Mercy killings for non-human animals.

[ZombieHorde]

An animal is accidentally hit by a vehicle out in the woods, miles from any town. The animal is still alive, but has horrible injuries. The driver of the vehicle has a firearm on his or her person and shooting the animal would be legal.

If the driver shot the animal, would the shooting be for the animal's sake or the person's sake.

Conventional wisdom would say the shooting would be for the animal's sake. The killing would be a kindness since it would end the animal's suffering.

I wonder if the animal would chose an immediate death over a painful life. Non-human animals seem to have a very strong survival instinct and I believe the animal would want to live as long as possible. I often believe that humans perform mercy killings because we have a hard time with non-human animal suffering, and killing the animal makes us feel better than leaving the animal to suffer.

[konnichi wa]

1. Nonhuman animals do have strong sef-preservation -instincts- but they have no concept

of mortality per se. And the coup de grace has not historically been reserved for 'lower' critters.

[LWolf]

2. Other:

We perform mercy killings, not because the animal "wants to die."

Who wants to die?

We perform mercy killings to end suffering, when there is nothing but suffering ahead.

It's for the animal's sake; not for ours. If you have ever held a beloved dog whose system had shut down, who was slowly starving to death and could no longer get out of bed, whose legs could no longer support his body; if you've ever held him in your lap while a vet euthanized him, you know that it's all for him; to end his pain, to end his suffering.

Our pain doesn't end with his.

[Johonny]

7. I'll go with this

Animal on road side injured is likely to be animal in predators stomach very soon.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

8. Well said

That's how I see it as well.

I had to put my precious, sweet dog to sleep last July. She's not suffering any more. I still cry every time I think of her and it's been a year almost.

[Fla_Democrat]

10. Well said

:loveya: :yourock:

[Tim01]

15. Well said.

A somebody who has been there.

[ZombieHorde]

18. Why do you believe the animal would prefer death over a life of suffering? nt

[Stellabella]

31. Because they don't understand suffering and pain for a purpose.

When animals are in pain they really retreat into themselves. Their spirit usually vanishes. They just want the pain to end, and often death is the only way to stop it.

[ZombieHorde]

35. How can one be certain an animal would want the pain to end more than they want their lives to

continue?

[REP]

52. Spend a lot of time with animals then ask again

Not meant sarcastically. Not assigning human motives to animals, either, but they just want to be animals, and if they can't, what is life to them?

[ZombieHorde]

54. I grew up with animals.

they just want to be animals, and if they can't, what is life to them?

Suffering is part of being an animal, both human and non-human.

[REP]

55. Is it, or is that a human construct?

Suffering for suffering's sake is a particularly nasty human sentiment, I think.

[ZombieHorde]

64. Suffering as a human construct? I am interested,

please tell me more.

[LWolf]

61. They live in the moment.

They don't contemplate the future.

Have you had much opportunity to deal with animals, specifically suffering animals?

[ZombieHorde]

67. I am not sure how much time would constitute "much opportunity",

but I have been around my now deceased dog when he was suffering.

[LWolf]

73. If euthanasia were the only way to relieve that suffering,

and the suffering was extreme and for the rest of his life, would you have taken that step for him?

I have had to do that for 3 dogs; 2 dying of old age, and 1 young dog suffering from advanced bone cancer, in his spine.

One horse, who injured herself beyond repair.

It's always been a painful decision, but I've never regretted it.

My family knows to do the same for me, when the time comes.

[stop the bleeding]

41. Very good post. I have been there more than once. NT

[virginia mountainman]

3. In Virginia..

It is Illegal to shoot a shoot animal, on the roadside..

That being said, it is NEVER enforced, the law that prohibits shooting from the road, is intend to stop road "hunting" of wild game, but by the way it is written, also prohibits "mercy" shots.

As I said, it is never enforced, against mercy shots...

I had the unpleasant task of a mercy shot, last week, for a dog, whose back, and hips had been smashed by a loaded dump truck...

It was a horrible sight, and made me well up with tears.

EDIT: The pain this dog was in, cannot be described, the yelping, will be with me for a very long time.

[floridablue]

4. You should have had the driver hold the dog

Then shoot the driver first giving the dog the satisfaction of seeing the cause of his death die first, then relieve the dog of his misery.

[virginia mountainman]

6. The driver did not stop....

I honestly, don't think he knew, the dog, from the neighbor who saw it happen, said the dog, ran under the rear wheels....

It was the neighbors dog, I heard the yelping, and came to see what had happened..

[floridablue]

57. That is unfortunate for you to be put in that spot. I commend your thoughtfulness.

[Codeine]

9. You've never struck an animal with a car?

It happens, despite the best of intentions. I totaled my Toyota Matrix a few years back attempting not to hit a dog; nearly died and ended up killing the dog anyway. Nothing but an accident -- poor guy darted out between cars right in front of me on an expressway.

Should I have been shot?

[floridablue]

58. It sounds like you suffered enough. And no, I have been fortunate

to have never having hit an animal with a vehicle. (said with crossed fingers). Here in downtown St. Pete there is a constant worry of bicycles and motorized wheel chairs. They both do not have good visability, so it is pretty much up to the driver to avoid them.

[Cleita]

5. Unfortunately, the wounded animal would need a health plan

before he could decide whether to live or die. Having put down more than one pet in my lifetime, I found that when they were ready they seemed calm and accepting of the fact that they would get peace at last. It's like they knew that the trip to the vet was the last one; the last pill; the last treatment that was keeping them alive was over. There was no whining and they died in my arms peacefully when the shot was delivered. I have also been witness to a deer being hit on the road and a local pulling his rifle out of his vehicle and shooting the animal square where the animal would suffer the least. The animal was not panicky but seemed to accept her fate even gratefully. Maybe she was in shock, but she didn't suffer anymore.

[scarletwoman]

11. Your poll choices are worded weirdly. No animal, non-human or human, "wants" to die.

Just as no creature "wants" to suffer unbearable pain. Where there is no hope of recovery, a quick merciful death is preferable to lengthy suffering of unbearable pain.

Why would anyone be okay with allowing a mortally wounded animal to suffer a long, drawn out unbearably painful death? Mercy killing is wholly for the animal's sake.

sw

[ZombieHorde]

20. Then why do people kill themselves?

[scarletwoman]

24. Because they perceive their pain (psychological, emotional, or whatever) to be unbearable. (nt)

[ZombieHorde]

26. So they want to die. nt

[Stellabella]

32. No, they want the pain to stop. And death seems the only way at the time.

There is a nuanced difference.

[ZombieHorde]

36. How can one be certain they don't wish to die?

[Stellabella]

68. Since they can't tell us, we'll NEVER know.

But using human judgment, we can certainly tell when there's no hope and when the animals is in pain.

I don't understand your questioning. You're asking an unanswerable question. Every situation is different, and it's up to human beings to decide what's in the best interests of the animal.

[ZombieHorde]

72. "it's up to human beings to decide what's in the best interests of the animal"

Interesting, why do you believe this? Are you only referring to pets, or animals in the wild as well?

[Lyric]

12. There's no way to know whether or not animal would choose death

because we cannot explain concepts like "pain" to an animal in terms of time--for example, we can't explain to a horribly maimed, car-struck deer that the awful pain will continue without death, and that death is inevitable without extensive medical care that is either too far away to save the deer, or that our government is not willing to pay for in order to save one animal. We can only use our own empathy, and say "If this were me, and I had no other options than to lay here with torn-off limbs, ruptured organs, and broken bones with an inevitable death, OR to die swiftly and miss a lot of pain, what would I choose?"

Empathy is a complex thing. One can make the argument that when we're feeling empathetic pain and make choices like the one you describe, that we are acting in our self-interest in order to stop the empathetic pain. On the other hand, does the self-benefit morally matter if the action we take is also merciful to the animal? It benefits cat rescuers to care for homeless cats, because it makes them feel good about themselves and it reinforces the common desire to be a "good" and "just" person, but it also benefits the cats as much as as the rescuers, if not more. So does that mean that self-interest is the "primary" motivation? And does it really matter, from a practical standpoint?

Good deeds done in the name of the Devil are still good deeds--and vice-versa.

[ZombieHorde]

22. My poll has nothing to do with care, my poll is about an animals will to live, despite suffering.

[Lyric]

30. But how can you claim that they have a "will to live" when "will"

is a consciousness construct that requires self-awareness and the ability to consent in order to exist?

They certainly have an instinct toward self-preservation, but instinct is not always a marker for their best interests. Some dogs have an instinctive urge to chase cars, but nobody would argue that those instinctual urges are necessarily in their best interests. All too often the dog ends up hurt or dead because the dog cannot understand the complexity of risks that chasing a car can ensue. My cats have an instinctive urge to run away whenever the veterinarian pulls out a vaccination needle, but I override that instinct because I know that vaccinations are in their best interests. Obviously, we cannot use instinctive urges as a solid guide to determining what is best for an animal.

Similarly, unless you believe that animals have the ability to give or deny consent, it's difficult to support the idea of an animal possessing a "will." Therefore, your premise that animals have a "will to live" and that overriding this "will" could be selfish would appear to be invalid.

[ZombieHorde]

33. I believe many animals have a will because many of them seem to have distinct personalies.

An ant may not have free will, but I think some animals, such as a dog, does have free will to some extent, sort of like how people have free will to an extent.

Ants seem to act alike, but I admit I am not well versed in ant behavior, but dogs seem to act very differently from each other.

but instinct is not always a marker for their best interests

This is true, but in the case of an animal who is badly injured or in the advanced stages of cancer, killing the animal when it has the urge to live seems to be in the person's best interest over the animal's best interest.

[Lyric]

37. To an extent?

To what extent? Unless you define it in a detailed way, that's a pretty meaningless statement.

As for your last statement, I can't see how you can make that argument without first defining exactly to what extent animals have "free will," and thus to what extent we need to respect it when their "urges" conflict with what our rationality, empathy, and judgement deem to be in their best interests. What is your evidence or rationale that animals have a "will" that needs to be respected, and exactly to what extent should that "will" be deemed sovereign?

The vaguery of your OP and your replies are too murky and overly-broad to lead to a serious examination of the idea of animals having a sovereign will.

[ZombieHorde]

40. "To what extent?"

This is a very philosophical question as psychologists are not in agreement with the nature of free will. This is why I used the "to an extent" phrase. How about this: at least some animals make choices, at least some animals have preferences outside of their basic drives; for example, any dog will chose a steak over a plain slice of white bread, but some dogs may prefer beer over soda and vice versa. For this thread, I am calling these choices and preferences 'free will'.

"will" that needs to be respected, and exactly to what extent should that "will" be deemed sovereign

I am not making an argument that an animal's "will" needs to be respected or that the animal's "will" is sovereign, I am arguing that non-human mercy killings are primarily for hedonistic reasons. I don't think people who put their animals to sleep are bad in any way, but I do think they do it because they hate to watch their beloved pets suffer.

[haele]

70. I've had two dogs that told us when it was time.

They just lay down, panting loudly and just stared at us whenever their eyes were open.
And would not get up for anything - their "weight" was forced downwards so if you tried to pick them up, it seemed that they weighed three times their actual weight. Wouldn't eat, wouldn't drink. Groaned loudly or whined whenever they needed to move - or even just twitched. Barely wagged their tails.
The St. Bernard lay like that between the front and dining room for two days before Mom and Dad agreed to call the vet (Mom was in denial, that dog was "her baby"), and when the vet came came, it was pretty obvious to all the dog was not going to improve, nor was she going to last more than another day or two.
And cats - they do the same thing when they're fading away, but they tend to hide rather than be "with the pack".
Animals may not feel pain like we do - a lot of pain is anticipation - but they know when their bodies are shutting down and it's time for them to go. It's not just us that feels sad, but they seem to project sadness - or weariness, at least.
Just because they can't verbalize it, doesn't mean it's not there in some fashion.

Haele

[Towlie]

13. "I wonder if the animal would choose..." under what circumstance? Why is your animal able to choose?

That's where your proposition breaks down. You said "I wonder if the animal would choose..." but you didn't describe the hypothetical circumstance you're imagining where the animal is somehow able to choose. Obviously if this animal in your scenario was intelligent enough to make such a choice then the right thing to do would be to ask it first. Whatever difference in your alternate reality made the animal able to understand and choose would probably also make it worth saving.

But as you pointed out, most animals are not driven by intelligence, they're driven by a strong survival instinct. That's a direct consequence of natural selection, since (unless you're an ant or a bee protecting the queen) being willing to die does nothing to further survival of your species.

[ZombieHorde]

34. An animal in a trap choses to live by chewing off its leg.

Even if the animal dies from the amputation, it still tried to live.

[Tim01]

14. We put them down to end their pain.

[ZombieHorde]

28. Yes, but is it mostly for our own sake or the animals sake?

I believe the animal would chose to live.

An animal will chew its own leg off to free it self from a trap.

[Tim01]

39. Give it enough time and pain and it would regret that choice.

I have chronic pain. I know what I am talking about.

I should have put down my dogs earlier than I did.

[ZombieHorde]

42. "Give it enough time and pain and it would regret that choice."

We can not be certain since non-human animals do not think like humans.

I have chronic pain. I know what I am talking about.

I have no doubts you are more experienced than I on the subject of human pain.

[Tim01]

45. It is true we don't know how they think.

But everything dies. Sooner or later.

My best example was when my cat got a small rabbit. 2 days later the rabbit died at the vets office. The rabbit suffered the whole time. I am a thinking creature and I could have ended it's pain. But instead I gave it 2 days of suffering and it died anyway.
If I had saved it, it still would have eventually died. We save them for a while.

I knew a guy who was attacked by a grizzly. It hit him in the head so hard he went flying. When he landed he thought part of his head was gone and that the griz was going to finish him. He said it was ok. He accepted it and it was alright.
His buddies shot the bear with a tranquilizer and everything turned out alright. And he wasn't actually missing part of his head. But as a human who can articulate thoughts, he was ok with dieing quickly at the hands of another.



As someone who has a real soft spot for animals, I try not to gamble with their suffering.

[ZombieHorde]

47. I don't think less of anyone who preforms a mercy killing in good faith.

I just think that mercy killings are mostly hedonistic in nature.

[Tim01]

48. Anybody who has to make the choice

is having a vary bad day. And they will probably live with regret and sadness no matter what choice they make.

[ZombieHorde]

50. I agree completely. nt

[Towlie]

43. But it's not a choice, it's an instinctive reaction to a situation, shaped by evolution.

There are plenty of examples of instinctive actions that cause animals to die. In those cases they don't choose to die, they're just victims of their instinct.

Chose is the past tense of choose.

[ZombieHorde]

44. Thanks for the spelling heads up, that word has always been hard for me for some reason.

If the animal's instinct is to live, and we kill it, are we not doing so primarily for our own benefit. Are we not killing the animal because we hate the fact that it is suffering?

[Curtland1015]

16. This poll also seems to imply that animals would be "fixed up" enough to keep going...

A person suffering from a grievous injury still has access to shelter, food and water, warmth... a lot of the things a struck animal would lack. If you let that sick/injured animal hobble away (assuming it even can) it would just end up starving to death, and be in terrible pain the entire time it's doing so.

[stray cat]

19. RIght - no one is actually going to treat the animal with morphine and move her to a comfortable

setting.

[ZombieHorde]

27. Doesn't matter. nt

[ZombieHorde]

23. I did not mean to imply anything about being "fixed up".

Whether or not the animal will live more than an hour is irrelevant to this poll.

This poll is about human motivation for mercy killings.

[stray cat]

17. I put my cat to sleep. She had severe acute cardiomyapathy and was getting to tired

trying to breath. She couldn't eat or drink because it would get in the way of breathing. There was no hope. She would have died in minutes or a week but why have her scared and suffering and desparately trying to breath? She had to lie on her side because it was the only way she could keep her respiration going.

[ZombieHorde]

25. Sounds horrible.

why have her scared and suffering and desparately trying to breath?

Because your cat may have preferred this over death. Non-human animals seem to have a very strong survival instinct. Of course we have no way of knowing for sure, at least no way I am aware of.

[stray cat]

21. I hit a raccoon with my car - I didn't stop and that was to protect myself

not because I knew the raccoon would want to stay alive to the end or until she got hit by another car.

[Curtland1015]

29. Something else to consider...

You ask if the animal would choose to live if given the choice. Implicit in that is it would understand the exact situation it is in.

If it knew it was only going to spend the next couple of days curled up in a ball, slowly starving and out of its mind in great pain, with no hope at all of living, it likely WOULDN'T want to live.

The part you seem to be hanging up on is their "strong survival instinct".

Of course every animal needs this, but then, animals very likely don't know when their cause is lost. All they know is that they are in tremendous pain and they have to get away and hide until that pain goes away.

If they actually KNEW they had no chance, and KNEW they were in for a couple of days of tourture and starvation with no chance at all of surviving after all was said and done, I'm willing to bet most wouldn't want to live.

[ZombieHorde]

38. "I'm willing to bet most wouldn't want to live."

I am guessing you are willing to bet this because you wouldn't want to live under those circumstances.

Lying on the side of the road with broken bones and messed up organs sounds horrific. I may wish to die, but I am not a non-human animal.

Non-human animals seem to think differently than humans. We can not be certain we are doing the animal a favor, but we know we are doing ourselves a favor by ending the animals suffering.

[Towlie]

46. Do you remember that movie where a dog chased a ball through an open window?

I didn't actually see the movie myself, but that scene was in a preview that was shown on TV many years ago. A ball bounced through an open window and a dog instinctively chased after it. The next scene showed the dog wrapped up in bandages because he had jumped from the second floor.

Now if you believe an animal's life-or-death choice should be honored, does that mean you would have let that dog jump out the window without trying to stop him? Or would you have saved him because you're able to make a smarter decision than what the dog's instinct tells him to do?

[ZombieHorde]

49. I would have stopped the dog from going out the window if I could.

I would have tried to save the dog from suffering and possible death.

Now if you believe an animal's life-or-death choice should be honored

Whether or not the choice is honored is irrelevant for my poll, I have preformed mercy killings before. I am arguing that mercy killings are more for the person's sake than the animal's sake.

We do not kill suffering animals because they want to die, we kill suffering animals because we can not stand their suffering.

[REP]

51. If death is inevitable, euthanize; if not, take to wildlife clinic

That is the decision I make. There are some injuries where death will come no matter what; if I can reduce suffering, I will.

[ZombieHorde]

53. I think I understand your position, but is your position based on your feelings

or the animals feelings?

Since there is no real way of knowing what the animal desires, I feel like the decision would be based off of your feelings.

I am not telling you to avoid mercy killings, I am merely suggesting that they are more for the person's benefit than they are for the animal's benefit.

[Curtland1015]

56. So what are you really trying to say?

That we should go ahead and kill suffering aminals, but we should feel terrible about it because the animal doesn't want to die?

Where is any of this going? Did you just want to let us know how in tune you are to the animals in the forests and the birds in the sky?

[ZombieHorde]

63. LOL. This debate is for its own sake. Armchair philosophy is sometimes fun.

I enjoy debating against conventional wisdom. I am not trying to change anyone's behavior or make anyone feel sad. I just wanted to kick around some ideas.

[Ganja Ninja]

59. Obviously you should kill the dying animal to put it out of it's misery.

Leaving it to a prolonged suffering death is inhumane. Would you prefer that an injured, disoriented, frightened and immobile animal be consumed by fire ants or die slowly in some other grizzly fashion? I realize you may find it to be a distasteful stomach turning chore so maybe not showing mercy to the animal would make you feel better but I wouldn't consider it kindness to the animal.

[ZombieHorde]

65. "Would you prefer"

This statement furthers my point. The mercy killing is for the killer more than it is for the animal.

[Ganja Ninja]

69. Sorry but I would consider it despicable to walk away from a dying animal

and leave it to God knows what awful fate simply because you're too squeamish or too self righteous to do the right thing. You've proven nothing other than the fact that you aren't able to deal with the hard realities of life and death. I grew up on a farm and had to put down animals several times with tears in my eyes. It was never something I wanted to do but I sucked it up and did it for the animal to end it's suffering. That's call compassion. Leaving a suffering animal to die slowly as the buzzards or rats or whatever feed on it is cold blooded, heartless and cowardly. The idea that you would derive some sort of smug sense of superiority by allowing an animal to suffer is disturbing.

[ZombieHorde]

71. Wow, no personal attacks until the 69th post, that is pretty good for DU.

too squeamish or too self righteous to do the right thing

I believe the killer is being squeamish.

You've proven nothing other than the fact that you aren't able to deal with the hard realities of life and death.

Please inform me on the realities of life and death.

did it for the animal to end it's suffering

I think you did it to end your own suffering. I think you saw animals in great pain and decided they would be better off dead.

Leaving a suffering animal to die slowly as the buzzards or rats or whatever feed on it is cold blooded, heartless and cowardly.

This could be true in some circumstances, but not all. If one believes the animal wishes to live then the act of "leaving a suffering animal to die slowly as the buzzards or rats or whatever feed on it" would be one of strength and great respect.

The idea that you would derive some sort of smug sense of superiority by allowing an animal to suffer is disturbing.

Why do you believe I "would derive some sort of smug sense of superiority by allowing an animal to suffer"?

[Xenotime]

60. I wouldn't have a gun in the first place.

[deaniac21]

62. Is the animal cute or ugly?

[ZombieHorde]

66. Depends on who is looking at it. nt

[deaniac21]

74. Well, if it's a deer or a rabbit, I take it to the ER. If it's a possum

I get out the tire tool.