Which way of life was better for the cat? Why?

[Fancie]

I was amazed at the answers I got on a diffrant forum.. so I figured ask this here and see if the answers change...

this question is purely hypothetical.

A cat is found in an alley way. This is possibly the ugliest cat in the world. It's fur is raggedy, it tail has bald spots, an eye is poked out... well just imagine the worlds ugliest dog of last year and change it into a cat.

This cat has two paths. There is no other options then these two.

1.) The cat is taken to the humane society where is is not adoptable and it is euthanized painlessly within the week.

2.) The cat is adopted by the person who found him. They give him a wonderful life full of toys, and kindness... however there finances do not afford health care and 3 years later it dies of a painful death from something that may have been prevented if that health care is provided.

Now which life was better?

 

[Camelot Farms]

Wow. Not an easy one to answer. Everytime I get ready to type the answer, I humanize the cat and I cant.

So, I have to abstain. Cant wait to hear what you all have to say.

 

[mom'sfolly]

I go with answer two. Life is better than death. Three years is a good long time for a cat. It's sad that it would be painful at the end but its what's in between that counts. This goes for animal or person.

To completely anthropomorphize the answer....nasty, old, smelly, crazy, homeless guy gets picked up, taken to the hospital and given enough morphine to kill him vs. nasty, old smelly guy dies of liver failure three years later after living in an assisted living facility, eating three squares a day, getting appropriate meds and playing checkers with his friends. I know which I pick for either person or pet.

I think that quality of life is important. If the question for the pet was to stay on the streets or be euthanized, I would probably answer differently. I also would not take this to the same level for a human.....

 

[faykokoWV]

i have to think if the cat is rescued, at least it had three good years that it was loved and cared for.
I'm assuming the painful death was not a prolonged one, since even without the means to provide health care, one can still put the cat down.

Imagine that cat as yourself with cancer, if you knew you were going to get three good years with your family and everything you could want, but die and agonizing death at the end, wouldn't you still want those three good years.

 

[fancbrd4me02]

It depends on if the owners let the cat linger to die a slow death in discomfort instead of euthenizing it. Neglect usually equal a poor quality of life.

 

[saddina]

2 with the cavat that the death was not prolonged suffering.

 

[teach1rusl]

Well...the cat would never know that it missed love and kindness in scenario #1. It would have lived a hard life and then died.
#2 would mean that it did discover love and kindness, but then lost it in a painful death. May be a cop out, but only if (as others have said) the painful death was rather short would I consider #2 the best. As they say, better to have loved and lost than never loved at all...
However, if the cat was in agony for months, then I'd opt for scenario #1.

 

[debilorrah]

#2, however, when an animal is ill it only costs $40 to put down a cat. At least around here. We have had to do it with two cats recently - got too old to hang out anymore.

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

It could easily be asked this way.

If you were told you had cancer an had 3 years to live would you opt to be but down now?


I didn't think so.

 

[redhen]

Quote:
ditto..