The PTS society

Damnation said:
I am 19, I feed, shoe, pay livery, insurance etc for my horse on my own.

I would rather see a horse PTS then left to suffer because the owner can't afford the thousands of pounds in vets bills. If they had a good quality of life before hand, and were well looked after, its quality not quantity.

.
Click to expand...

What a very mature young lady you are. Totally agree with you.

I can afford my horses....but if it came to spending £5k on vets bills or giving the money to my kids for Uni etc....then I'm sorry- thers no contest. Not everyone has surplus cash hanging around that wouldn't be needed for other purposes.

My horses will never suffer.....and being PTS is not suffering.
 
dizzydancer said:
I agree with what you said OP. I currently have a 16.2 IDxTB who is a field ornament at livery and costs alot to keep due to his problems. However at present he loves his life and is always happy. I cannot afford another horse whilst still having him but he has served me well for 12years so deserves a nice retirement. Therefore I put an advert up looking to share and have totally fallen on my feet, now riding a gorgeous ex racer and owner didnt even want a contribution towards him, so now with my spare cash i spoil them both!!
Click to expand...

How lovely!!!!!! My boy loved being retired, i took him for walks like a dog to the river to play etc, I now have free access to 2 horses to ride when I want, and don't have to pay for anything.

Someone has suggested the reason why I am getting frustrated and not understanding is because I look upon horses as pets, I think they are right, I am a softie, don't think of animals as having a job and place (glad I don't too)
 
I think you are viewing horses purely as pets and basing your objections on emotions and sentimentality.
Click to expand...

I cannot speak for the lady with the thin horse because I never met her. However the lady with the horse that couln't get up after laying down, I did know. The quote above was very much her stance on her horses. They were her pets and she couldn't bare to part with them.

I do understand that you are only really talking about certain PTS situations.
 
I did read what you said...and laughed....as I said at the time I had the money...now I don't...but the pony is still here, and sadly my magic spy glass to let me see the future was broken the day I took my horses home. You were very sweeping in your statements and worded it to read like you were condemning ALL who are put in to the hard PTS choice's, even your thread title is sweeping. In an ideal world we would all have loads of money from our money tree at the bottom of the garden...but we don't, and people who cant afford pets get them....reality sucks doesn't it...still no reason to live life on a what if. Horses get caught up in the mess we humans make, all things do, doesn't give others the right to condemn.
 
councillor said:
I did read what you said...and laughed....as I said at the time I had the money...now I don't...but the pony is still here, and sadly my magic spy glass to let me see the future was broken the day I took my horses home. You were very sweeping in your statements and worded it to read like you were condemning ALL who are put in to the hard PTS choice's, even your thread title is sweeping. In an ideal world we would all have loads of money from our money tree at the bottom of the garden...but we don't, and people who cant afford pets get them....reality sucks doesn't it...still no reason to live life on a what if. Horses get caught up in the mess we humans make, all things do, doesn't give others the right to condemn.
Click to expand...

I am not laughing at your statement, it makes me feel sad! Life sucks, live life, horses get caught up in the mess we humans make.......

Makes me sick actually that attitude!
 
Faracat said:
I cannot speak for the lady with the thin horse because I never met her. However the lady with the horse that couln't get up after laying down, I did know. The quote above was very much her stance on her horses. They were her pets and she couldn't bare to part with them.

I do understand that you are only really talking about certain PTS situations.
Click to expand...

Thats right, I strongly agree with euthansia, I hate it when people leave it too long, its very sad. I personally have my pets put to sleep that split moment in time when they are still OK but the time is right. My horse was perfectly alright when I chose to have him put down, but having kidney infections with a bad heart was a sign that he was going to go down hill in the near future, he was treated and well still on his meds... we then had him put to sleep before he got sick again, he was 22 and I had him on heart meds for 6 yrs paying DIY livery and shoes, I don't think I am a fluffy bunny.. but I find alot of ppl very insulting on here
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damnation
I am 19, I feed, shoe, pay livery, insurance etc for my horse on my own.

I would rather see a horse PTS then left to suffer because the owner can't afford the thousands of pounds in vets bills. If they had a good quality of life before hand, and were well looked after, its quality not quantity.

.

What a very mature young lady you are. Totally agree with you.

I can afford my horses....but if it came to spending £5k on vets bills or giving the money to my kids for Uni etc....then I'm sorry- thers no contest. Not everyone has surplus cash hanging around that wouldn't be needed for other purposes.

My horses will never suffer.....and being PTS is not suffering.


:o Why thank you!

My opinion is that sometimes you have to be hard hearted. What type of life is it for a horse who gets abandoned because the owners who used to be able to afford it now cannot? And morally they feel they cannot PTS. Rescue centeres are full, people are indiscriminately breeding so as a country we seem to be overwhelmed by horses. And as a country we cannot physically care for all of them.

As I said before its quality not quantity.

My last mare was PTS at aged 7. Slipped disk in her back. I was told she could undergo physio but would never do what I wanted her to do and would probibily never be completely pain free so she was PTS.
She wasn't passed from pillar to post, I know damned well she had a good life with me. I had ambitions, which I could not fulfil with her and I certainly could not afford the cost of 2, especially when one would need so much attention with no real guarentee of recovery.

It was both the hardest decision of my life and the best.

Would that make me part of your "PTS Society" ??
 
chickeninabun said:
Without wanting to make you angry DD, I have two horses, I don't have pots of money and it would make my life very difficult if either had a condition which went above and beyond my insurance payouts. But you can't live your life on "what-if's", as you'd never do anything. So you can't own a horse because "what if" it breaks a leg, you can't cross the road because "what if" you got run over..... etc etc.

In an ideal world, no horses wouldn't be PTS because of an owners financial situation but we are all far from ideal....
Click to expand...

I agree with this. Some of the best looked after horses on my yard are owned by people who don't have a single other penny after the horses are payed. And even if something happned and they had to be PTS they have had a fab life with these owners. There are horses suffering their whole lives with crappy owners who are loaded. It's not a case where things can be generalised imo.
 
Didn't say I liked the fact....just that is what it is....a fact. I love my horses and if it were just me I would give up everything I have in the world for them to get what they need, but I have a family and I will put what they need first, as that is what I have to do as a mother.
I don't have an attitude, I have a grip on the reality of the world we have made....it isn't nice and it is far from easy.
 
i have kinda lost the main point/question of this thread ?
remind me...?

but in reference to a comment made earlier, i know a lady who had an ex racer who she'd reschooled and had for a good few years. horse was definitely over 16 though not sure of her exact age now but she reached a point where rather than sell her she had her PTS as she didnt trust anyone else with her. if in however many years time when my pony is over 16 (and i know 16 isnt old in todays world) and i wouldnt be able to keep her i would have owned her since she was just 6, i love her to bits now (she's 12) so if in another good few years i had that situation i would rather PTS than send her into the market to god knows where....
and neither of us are stuck up our own arses.
furthermore, she went on loan for 6 months last year or so and the times i went to visit they'd ignored our advice-she was fat, rubbed her mane and tail to bits and it was almost pitiful how when she saw our car pull up she'd come straight to us and just stand with me rather than allow the loaners to catch her. the kid who had her was also scared of her and i couldnt have been happier when she came back. after that experience i'd never loan her again let alone sell!
 
I read this posting because I thought it was a Society to support people who were considering have their horse put to sleep!
Lots of thoughts here, I would find it very very difficult to have my horse put down (my preferred term) if he could possibly have a better alternative, but I would not let him out of my sight if I had any doubts as to his future with another owner, for that reason alone, no matter what the circumstances, I would never sell him below market value or give him away.
He is the main beneficiary in my will, that is to say a charity will take him and find him a loan home when i have expired or been pts (DNR)
 
Last edited:
Devonshire dumpling said:
I think you need to make sure you have savings or in a position to get your hands on money, not on a completly right budget and relying on insurance alone, because insurance will often get out of paying money if they can anyway! IE a regular income were every penny you have coming in isnt accounted for.
Click to expand...


Yes but how much? I do have some savings but tend to do so because I am saving for something specific. I can "normally" get my hands on extra money or cut back if needed but you still don't say how much extra you think someone should have access to?
 
Well how many of you have had children and how do you cope with them and the massive financial cost if something unforseen happens?

I cannot have and luckily for me don't want children but for me my animals (and before you say it NO THEY ARE NOT CHILD SUBSITUTES THEY ARE PETS!) are my selfish pleasure. I have many dogs...and an expensive horse..and I struggle for money monthly and if anything serious happened to any of them I'm not sure where I'd get the money but get the money I would and they most certainly wouldn't suffer. I most likely would but they won't, they didn't make the choice to live with me so I must take full responsiblity for their care come what may. I would never ever ever make the decision to PTS based on financial reasons and anyone that does so is selfish.

Don't really care what anyone thinks of that but to me the choice to bring children into this expensive, unhappy, unfragmented, unsociable dangerous society is selfish and us having animals we cannot afford is selfish...but we still do it and MUST face the consequences of it. Those who PTS because they cannot afford the animals are a disgrace in my opinion.
 
MrsD123 said:
I read this posting because I thought it was a Society to support people who were considering have their horse put to sleep!
Lots of thoughts here, I would find it very very difficult to have my horse put down (my preferred term) if he could possibly have a better alternative, but I would not let him out of my sight if I had any doubts as to his future with another owner, for that reason alone, no matter what the circumstances, I would never sell him below market value or give him away.
Click to expand...

Yes like I said before I think I wrote it a bit black and white, but as usual people twisted what I wrote, I suppose I was saying I don't think people should commit to buy unless they are financially sounds and not struggling. But alot of people think of horses as piece of living meat for a job in hand, i think if them sentimentally, this is why so much disagreement going on......
 
Devonshire dumpling said:
Thats pretty selfish imo, ppl are so up their own arses they assume know one else could look after horses, alot of ppl do look after horses well, including ex racers, why pts incase its not looked after properly, I am sure the horse would use life and see what happens...
Click to expand...

I would call it responsible, sorry but too many people take on ex racers when they just don't have the experience, they bought them because they were cheap as chips and have no idea how to deal with them, the horse then becomes neglected or sold off to a bin end dealer. There have been cases of ex racers turning up in France having entered the meat chain. Having said that there are also people who do and can take on an ex racer who do have the wherewithall, sadly these people are outnumbered by the above types.

Don't get me wrong, I do understand your point of view and in fact still have my old horse, now into her mid 30s, but and it is a big but, if I was unable financially to keep her, she would have been pts.

IMO worse by far are those people who try to sell their injured or elderly horses on to an uncertain future to suffer God knows what fate.
 
DD, in the thread that has set this off, the Op gave us two options - to give her horse with kissing spine away without him having had the op, or to have him put to sleep.
Faced with those two options, I maintain that pts is the right choice. Reality is that no knight in shining armour is going to come riding over the hill waving a cheque for £3,000 (or more) for that horse. He may or may not be worth £3k if sound, but even if someone was prepared to take him, pay for his op and support him through his rehab, there would be no guarantee as to his physical abilities at the end.
The more likely outcome, based even on what we see over and over again in these forums, would be that he would be taken on by someone much less principled and come to an unhappy end. There's a tidy profit to be made from picking him up and selling him straight on for slaughter, even if you don't consider the possibility that he could get sold on as a riding horse.
So, given that the poster had no intention of providing him with a safe retirement home with her, what is the kindest option for the horse?
I don't think people were generalising on the thread, they were giving their heartfelt opinions based on the facts presented. It is easy to assume that people respond from some theoretical point of view, but this is often far from the case. Some have very real and heartbreaking experiences of similar situations and their opinions remain the same. If you can't (and sometimes circumstances change and people CAN'T) or won't take responsibility for your disabled horse's safe and secure future, then do the kind thing and have it put to sleep at home and under your control.
Anyone who thinks that there is an army of horse rescuers who will take on the unwanted horses in this country then they need to go an speak to some equine rescues and get a reality check. They are turning equines away. If there was some sort of benevolent army with unlimited resources to take horses in, the rescues and sanctuaries would be empty.
 
Luci07 said:
Yes but how much? I do have some savings but tend to do so because I am saving for something specific. I can "normally" get my hands on extra money or cut back if needed but you still don't say how much extra you think someone should have access to?
Click to expand...

You are trying to prove a point ! If you can get your hands on loans and extra money then imo you are financially sound. Someone who can't get their hands on money because they are stretched to their limit financially and refuse credit cards, and loans because they are maxed out, I would think daft to buy a horse, there is no set fee! Also while we are on the subject I think everyone will have a reasonable amount in their head, I mean if it cost £15k to get a horse right then you really to have to question the treatment! I am talking reasonable amounts of money to say get your horse fit and well if treatable some people can't even afford £1k to spend on their horse!
 
Tinypony said:
DD, in the thread that has set this off, the Op gave us two options - to give her horse with kissing spine away without him having had the op, or to have him put to sleep.
Faced with those two options, I maintain that pts is the right choice. Reality is that no knight in shining armour is going to come riding over the hill waving a cheque for £3,000 (or more) for that horse. He may or may not be worth £3k if sound, but even if someone was prepared to take him, pay for his op and support him through his rehab, there would be no guarantee as to his physical abilities at the end.
The more likely outcome, based even on what we see over and over again in these forums, would be that he would be taken on by someone much less principled and come to an unhappy end. There's a tidy profit to be made from picking him up and selling him straight on for slaughter, even if you don't consider the possibility that he could get sold on as a riding horse.
So, given that the poster had no intention of providing him with a safe retirement home with her, what is the kindest option for the horse?
I don't think people were generalising on the thread, they were giving their heartfelt opinions based on the facts presented. It is easy to assume that people respond from some theoretical point of view, but this is often far from the case. Some have very real and heartbreaking experiences of similar situations and their opinions remain the same. If you can't (and sometimes circumstances change and people CAN'T) or won't take responsibility for your disabled horse's safe and secure future, then do the kind thing and have it put to sleep at home and under your control.
Anyone who thinks that there is an army of horse rescuers who will take on the unwanted horses in this country then they need to go an speak to some equine rescues and get a reality check. They are turning equines away. If there was some sort of benevolent army with unlimited resources to take horses in, the rescues and sanctuaries would be empty.
Click to expand...

this wasn't really the thread that started it off for me to be honest, I actually feel sorry for that lady! I haven't researched the ins and outs of kissing spine and the outcome, i am referring to treatments that will cure an animal, something with not a 100% cure rate and thousands of pounds is a different story, u then have to weigh up pain to the animal during surgery, quality of life etc
 
I'm a non-owner precisely becasue whilst I could afford day-to-day (and even emergency) expenses right now it is quite possible I wouldn't be able to later. I wouldn't want to have to PTS an animal I'd taken on becasue I didn't have funds to treat it. IMHO that would be irresponsible and selfish.

I'm not by any measn perfect. You don't have to be. I just wish more people were realistic.
 
Amaranta said:
I would call it responsible, sorry but too many people take on ex racers when they just don't have the experience, they bought them because they were cheap as chips and have no idea how to deal with them, the horse then becomes neglected or sold off to a bin end dealer. There have been cases of ex racers turning up in France having entered the meat chain. Having said that there are also people who do and can take on an ex racer who do have the wherewithall, sadly these people are outnumbered by the above types.

Don't get me wrong, I do understand your point of view and in fact still have my old horse, now into her mid 30s, but and it is a big but, if I was unable financially to keep her, she would have been pts.

IMO worse by far are those people who try to sell their injured or elderly horses on to an uncertain future to suffer God knows what fate.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree! but racing and horses with jobs is beyond me as stated before
 
Spudlet said:
I would sooner see a horse PTS that passed on and on and on in a downward spiral, because I have seen the bottom of that spiral and it ain't pretty. I've no wish to see horses shot. But I would rather that than see some of the other stuff I've seen - and still see, some nights when I'm asleep.

Horses are kept safe from harm because they have financial value, and sentimental value. Sadly, an unrideable horse with ongoing health or behavioural problems has little financial value, and unless it's your horse, that you love, it has little sentimental value either, at least not to anyone else. So what keeps those horses safe when they're given away? You are really shoving them out there into the cold. When you take on an animal, you take on the responsibility to keep it safe and protect it from harm, to the best of your ability, for the rest of its life. That means you feed it, and water it, and care for it, and make it well when it's sick, and if you can't do that any more you find it a good and trusted home, and if you can't do that, you face the fact that actually, death is not the worst fate that animal can suffer. And you cry your tears and you live with the guilt, because that is the deal. That's the bargain. They give us everything, and they ask for so little in return - but part of our half of the bargain is a peaceful ending, without fear or pain.

And I'm sorry if people don't like it. I'm sorry if people think I'm a horse killing psycho. But I will carry on saying what I do, because I believe it to be right.
Click to expand...


I also agree with this, you've got to also consider that by not owning in case of unforseen circumstances, you may be depriving a horse that is currently in need of a decent home of a loving home with you for as long as cicumstances permit. My mare has been a field ornament for extended periods of time due to injury and I wouldn't consider pts as long as she had quality of life, however if I couldn't afford to keep her comfortable and happy then I would pts without hesitation and be thankful of the many years we have shared together with her in a loving home.
If only the wealthy were permitted to own horses then how many more will be turned away to face an uncertain future? Better a few years well looked after than no hope at all. There are some owners who sacrifice all sorts in order to provide for a horse and give them an excellent loving home and to judge them as selfish if they were pushed to the limits and unable to keep their horse is a bit naive and unfair I think.
There are certainly fates worse than death, so if I am judged as unfair and selfish for being part of the pts brigade then so be it, but I stand by what I feel is morally right for the welfare of the horse.
 
jsr said:
Well how many of you have had children and how do you cope with them and the massive financial cost if something unforseen happens?

I cannot have and luckily for me don't want children but for me my animals (and before you say it NO THEY ARE NOT CHILD SUBSITUTES THEY ARE PETS!) are my selfish pleasure. I have many dogs...and an expensive horse..and I struggle for money monthly and if anything serious happened to any of them I'm not sure where I'd get the money but get the money I would and they most certainly wouldn't suffer. I most likely would but they won't, they didn't make the choice to live with me so I must take full responsiblity for their care come what may. I would never ever ever make the decision to PTS based on financial reasons and anyone that does so is selfish.

Don't really care what anyone thinks of that but to me the choice to bring children into this expensive, unhappy, unfragmented, unsociable dangerous society is selfish and us having animals we cannot afford is selfish...but we still do it and MUST face the consequences of it. Those who PTS because they cannot afford the animals are a disgrace in my opinion.[/QUOTE

Thanks.... don't start me on ppl having kids for the massive child benefits!

I would never put a price on my dogs heads either, they have been my world for the 16 yrs and 13 yrs i have had them, my dog could have had drops for his eyes for ever in a blind painful eye, or be painfree by having it removed, I found the money without a second thought! at 13 some ppl would have said hes had a good innings! But he was recovered within 10 days and hopefully will live another 5 yrs+

My kids are well clothed and looked after and now I have them I can't afford to replace my old horse who had a home for life!

I would like a 3rd child, but won't have one because I think I comfortably manage 2, its a shame we live in a society where ppl want things so have them regardless of the consequences.
Click to expand...
 
Devonshire dumpling said:
You are trying to prove a point ! If you can get your hands on loans and extra money then imo you are financially sound. Someone who can't get their hands on money because they are stretched to their limit financially and refuse credit cards, and loans because they are maxed out, I would think daft to buy a horse, there is no set fee! Also while we are on the subject I think everyone will have a reasonable amount in their head, I mean if it cost £15k to get a horse right then you really to have to question the treatment! I am talking reasonable amounts of money to say get your horse fit and well if treatable some people can't even afford £1k to spend on their horse!
Click to expand...

I think you are being a bit naive but well meaning. You have to understand that there are people who have stable and secure lives and incomes, and who through no fault of their own can lose everything. It can happen that someone can go from being financially very secure to the opposite, and unable to access anything more than a basic bank account and debit card. No credit cards, loans or overdrafts. Until you have been in their situation (and I hope you never will be) you cannot know the dread and heartbreak they go through trying to care for family and animals.

You refered to the other thread earlier in this one, so I think it was reasonable to think that it had sparked you off. However, I think the points being made are still valid.

You also said
I won't comment too much more on this thread, I suspect it will be chewed over and spat out, but as someone once said to me that its often the nice people who don't comment on here and makes this place look so one sided
Click to expand...
I think that was rather childish and insulting to many people here. How can you label people as not "nice" just because they hold different opinions to yourself? You have no idea of the stories behind the usernames, or the heartbreaking decisions those people may have had to make themselves. There will be reasons why people hold opinions that you feel mean they are not "nice".
 
Tickles said:
I'm a non-owner precisely becasue whilst I could afford day-to-day (and even emergency) expenses right now it is quite possible I wouldn't be able to later. I wouldn't want to have to PTS an animal I'd taken on becasue I didn't have funds to treat it. IMHO that would be irresponsible and selfish.

I'm not by any measn perfect. You don't have to be. I just wish more people were realistic.
Click to expand...

Nice attitude x
 
Tinypony said:
I think you are being a bit naive but well meaning. You have to understand that there are people who have stable and secure lives and incomes, and who through no fault of their own can lose everything. It can happen that someone can go from being financially very secure to the opposite, and unable to access anything more than a basic bank account and debit card. No credit cards, loans or overdrafts. Until you have been in their situation (and I hope you never will be) you cannot know the dread and heartbreak they go through trying to care for family and animals.

You refered to the other thread earlier in this one, so I think it was reasonable to think that it had sparked you off. However, I think the points being made are still valid.

You also said

I think that was rather childish and insulting to many people here. How can you label people as not "nice" just because they hold different opinions to yourself? You have no idea of the stories behind the usernames, or the heartbreaking decisions those people may have had to make themselves. There will be reasons why people hold opinions that you feel mean they are not "nice".
Click to expand...

No there are some damn right malicous people here! Not all I grant you! there are some very nice people here too.

I have also said more than once for people who openly buy a horse on a budget... I said not including people whose circumstances change!
 
I totally get what you are saying DD.
I now only have 1 horse who is uninsurable other than for liability so I have a savings account that will only ever be used should she need any treatments/ops, I would however, have no hesitation in pts if her quality of life wasnt as good as I felt it should be. I feel that I owe her a good quality of life and make sure I have what I need to be able to provide for her as this is the responsibility I accepted when I bought her.
 
Farma said:
I totally get what you are saying DD.
I now only have 1 horse who is uninsurable other than for liability so I have a savings account that will only ever be used should she need any treatments/ops, I would however, have no hesitation in pts if her quality of life wasnt as good as I felt it should be. I feel that I owe her a good quality of life and make sure I have what I need to be able to provide for her as this is the responsibility I accepted when I bought her.
Click to expand...

Yes you do owe it to her and putting an animal to sleep is often a very precious gift to give to them xx
 
Devonshire dumpling said:
Alot of people choose to keep and struggle with money (not talking about circumstances changing like loss of a job) but ppl actively go and buy a horse when they are struggling with finance, and often see a serious condition (treatable) arise and are advised to have the horse PTS or come to that conclusion themselves.............
.......................

I can't help but think sometimes horses are put down because of financial reasons and if you didn't buy this horse in the first place, someone with lots of money may have bought them and they would not have been PTS........

I know this sounds a bit idealistic, but it makes me mad how freely PTS is recommended on this site, do right by your horse etc, well i sometimes feel its not right, its not right at all!:eek:
Click to expand...

I think you have a valid point. Your criticism is of people who go into horse ownership irresponsibly without thinking about the real cost of ownership and then when the going gets tough decide to have it PTS.

So often on here, posters seem to jump on the PTS bandwagon too easily. Is it right to have a horse PTS because its no longer rideable but could live quite happily in retirement but the owner wants something to ride ? Its not difficult to find a ride on someone else's horse while keeping their own in retirement.
Is it ok to have a 'quirky' horse PTS because it needs a competent rider ? It may not be easy to match the horse to a new home, but surely worth time spent trying rather than reaching for the bullet as a first option ?

Why do some owners think no one else can ever give as good or better, a home to a less than perfect horse ? How often have horses been more settled and better rides with a new owner that they clicked with ?

Selling, even the most perfect horse is a gamble. Once the deal is done, its future is no longer guaranteed, but responsible sellers do their best, stating a good home is more important than money.

I'm not saying never put a horse down, but its not a decision to be taken before all other options have been explored, but time and time again on this forum, my impression has been that the immediate response from some posters is PTS, without thought for the value of the horses life and exploring alternative solutions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top