and much more important than how we treat animals when it comes to handling the decisions on either letting a human die without intervention or maybe helping the death process along due to humane concerns.

One of the cornerstones of personal growth is “Different Strokes for Different Folks”.  We all have our personal value systems on subjects such as the process of death at the end of one’s life journey.

As I get older, I find myself with more and more questions about such things and fewer answers.  I expect to die the same way.

Comments welcome.     Email: silverchatline@gmail.com