Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2005;331:1227 (26 November), doi:10.1136/bmj.331.7527.1227
Rebecca Coombes
London
What does a vet do when a pet owner wants them to carry out heroic surgery on a dying animal? Rebecca Coombes asks whether doctors and vets can learn from each other's ethical dilemmas
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
The ethical problems facing doctors and vets obviously differ in some ways. A veterinary surgeon, for example, can decide when a treatment is no longer valuable and opt for euthanasia. This course is not open to doctors. And a doctor has to seek the consent of a patient for treatment whereas veterinary surgeons need to steer a course between their own professional opinion and the wishes of pet owners. The animal itself has no rights. Moreover, there is no NHS for animals, and decisions about euthanasia often have to be made in the light of an owner's ability to pay for a lengthy course of life extending treatment. But, when considering these ethical issues with members of both the veterinary and medical profession, some interesting parallels emerge.
|
|
Could child cruelty, such as that suffered by Victoria Climbié (above), be reduced if vets were obliged to report cases of pet cruelty |
Read all Rapid Responses