Background information

Can you put a number on a small animal’s life?

11/6/2024

Translation: Elicia Payne

Accessories, pet food, vets: dogs and cats cost a lot of money. Everyone knows that. But why do many people find it normal to euthanise hamsters, budgies or rabbits rather than giving them expensive care? Isn’t every pet’s life worth the same?

At the vets the other day, I hear «That’s 548.46 euros.» Without exception, every one of my friends I mentioned this figure to rolled their eyes – even those who have pets themselves.

«So much money for such a small animal?», they kept saying. I’m talking about my rabbit. An animal which German vet Ralph Rückert now considers a questionable pet for valid reasons. I’ve already explained it myself, rabbits are underestimated and basically luxury pets. They’re also masters at hiding their symptoms. Rabbits often don’t show how ill they are until they die.

But what do you do with an animal that – as expert Rückert describes – «perversely costs only half as much as a stuffed rabbit from Steiff, but can be just as expensive as any dog when it gets sick»?

Ethical question: what’s animal love all about?

Are you rolling your eyes already? Hundreds of euros or francs for a rabbit? Counter question, why do people pay several thousand euros just to buy a pedigree dog, when this doesn’t even include follow-up costs?

This question demands a call with Angela Martin, professor at the University of Basel, philosopher and specialist in bioethics. So, Mrs Martin, who’s right? My friends who think I’m crazy when it comes to loving bunnies? Or me, who takes care regardless of the type of pet I have and, of course, pays for it?

«It’s not about who is in the right,» says the expert. «Pet owners who take extensive care of their pets are doing the right thing if they go to the veterinary practice and are also prepared to pay the costs incurred. The fact is, as soon as you get an animal, it’s completely dependent on humans. This is what you need to be aware of beforehand – what can I expect? Am I prepared to care for the animal in the event of illness? How many years will I commit myself? What kind of animal do I adopt, what are its needs and how do I look after it appropriately? Anyone who thinks about all this before adopting the animal is acting in an exemplary manner.»

But even people with their own pets seem to make a difference when it comes to their love of animals. Why am I ridiculed when I open my wallet wide for the best possible treatment for my rabbit, while fans of dogs or cats spend more money on their upkeep every year? The pet food market has been growing steadily for years, for example in Switzerland by 14 per cent annually. But when it comes to small animals, doesn’t love reach that far?

People discriminate against animals – and aren’t very consistent with it

«From an ethical point of view, such a distinction makes no sense. Yes, certain animals cost more to buy and maintain. But that says nothing about their value as an individual,» says philosopher Angela Martin. Is it a cultural question, which investment in animals is considered appropriate? According to the motto: we spend a lot of money on the golden retriever, but not on the goldfish? «We’re actually influenced by our cultures with that», says Martin. «We assume that humans are at the top and that there’s a hierarchy below them: the closer the animal is to humans, the more value it has for them. But what does «close» mean? And how do you define that? This is an entirely anthropocentric view. From an ethical point of view, it’s irrelevant. Instead, you should ask yourself, is the animal okay?»

We humans discriminate on the basis of species. We treat certain animal species better than others.

«But at the same time, we’re not very coherent in this speciesism: chimpanzees, for example, are closer to the human species. This would mean we’d also have to rate rats higher, since they’re very intelligent. At the same time, psychological factors play a role in how we discriminate against animals – whether they’re farm animals or animals that we can pet.»

Too often, people underestimate the costs and time involved

Yet, the expert emphasises that what counts from an ethical point of view is the welfare of the animal alone. This means that only one question should arise during veterinary treatment: will they be better or worse afterwards? And not, do I agree to the operation so that I can live with my pet for longer for purely selfish reasons?

From theory back to practice. After a few weeks, Löwi the rabbit suddenly had to go to the vet’s surgery again. First the costly emergency treatment and dental surgery, and now a jaw abscess had formed. Another operation with anaesthesia was due. The aftercare would be complex and lengthy this time. Chances of success? Uncertain.

I’ll admit, I asked the vet if it’d be «better» to put her to sleep. Her outraged reply of «No, the operation is an opportunity!» immediately silenced my guilty conscience and me.

Bioethicist Martin knows how difficult the business is. Too often veterinarians are asked to euthanise animals because their owners can no longer find a pet sitter, have underestimated the expense or are unable to or no longer want to pay the medical costs. «But the question is: should we decide on life and death so flippantly when it concerns monetary constraints? For the pet owner, it’s the cheaper option. For the hamster, the rabbit, the budgie, it’s a whole life. Their life.», says Angela Martin.

Then she adds: «death is also the ultimate harm for animals – it deprives them of any opportunities to have positive experiences in the future.» So it’s also important to consider euthanising from an ethical point of view. Premature euthanasia? That doesn’t even come into question when you look at it this way.

When is euthanising the ethically correct decision?

This is how the story of my little Löwi ends. The expenses page on my account amounted to around 900 euros. I rinsed my bunny’s operated abscess for four weeks. He resisted and I was worried. He didn’t seem a lot better. Or did he? How could I know? What was really best for my pet?

Instead of continuing to treat the symptoms, I finally wanted to know the cause that had made my pet so ill. So I drove to the next larger town to a specialist clinic with computer tomography for small animals. Naturally accompanied by eye-rolling comments from those around me: «You’re not actually getting a CT done for your rabbit?!» Yes, I am. The specialist then found the cause. Unfortunately, the prognosis wasn’t good.

In the end, another 600 euros lighter, ethically it seemed the best thing for my pet to let him go. Even on his last day of life, I was still tormented by doubts: am I doing the right thing? Couldn’t Löwi have a few more days, a few more weeks with us? Would I be the only one who would like that – or would my pet? In the end, I trusted the specialist’s judgment. You wouldn’t wish a close family member like our rabbit a life of constant, terrible pain. Rest in peace, Löwi.

23 people like this article

Mareike Steger

Autorin von customize mediahouse

oliver.fischer@digitecgalaxus.ch

I could've become a teacher, but I prefer learning to teaching. Now I learn something new with every article I write. Especially in the field of health and psychology.

Background information

Interesting facts about products, behind-the-scenes looks at manufacturers and deep-dives on interesting people.

Show all

These articles might also interest you

Background information
What it’s really like at an animal shelter: these five myths aren’t true
by Darina Schweizer
Background information
Cats get to sip Pawsecco at this hotel
by Darina Schweizer
Background information
A tent, a dog and two kids: our chaotic and colourful camping debut
by Ann-Kathrin Schäfer