Shall We All Play God?

This issue has been debated to death all these years - the question of animal euthanasia.

Is it right for us to "Play God" and decide to end an animal's life?

Last week, a woman went to the shelter and commented to Joan that the organisation should simply put down Sam, an old and blind Dalmation who could hardly move. The woman was pretty pissed off when she saw the depressing state Sam was in.

"Can't you see he is suffering?" she asked Joan.

"If you wanna discuss ethical issues with me, you're looking for the wrong person," was Joan's reply.

We bitched discussed about it later that day. Should Sam be put to sleep?

Honestly? I don't know.

There are animal lovers who hate SPCA to the core because of their practice to put down animals. For me, i prefer to take a neutral stand. Somebody has to get the dirty job done eh? It is a way to deal with the pet overpopulation after all, especially with many stupid Singaporeans being so uneducated about pets and all. The blatently dumb remarks I hear almost everyday has made me pretty cynical about Singaporean pet owners.

Until proven otherwise in time to come, many Singaporean pet owners are still a painfully ignorant lot.

Screw them all.

Anyway, back to the euthanasia issue on hand.

I would admit, looking at Sam's condition today (his condition is worsening with each week) I did suggest euthanasia too. He can no longer move anymore and his kidneys are failing. Flies are frigging tap dancing on his body and there is nothing he can do about it. His left eye vessel has burst and pus is leaking out of the other eye.

I feel sad just looking at him. And I cannot even go comfort him without him trying to chew off my hand because he can't see and recognise me.

And yet, now as I type these cruel words, I remember something that made me rethink my suggestion earlier in the day.

I saw Sam dream - his limps twitching while he snoozed away.

Did he dream of running about in the big green fields? Maybe he was dreaming of chasing a cutey squeaky toy? Or perhaps some form of rough play with a furpal?

It is a little ironic. To see some form of "life" when Sam was sleeping.

And because there is this very slight hint of "life", is it right for us to take it away simply because Sam looks pretty much "dead" otherwise?

But if we don't, are we needlessly prolonging his suffering? Does he really want to go once and for all instead of just wasting away with each passing day? Do they have pride like us, that they want to be remembered as the most beautiful after they have passed on?

Its no wonder the debate has gone on for ages.

Judging from the looks of things, we may not see Sam for much longer. The vet has given the verdict that he may live for just another 3-4 more days in his current state.

And no, he won't be put to sleep. It is not the policy of the shelter anyway.

For Sam has guided his blind brother Murphy before Murphy died. Sam stayed by Murphy's side - always loving, never leaving him til Murphy breathed his last. And now that Sam has lost his sight and is about to join his bro in Rainbow Bridge, we will accompany him through this as well.

The curse of old age and sickness await everyone.

My babies,

I may not have the luxury of seeing you both through puppyhood......

But together, I would walk you through old age.