A warning to anyone who wants their horse put down when they die

The video is not especially upsetting. It’s an interesting perspective - a relatively healthy horse, not rideable but apparently happy and not in pain, nearly 20, and his owner wanted him pts to be sure he is ‘safe’. I can see her point unless someone is willing to fund him - her wish to have him buried with her could presumably be honoured at a later date, if he can live a good life for a while longer.
 
Makes you realise you need to make your wishes absolutely clear and leave them with someone you trust (with the funds to make it happen). That said, if my horses were healthy and could go on and have good lives, I wouldn’t want them dead just because I am.
 
I feel very saddened and a great deal angered TBH about this.

For pity's sake, the owner's express wish was that the horse should be PTS upon her death. She probably didn't have anyone who'd be willing to take him on, or could afford to, which is why she made the decision. I would do the same without any hesitation if I was in a similar position.

The previous owner is very conveniently weeping Crocodile tears about it; but is she willing to take him? Doesn't look like it.

And the person he's with at the moment has said she has other horses and patently doesn't want either the responsibility of an extra horse OR the financial burden.

Poor old lad. Just hope something positive for him turns up. We all know there are a great many things more awful that can happen for an old horse than a peaceful death.

The poor deceased owner cannot be resting easy in her grave tho' ................
 
My old lad is 20. I have instructions that if he's alive when I die, he is to be PTS. He is not the most straightforward, but is currently in full work. However, I bred him. He has lived here, and been looked after by me, his whole life. There is no way he could happily be moved. He gets grouchy when things don't suit him as it is. My younger lad is an ex-racer, and adores anyone willing to give him cuddles. I trust my daughter to either keep/ re-home him to someone suitable as necessary. But once he gets older, I would request that he be PTS rather than re-homed.
My personal view is that PTS is much, much kinder than risks associated with being sold/rehomed as an older horse.
 
My friend died of cancer 12 years ago. She had said that her 17 year old horse should be pts once she died, also to ensure he was never not looked after. Her husband said (after she died) that there had been enough death and he was ignoring that request. Her horse stayed on the fabulous grass livery yard he was on as a companion for the other horse that he had been with. They were lightly hacked, and later retired. He spent another ten happy years there, with us all keeping an eye on him from over the fence. I think it was the best thing for him in this case.
 
Honey08 said:
My friend died of cancer 12 years ago. She had said that her 17 year old horse should be pts once she died, also to ensure he was never not looked after. Her husband said (after she died) that there had been enough death and he was ignoring that request. Her horse stayed on the fabulous grass livery yard he was on as a companion for the other horse that he had been with. They were lightly hacked, and later retired. He spent another ten happy years there, with us all keeping an eye on him from over the fence. I think it was the best thing for him in this case.
Click to expand...
I think that's the future I would wish for mine but can't guarantee would happen, hence pts if I go first.
 
Honey08 said:
My friend died of cancer 12 years ago. She had said that her 17 year old horse should be pts once she died, also to ensure he was never not looked after. Her husband said (after she died) that there had been enough death and he was ignoring that request. Her horse stayed on the fabulous grass livery yard he was on as a companion for the other horse that he had been with. They were lightly hacked, and later retired. He spent another ten happy years there, with us all keeping an eye on him from over the fence. I think it was the best thing for him in this case.
Click to expand...

I think that I've seen you mention that friend, and her horse on another thread some time ago. I think it's totally understandable the husband who had just lost his wife, didn't want more death. As long as he was well enough to make sure the horse had a good life continuing to live on the yard, fair enough.
It's lovely that the horse got those 10 extra years with everyone on the yard helping to keep an eye out for him. But at the same time, I don't see any problem with if the husband had chosen to give the horse some extra carrots, and euthanised him per his wife's wish.

Either way, totally different case with an ex owner basically saying "Oh no, don't kill him, I want him to live longer, but I can't afford that responsibility/take him, someone else must do it."
 
Last edited:
When I made my Will a few years ago I asked my lawyer to set up a testamentary trust drawn from my estate, for any horses I own and pre-decease.

She was a bit surprised, but did the due diligence. The trust pays a specified person [reliable barn owner where he used to be] to use funds distributed by the trust to feed and care for him. Has given peace of mind.

I got the idea here https://issuu.com/hoofbeats.com/docs/where_theres_a_will_-_hoofbeats
 
My childless widowed sister knew she had terminal cancer and set up her will .Her cat was supposed to be put down (this was not in the will), I over ruled that idea as I could offer it a home. Snowflake settled with us and lived for another 3 years. The morning she died she came out of the hay store, rubbed round my OHs legs and then just died of old age.
The whole affair felt a bit bizarre as whilst she left me her chattels she also left me a list of items to give to specific charities and her friends. I did try to honour those wishes but the friends kept saying thank you but could I have Y instead please. Generally I agreed.

All of which goes to show that those who are left alive may well not follow your wishes exactly.
Thankfully I have an OH whom I trust to care for our animals should I die tomorrow.
 
I actually think this is incredibly selfish. To make loved ones carry out this excessively unpleasant task when they are already bereaved is not a kindness to them and because once you die nothing belongs to you anymore (dead people can’t own things ) then it will never be a binding agreement… I understand why people want it but it is never going to be a certainty.
 
When a friend of mine was terminally ill she asked her husband to have her old pony put down and her horse went back to his breeder. All done while she was alive. Another friend who had a horse and several mostly elderly rescue dogs had all the dogs pts herself and gave the horse to her very good friend who was looking after her in her last few months. My sister has instructions to pts my mare when she is ready and equally I have the same instructions for hers. Our respective dogs would be sorted by which ever of us goes last.
 
blitznbobs said:
I actually think this is incredibly selfish. To make loved ones carry out this excessively unpleasant task when they are already bereaved is not a kindness to them and because once you die nothing belongs to you anymore (dead people can’t own things ) then it will never be a binding agreement… I understand why people want it but it is never going to be a certainty.
Click to expand...

This attitude strikes me as bizarre. What else should happen to pets left behind? Someone has to take responsibility for their care, once the owner has died, to make decision and then to enact them. A painless death secures the horse's future, so in the absence of an alternative home for an unrideable oldie, it is clearly the ethical choice that protects the horses was being passsed pillar to post and neglected, inadequately managed.

A yard owner asking a vet to come and euthanise someone else's horses is not an 'excessively unpleasant task'. If it's a loved one who decides instead that they will care for the animal themselves, or pay for good care elsewhere, then fine. But when it is sentimental hand-wringing by people wanting to 'save the horse' but are not prepared to offer the horse safe haven themselves, THAT is selfish and self indulgent.
 
blitznbobs said:
I actually think this is incredibly selfish. To make loved ones carry out this excessively unpleasant task when they are already bereaved is not a kindness to them and because once you die nothing belongs to you anymore (dead people can’t own things ) then it will never be a binding agreement… I understand why people want it but it is never going to be a certainty.
Click to expand...
I disagree
HHOers frequently say that pts is the last kindness an owner can do for an animal, or that it's not a welfare issue
I don't get why someone without (presumably) a strong emotional attachment to a dead person's horse should be so squeamish about it
Presumably it's usually old horses, or ones with chronic conditions where the owner asks for them to be pts, exactly the sort of horses we all agree 'shouldn't be passed around'
 
Just to add, yes you could arrange it all when you are still alive, which may be the best option of all for other people.

But a) no-one knows for sure then the end might be. I have a statement of wishes for all mine already despite expecting to go on decades more.

And b) I actually think if I were in that awful position my OH would not dream of asking me to have it done while alive. He'd want me to spend time with a loved horse as long as possible, and then he'd take responsibility for dealing with the situation afterwards. A friend of my YO's died and had a retired horse at home. She had asked for him to be PTS after her death - and he was - but having him there till the end was a comfort. The husband kept the horse for a while as it helped him cope with his own grief. But the horse was then euthanised in accordance with her wishes.
 
blitznbobs said:
I actually think this is incredibly selfish. To make loved ones carry out this excessively unpleasant task when they are already bereaved is not a kindness to them and because once you die nothing belongs to you anymore (dead people can’t own things ) then it will never be a binding agreement… I understand why people want it but it is never going to be a certainty.
Click to expand...
Or it could be seen as extremely unselfish, to make arrangements and clarify wishes for animals before you die will save a huge amount of angst - how often do you see posts up looking to rehome often elderly cats and dogs because the owner has died and the family can't take them? A horse is an even greater issue.
 
I think the key message to learn from this and the stories above is that you need to have detailed and specific conversations with your loved ones / people who will sort stuff for you.

We will all die - 100% guaranteed, nobody really knows when / how - you might see it coming or you might not.

Having a plan, in writing and with funds to back it up, is one thing. But if your loved ones don't agree or like it or haven't discussed it first it's not a solid plan.

For a more remote friend - a call to the knacker man (number to be included in the letter for ease) and paying the YO to get horse in at the right time wouldn't be too tricky or traumatic in the massive list of admin tasks once someone has died.
For a devastated OH with funds to keep a pet in glorious retirement - it's unthinkable.

We must talk to people (IMHO)

Same as donor cards and do not resuscitate wishes - it's all too late and too raw when something has happened.

My Gran chose not to tell anyone of the family about her terminal cancer (bad on us). But 2 days before she went into hospital for "routine stuff" she had her elderly cat put down. She knew what was happening and sorted out the important stuff herself.
 
He's long gone now but for a fair number of years a friend's will left me her elderly horse with the proviso that please could I do the best for him - even if that meant PTS

Would have been tough for me but hopefully entirely my call to make. He was in light hacking when I first agreed to it, but he went on into his 30s so if the worst had happened I wouldn't have moved him at that great age.

I think leaving them to someone you trust to make the decision is the best way forward. I'd hate to think someone would overrule me about my Appy. Love her dearly but I promised she'd finish her days with me she's got such a complicated medical history.
 
SEL said:
He's long gone now but for a fair number of years a friend's will left me her elderly horse with the proviso that please could I do the best for him - even if that meant PTS

Would have been tough for me but hopefully entirely my call to make. He was in light hacking when I first agreed to it, but he went on into his 30s so if the worst had happened I wouldn't have moved him at that great age.

I think leaving them to someone you trust to make the decision is the best way forward. I'd hate to think someone would overrule me about my Appy. Love her dearly but I promised she'd finish her days with me she's got such a complicated medical history.
Click to expand...
^^^ You also need to talk to people about HOW you want your horse PTS. Mine reacts very very badly to sedation; she fights against it like billy-hoh, so unless there is a genuine emergency and there is no other option, it would be my choice to have her shot. I have communicated this to people at my yard and have put down a written protocol for if I cannot for any reason be contacted.

If I wasn't around to supervise the PTS then I am confident that those close to me would ensure my wishes in this regard would be carried out.
 
I assume a lot of people wouldn’t expect someone to want to take on their old/difficult horse so they think PTS is the best for all. I don’t think it’s wrong if a friend or family member chooses to keep the animal alive after the owners passing so long as they can continue having a good life.

But this poor woman obviously didn’t have anyone and chose what she thought was best for the horse. The old owner, instead of making her out to be a villain, should be glad the horse ended up with a responsible owner after she passed him on.
I do wonder wether the fact she wanted to be buried with the horse is making it seem like that’s the reason she wanted him PTS while I believe it is more the fact he’s an old horse with an old injury and she didn’t want him to end up who knows where. I can see her point that if they are both dead why not be buried together but is that skewing other people’s view on the situation?
The old owner is so out of order getting involved when she has no interest in taking on the horse.
 
I volunteer a bit with a local rescue, and the saddest dogs (and cats) are those whose owners have died with no one to take care of their pets. These animals are usually elderly, they've often never been anywhere other than home, and even if they are adopted they often don't settle in a new one.

I have instructions for what is to happen to my 3 dogs, some to go to named people, some to be put down. I had the same for my horses when I had them. I update as required.
 
It reminds me of Beau. I kept in contact when we sold him. He was my daughter’s first horse. To a lovely lady. She owned him for years. She died very quickly after cancer diagnosis and also stipulated that he was to be put to sleep. He had cushings and dropped fetlock’s. And I totally understand her wishes. I had a phone call from the livery yard asking if I was willing to take him on. We went to see him. And it was very emotional. And I did take him home. He had three wonderful years with me. Loved. I lost him on New Year’s Eve to colic. And he’s now in heaven with his owner.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top