I'm so upset.

[Elaine]

Sadly, what choice do they have.

[sarah5]

good grief call me naive but I had no idea how very sad

[Amber_Leigh1]

I'm so sorry to hear this! My personal view is it shouldn't be allowed if the animal is healthy even if it's what the owner wants - that decision should be made by the vet in assessing it's health - Big hugs to you xx

[EmmaG]

Sorry to hear this Farthing but you have done as much as you could have, try not to beat yourself up.

xxx hugs to you.. x

[Kim]

I can understand why you are so upset, I would be too. Poor cat, can't understand her reasoning at all, not sure how she can live with herself. RIP little cat.

[JBalways2000]

Originally Posted by Amber_Leigh1

I'm so sorry to hear this! My personal view is it shouldn't be allowed if the animal is healthy even if it's what the owner wants - that decision should be made by the vet in assessing it's health - Big hugs to you xx

I completely agree. IMO if the kittie was healthy then it should not have been PTS-the vet should have contacted a rescue or even RSPCA to have the poor kittie taken off the woman. Im in utter shock that he was pts when you had repeatedly offered a home and your vets knew that poor little guy, can definately see why you are so upset

Sleep well little man xxx

[farthing]

Legally there is nothing the vets can do if the owner won't sign the animal over- I'm pretty sure unless the police are involved in a cruelty case the RSPCA/SSPCA cannot even remove an animal without an owner's consent.
I do not blame the vet, they did all they could to persuade her to rehome- but if they had removed him it would have been theft!

I have already been it that situation with 2 rabbits.

[Elaine]

Originally Posted by Amber_Leigh1

I'm so sorry to hear this! My personal view is it shouldn't be allowed if the animal is healthy even if it's what the owner wants - that decision should be made by the vet in assessing it's health - Big hugs to you xx

Originally Posted by JBalways2000

I completely agree. IMO if the kittie was healthy then it should not have been PTS-the vet should have contacted a rescue or even RSPCA to have the poor kittie taken off the woman. Im in utter shock that he was pts when you had repeatedly offered a home and your vets knew that poor little guy, can definately see why you are so upset

Sleep well little man xxx

In an ideal world, I would agree but we all know just how over stretched rescues are and how hard it can be to rehome an older cat. It is very sad and I cannt think why the old woman wouldnt have wanted to rehome the cat instead of pts. Maybe she felt that no one would care and love the cat as much or as well as she has done and would rather pts than risk her cat being shunted from home to home. Who knows...

Originally Posted by farthing

Legally there is nothing the vets can do if the owner won't sign the animal over- I'm pretty sure unless the police are involved in a cruelty case the RSPCA/SSPCA cannot even remove an animal without an owner's consent.
I do not blame the vet, they did all they could to persuade her to rehome- but if they had removed him it would have been theft!

I have already been it that situation with 2 rabbits.

I think you are right there.

[JBalways2000]

Its a real shame that vets dont have more power when it comes to this sort of thing, i would hate to be put in that situation as a vet of someone asking me to euthanise their animal for no other reason then because they dont want it anymore this is such a sad story, i do wish the world were different.

[Elaine]

It wasnt as simple as the woman not wanting the cat any more, she was going into hospital. Sadly, Louise wasnt able to convince her that the cat would settle with her and for what ever reason the woman thought it best to have the cat pts.
I dont agree with the womans decision but it was her's to make.