News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Pugs are anatomical disasters. Vets must speak out–even if it’s bad for business. Parent comment

Re:Pugs are anatomical disasters. Vets must speak out–even i... by MarkMc on Thursday February 09, 2017 @02:26PM (#13610013)
That's a good question. I suppose I'm arguing for ethical framework in which I'm not the sole judge of costs and benefits.

I think the pug will suffer so much that its life is not worth living. But if the pug feels differently then to some degree I should respect that.

I guess my view is shaped by my empathy for the dog. How would I feel in his situation? Similarly, if I end up in a hospital bed racked with pain, do I want the doctor to make a cost-benefit analysis without regard for my own feelings?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Pugs are anatomical disasters. Vets must speak out–even i... by tptacek on Thursday February 09, 2017 @02:38PM (#13610128)
Respectfully I want to creep up towards a presumptuous argument and say that you won't argue for euthanizing pugs because your gut tells you that whatever trouble pugs have due to their (many) health problems, a well-cared-for pug is generally a happy dog, and is not in fact living a life of overwhelming suffering.

We own a rescue mutt and a brachy purebred, and while I can't get inside the heads of either of my dogs, I would have absolutely no trouble telling you which of the two dogs is enjoying its life more. :)

[ Parent | on HN ]