Dear Prudence,
I have a 15-year-old cat named Loki. Last year he started peeing everywhere that wasn’t his litter box. We found out that he was suffering from diabetes, a manageable but costly disease. Between his medical needs and special home care when we need to travel, it is costing us more than $3,000 a year to keep him relatively healthy and cared for. We have house payments, student loans, and a 2-year-old. We’ve had to significantly rearrange our financial priorities to care for him. My husband wants to take Loki off the medication and just let nature take its course, but that idea just makes me cry. I don’t want to watch him go back to having accidents and slowly waste away over the next couple months or years. I would rather put him down, but my husband says he’s otherwise a healthy cat and we can’t. Do we suck it up financially? Let nature run its course? Or pick a day to say goodbye to our beloved family pet while he’s still feeling relatively good?
—No Good Options
Re: Your husband's proposal is cruel.
ETA - I know one anecdote =/= the rule, but my friend's cat has been treated for diabetes for years. I don't know how old the cat is (pretty old though) and he's been diabetic for as long as I've known him - 8 years probably.
I do not want the financial commitment. I do not want to be on the hook for taking care of this animal with health problems, especially the ones that are likely to arise with the breeds he likes. That is not my financial priority, and the benefits of having a dog are not worth that to me.
But that's because I agree with you - if we do take in an animal, we've committed ourselves to that.
DefConn has asked for a fish. Even that's a giant maybe.
We do dog sit for FIL a lot, so that helps everyone get their fix and reminds me that I am not a pet person and have no desire to have a pet friendly house.
I actually disagree with this. I love my dog and cat also, and I'm not sure I'd spend $3K/year to maintain a chronic medical condition. I'm sorry if I sound heartless, but pets are a luxury and that is a lot of money to spend on a luxury. Especially for a family who appears to have trouble affording it.
As many of you know, I'm a Type I diabetic myself. As crazy as it sounds, I've actually heard that insulin for pets is substantially more than it is for people. Though, you wouldn't think they would use very much. They aren't very big. But, I don't know. At least on the pet side. I've heard you're not supposed to give animals insulin meant for people, but did some research and this is what I've found:
There are a variety of types of insulin available. Some are designed for human use but can be useful in pets, while others have been developed specifically for animal use. The natural insulins produced by cat and dog pancreatic cells have slightly different structures than the natural insulin produced by human pancreatic cells. Insulin types made for human use match the natural human insulin, and may not always be as effective in pets.
So, in a nutshell, I'd recommend the LW talk to the vet about giving their cat insulin meant for humans. Because "maybe not being as effective", sounds like it will still work fairly well. For people, it is $26/vial at Walmart and Sam's Club. $75/vial everywhere else. The cat may need to take two different types but, either way, I'd think each vial would last a loooonnnggg time for a 10 lb. creature.
As to the H thinking nature should take its course. Hhhhhiiiisssssss. I'm tempering my absolute anger with the thought that he's not so much cruel, as just an ignorant f**k who doesn't know any better. If my blood sugar is too high even for a couple hours, I.FEEL.VERY.SICK. A few days without insulin and I'd be so lethargic and ill, I could barely move. Except to go pee 2-4x/hour. Not pleasant. If they choose to no longer treat their cat's diabetes, then they need to euthanize it.
Re: pets are for life. I used to agreed so strongly with this. But after bringing my dog with us on this move and seeing his health suffer because of the environment, I wish I had left him with my mom. I would miss him so much but I really do think it would have been better for him.
Sort of off topic, but this letter is triggering me today.
We've had our cat Nip since she was a 4-month old kitten. She is about 15 years old now. She's still seems to be in good health, overall. But we've started seeing the first signs of her aging and a little bit of a decline in her health. Mostly in how she moves. We think and hope we'll have a few more good years with her, but we also know it could be much shorter than that. And it is with a heavy heart, as we watch our kitten girl becoming an old lady.
Yes, a pet should receive love and appropriate care and food. But it's still a pet. It's not a human. I wouldn't spend that kind of a money on an animal. No, I don't think they should just let it suffer, but I see no problem with euthanizing it.
2) This is the last cat they own until finances change and they can afford to own a pet...
3) If the $3k affects their finances that much (it happens! Not judging), time to find a new home for the cat..
And stuff like this is why I've put off getting a new goldfish for our tank... Having a pet means being a responsible pet owner regardless of the size of the pet...
I love your cat's name!
Thanks! It's a double reason. The obvious allusion to the much loved by cats plant called catnip.
But she is also a Manx breed and was born without a tail. As my H says, "It was like God 'nipped' her tail."
If anyone is curious, cats born without tails are just as balanced and agile as their tailed brethren. In fact, even cats born with tails but lose them, will quickly learn to compensate and move/jump just like their old selves.
Rehome. It might not be easy, but at least try, before killing an animal, ffs.
And no-kill shelters do euthanized animals 'to sick' to be adopted--and that's a very fluid term.
I mean, we're suckers at my house. really suckers.
And we just adopted...and I will say elderly pets had strong strikes against them. Not just money (although, yes, money. care costs. ANd we've always come up with what we needed [ok, except the time when the 'best' dog knee surgery was $10k. then we went with the $2k 'lesser' knee surgery]), but because getting attached to a 15 year old cat that you then lose 2 years later (15 isn't ancient, but it's definitely not young)...man, that's a hard thing to commit to (and, it was something we really didn't want to do to the kiddo either. Coming out of losing 2 animals in fairly short succession)
I mean, rehoming is leaps and bounds better than letting the animal waste away. But people aren't lining up to take elderly cats with expensive health problems--my local shelter puts down a horrifying number of healthy young cats yearly because of 'lack of space'.