But now he is the one who is ill. Seeing the vet for an eye problem and yet another broken tooth, she was distracted by a different growth, drew some cells, and a few days later we got the report: lymphatic cancer. It's been a sobering reality to accommodate. We have read, we have learned, we have cried, and yesterday we started him on chemotherapy. I know, I know. Chemotherapy for a dog? We have already been privy to chuckles of amusement from some and eyes rolled in disapproval by others. To put it simply, not everyone agrees that this is a good use of time, energy, or money, of which the process will require quite a lot of all three. And I understand. On another day, regarding someone else's family pet I might very likely roll my own eyes. I make no claim that this is rational. I only know that we two otherwise careful, prudent, and occasionally frugal people never really considered the alternative of doing nothing. Our only real hesitation was concern for how treatments might make him feel. We were already sick enough; we didn't want to add to his. Unable, then, to parse the syntax of life's relative value -- or perhaps unwilling to even try -- we set off down this pitted and winding road of injections, pills, temperature taking, special foods and altered plans; freshly reminded of the precious gift of everyday when those days are animated by those we love...
...even those who leave hair on the couch -- when they have the strength to jump up there.
1 comment:
My (somewhat-flexible) rule-of-thumb regarding medical intervention for my own animals is: would I want that treatment for *myself*? If not, I wouldn't subject them to it.
If it was something I was willing to endure, and it seemed to have a positive benefit to the animal (despite the cost to me or to the pet) then I'd go ahead.
So if Barrington doesn't object to the chemo you might as well do it.
(Just don't expect *me* to want to undergo that treatment for myself any time soon.)
Post a Comment