Or, we know when to pull the plug on our pets.
The post earlier in the week about the Schaivo case generated a number of comments (genuine ones, not spam!) including Jim's suggestion that a symbolic "Terri's law" was where this was all headed. Possibly.
What about Fluffy's Law. Pets are "put down" just about every day of the year. Pets with--and I'm not trying to be flippant here--with more expressive ability than Terri Schaivo currently has. Yet after considering the veterinary evidence we're allowed to put Fluffy the Bunny (gratuitious Easter reference) out of her misery without the law, let alone Congress, getting involved.
Obviously [most] people don't form the same bonds with their pets as they do with their spouses and human relatives. But people do form emotional bonds with their pets that extend over many years. (It's for another day to discuss whether Kitty has an emotional bond to us, or just knows where the next meal is coming from).
And when Kitty, Fluffy, and Spot get kidney failure (or whatever) it is an emotional wrench to decide that they're not going to enjoy a life with an incurable disease and little hope of palliative care. People don't put their pets down lightly. We trust them to do it, and we trust them to get it about right. Most of the time people don't prolong their pets suffering. We know when to pull the plug.
But with humans incapable of expressing their opinions we probably err on the side of prolonging life too long. We should treat people more like cats at the end of their lives.
Posted by robe0419 at March 27, 2005 7:11 PM