|
Post by packerdogs on Mar 23, 2004 9:03:06 GMT -5
Hi guys! How's it going? I've been trying to catch up on the posts, I've been far too busy the last month to read and respond much, but wil try to get back into it!
Anyways, what does everyone think about spaying a pregnant female? What's your reasons for yes or no? Also, does it matter if the female is skinny, healthy, has had shots, etc? And does it matter if the father is unknown and the puppies may be mixes?
Thanks! Cathy
|
|
|
Post by amyjo on Mar 23, 2004 9:18:43 GMT -5
I have spayed a pregnant female. I once found a pregnant 9 month old puppy and I had her spayed and found her a home. I did it for her health and well - being and because it is hard enough to find a home for one stray much less a litter.
I know this can be a very touchy subject for some because it touches on the "A" issue - but I really think with the pet over-population problem it is a viable option that should be considered.
|
|
|
Post by Nicole on Mar 23, 2004 9:30:35 GMT -5
The concept doesn't offend me at all especially in light of overpopulation and the knowledge that the dog will never breed again. If I came upon a pregnant stray I would consider a spay if given the option. The factors that you mention do not alter my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Aussienot on Mar 23, 2004 17:09:06 GMT -5
I would not dismiss or condone it out of hand. The age of the mother, her health, whether or not she had a home and how close the puppies are to birth would all factor into the decision.
I am assuming this was not a carefully planned breeding, so the negatives of letting her carry to birth are pretty strong in MHO : dodgy genetics and adding to the unwanted pet population at the top of the list.
The female probably should have been spayed before conception, because we're not talking about breeding stock. To me, it doesn't matter if it's badly breed pures or mutts, either way the breeding was the first error, and I would have no ethical problem correcting it.
On the other hand, spaying is not birth control! I think I was assuming this was a rescue dog. If it was my own dog who had gotten pregnant through my own carelessness, there would be no question that I'd assist her in carrying to term and take responsiblity for homing the puppies.
|
|
|
Post by Brooke on Mar 23, 2004 19:21:32 GMT -5
Ouch touchy subject I think this is a matter of personal opinion. I think you should do only what you are comfortable with. I also would not dismiss or condone it either way. It depends on the person. I have no idea what I would do in that situation??
|
|
|
Post by Laura on Mar 24, 2004 0:25:27 GMT -5
Tough call, a lot of factors to consider, age of the bitch, soundness, and most importantly, how far along in the pregnancy. Too far, and many vets will refuse to do it, the chances of the mother not making it get higher.
|
|
|
Post by packerdogs on Mar 24, 2004 9:15:53 GMT -5
I’ve always been of the belief that once the dog comes into rescue, it’s our responsibility, and the dog is only put down for aggression or unfixable health problems. And if the female turns out to be pregnant, the pups are our responsibility too, regardless of if they are born yet or not. Having a baby born 12 weeks early also has made me completely against abortion – for humans or animals. But, I was outnumbered, and I feel like we just killed the pups. I’m having a hard time with this.
Cathy
|
|
|
Post by amyjo on Mar 24, 2004 11:31:16 GMT -5
Cathy - I can certainly see why you have a problem witht this decision. I am so sorry that you are feeling badly about it...You should focus on all the dogs you help and all the good you do. Know that your groups limited resources will go to help the mother have a much better life and help other dogs like her who have suffered at the ingorance of people. I know that is small consolation - given how you feel...but it should mean something.
I also apologize if my post was insensitive - I did not realize this had already happened and was something you were having an issue with.
|
|
|
Post by packerdogs on Mar 24, 2004 11:50:21 GMT -5
Cathy - I can certainly see why you have a problem witht this decision. I am so sorry that you are feeling badly about it...You should focus on all the dogs you help and all the good you do. Know that your groups limited resources will go to help the mother have a much better life and help other dogs like her who have suffered at the ingorance of people. I know that is small consolation - given how you feel...but it should mean something. I also apologize if my post was insensitive - I did not realize this had already happened and was something you were having an issue with. No, I didn’t think your post was insensitive. I’m realizing them I am by far the minority in my opinion of this. The problem is we DO have the resources to help the mom and the pups. The mom did get spayed yesterday, 3 of the pups were infected (I’m assuming that means the sac’s ambiotic fluid was infected), the rest weren’t. Well, most would think that is a consolation that the right thing was done again, however, the reason Finnegan was born early is when I had him, then they discovered the same thing – an infection in the ambiotic fluid. But, he lived and is just fine. There’s no saying either way that these pups would have died for sure, or if all would have got infected and all would have died, or if everyone would have lived. I guess I’m one to let nature take it’s course. We’ve had a female in the past (Lois – remember KC?), she was old, about 7 or 8 I think, skinny too. She had the pups, her entire uterus was infected they discovered when they did the spay – all the pups lived and so did she. We’ve had very healthy females that were pregnant come in and 1/2 the pups died for no reason whatsoever. I just truly feel the pups were already our responsibility whether they were born or not yet. I feel it’s no different then saying “let’s euthanize all the dogs in foster homes right now and get new ones!”. But, I have to keep my mouth shut, because there are only a handful of volunteers and other rescuers that I know agree with me. Cathy
|
|
|
Post by Willow on Mar 24, 2004 12:58:12 GMT -5
After pondering over the whole issue, I can truthfully say I feel very strongly for both sides. Part of me says it's not fair to bring more unwanted dogs into the world, esp. in a case like this one, and that we can't apply moral issues/reasonings to our pets, because they are not human, eventhough we tend to view them as such. OTOH, I can really see and understand your side of it too, Cathy.
|
|
|
Post by Brooke on Mar 24, 2004 13:32:32 GMT -5
I can see both sides honestly with pet over population and all but I think I actually lean more towards your side Cathy. I don't feel lives...human or otherwise are disposable regardless of the situation.
I just read a post at DP yesterday about a poster who was once a vet and had a woman spend $135 on treatment for a sick $5 hampster. I find that amazing and so wonderful and refreshing. I think I'm with you on this Cathy.
|
|