What would you do? (be nice please)

[AmyMay]

He was diagnosed by x ray and had them repeated after rehab. My horse is Charlie foxy1.

But was the exact nature of the syndrome established; i.e is it the navicular bone, bursa, coffin joint or the ddf?

And is it only bute that he' ever had, or has he had steroids etc.?

 

[Curragh]

He has holes in his navicular bone and has only been on bute.

 

[AmyMay]

Has your vet ever suggested drugs that will increase blood supply to the foot??

 

[NooNoo59]

I’m not going to mince my words as I see this as a very black and white subject for me personally, so here’s my penny’s worth….

If you can’t afford 2 horses (one as a pet, one that has a job as in a riding horse) then the only option I think is better, is to have a horse like this PTS.

If a horse has no future as a riding horse and will require medication to keep them comfortable for the rest of their life (for instance) and an owner can’t safeguard their future (selling/loaning/gifting as companion etc and knowing they will always receive special care and the medication they require) then there is no shame in letting a horse go peacefully as a happy younger horse, knowing they had a good life, I think every owner at least owes their horse that one last thing after serving them over the years.

I’m not saying it is an easy thing to, hell no, it would devistate any owner I'm sure, but this country if full of companion horses that can’t be ridden for various reasons and are looking for good long term homes and lets face it, not everyone wants a large companion, usually it’s something smaller and cheaper to keep etc.

I’d hate to think a horse that I once owned ended up being one of these out there because it was no longer any use to me, I’d rather know I ended his life knowing he’d left the world with the dignity and respect he deserves.

But having said all that, I'm referring to a horse that has no definate future as a riding horse and an owner who no matter what can't simply afford to retire one for ther rest of it's life and buy as well as keep another competition/riding horse on the go, you have to be realistic if you can't afford both, it's both or one or the other to me, but that's just my view.

I totally agree, my mare went thru hell and back as a so called companion, would never make that mistake again, and some horses do not suit the paddock lifestyle, I know, I have been there, I was told only very light work with the bute for the rest of her life, should have had her put down then not five years and much hardship later

 

[NooNoo59]

Although this should not be treated the same as humans, I watched a dear friend die of a brain tumour, if she could have had been put down, she would have welcomed it. Horses cant talk, they are animals, and if they are injured, old, in pain, it is the owners responsibility to make the decision in the best interest of the horse and not themselves.

 

[Curragh]

Amymay the vet offered tildren, but after our insurance wouldn't pay out and after more research we decided against it. Vet didn't overly push it either so I didn't go down that road.

My horse won't be leaving me, I will not re home him as a companion, I've heard too many horror stories and at the end of the day, he's my responsibility and I'm not going to past him on.

 

[jeeve]

I think that there is nothing wrong in putting a horse or any other animal to sleep. If you do not have the room and you cannot afford another horse, and you wish to ride/compete, then honestly I think that is ok.

 

[CatStew]

It's a tough call. If it looks like there is really no way out the other side, and the the horses condition is suffering, then as others have said, I would consider the option of loaning him out to somebody you trust as a companion, as long as he remains paddock sound and doesn't suffer - but you would have to be prepared to pay for any vets fees etc that might come up. If this isn't possible, then I think the option of PTS should be considered. There are fates worse then death for horses unfortunately. I know it's a heart breaking decision though. Best wishes

 

[Maesfen]

that if its their misfortune to be owned by person A they get PTS yet a luckier horse with person B gets to live.

I'm a real advocate of life is sacrosanct until they tell us when they are ready.

Why would they be lucky if they were in pain as this horse is, that's a ridiculous statement?

There are a lot worse things for a horse than death believe me and I also believe that we as owners owe it to our horses to do what is best for them, not for us (which saving at any cost is).
I for one would never agree to keeping a horse on medication permanently just so it can be a field ornament; that's not fair on either it or me.
In this day and age I wouldn't dream of letting something go as a companion because then you have no rights whatsoever in case the person you gave to is a fraud, it's happened too many times to remember. Far better to do the decent thing for the horse yourself than run that risk of being passed from pillar to post.

To OP, I'd have no compunction about PTS in your situation, I think that way you'd be fair to both of you.

 

[Auslander]

He was diagnosed by x ray and had them repeated after rehab. My horse is Charlie foxy1.

This Charlie http://rockleyfarm.blogspot.com/p/charlie.html? Who they say has been sound since going barefoot and leaving them. I'm open minded about barefoot, but if this is the case and what they are saying about your horse on their website is blatantly untrue, it does make you wonder about all the other miracles!

 

[Curragh]

I haven't looked on the website for a while, in fact I've never heard from them since. He wasn't sound when he left, I had him re vetted and x rayed again at my expense. It didn't work for him, but I can't answer for any of the other horses that do rehab successfully.

 

[Curragh]

Just had a look at the link and that isn't my Charlie.

He is in the rehab results though, 9 year old ISH.

 

[touchstone]

This Charlie http://rockleyfarm.blogspot.com/p/charlie.html? Who they say has been sound since going barefoot and leaving them. I'm open minded about barefoot, but if this is the case and what they are saying about your horse on their website is blatantly untrue, it does make you wonder about all the other miracles!

Rockley do pubish all the results whether successful or not, there is a link here:- http://rockleyfarm.blogspot.com/p/research-results.html

 

[Marydoll]

Op can i ask why you never tried the tildren ?

 

[Auslander]

Just had a look at the link and that isn't my Charlie.

He is in the rehab results though, 9 year old ISH.

Thanks for clearing that up! I will maintain my open minded stance then!!

 

[Wagtail]

Why would they be lucky if they were in pain as this horse is, that's a ridiculous statement?

There are a lot worse things for a horse than death believe me and I also believe that we as owners owe it to our horses to do what is best for them, not for us (which saving at any cost is).
I for one would never agree to keeping a horse on medication permanently just so it can be a field ornament; that's not fair on either it or me.

Whilst I agree, it is unfair to keep a horse alive as a field ornament if it is in constant pain, I do not agree that to have a horse permanently on medication is unfair. On the contrary, if a horse can be made comfortable on medication then why not? Or are you saying that all the people who are on contant medication to make them comfortable have less than worthy lives? Ask any of them if they would rather be dead. It is so arrogant to think that because they are just horses, they cannot enjoy a life of retirement on medication.

In this day and age I wouldn't dream of letting something go as acompanion because then you have no rights whatsoever in case the person you gave to is a fraud, it's happened too many times to remember. Far better to do the decent thing for the horse yourself than run that risk of being passed from pillar to post.

Agree with this if the horse requires continuous medical support.

To OP, I'd have no compunction about PTS in your situation, I think that way you'd be fair to both of you.

Actually, it is fair to the OP to PTS, but not from the horse's point of view unless there is absolutely no chance of the OP keeping him. The best outcome from the horse's POV is that the OP keeps him and ups his bute, unless he deteriorates to such a degree that he cannot be comfortable in the field.

 

[Maesfen]

Or are you saying that all the people who are on contant medication to make them comfortable have less than worthy lives? Ask any of them if they would rather be dead.

Totally beside the point and yes, in many cases, people rather would be dead than living in a hellish existence; that is fact but because of our laws they are unable to do anything about it. Just because horses can't talk doesn't mean they can't feel the same too

Actually, it is fair to the OP to PTS, but not from the horse's point of view unless there is absolutely no chance of the OP keeping him. The best outcome from the horse's POV is that the OP keeps him and ups his bute, unless he deteriorates to such a degree that he cannot be comfortable in the field.

You sure know how to make someone feel worse than they already do. Have a bit of compunction do even if it isn't what you would like to happen; have enough decency to not labour your point.

 

[Polotash]

I would speak to the vet and see what options there are for upping his bute or giving other pain killers. With an elderly horse I personally have no problem in giving as high a dose as it needs to keep going.

If he was mine I'd have room to retire him, but if this isn't an option for you and you can only keep one on livery (quite understandable if you can) you need to decide whether to keep him as a pet, or put him down in order to get yourself something new.

No one else can make this decision for you. Please don't feel that you OUGHT to try and find him somewhere else, if he is elderly and not able to work then IMO putting him down is a responsible decision.

 

[Leg_end]

Haven't read all the replies but I was in a similar situation, although my boy wasn't rideable. He hated not being in work and lost all his sparkle so I did the right thing for him and PTS. It broke my heart but I know it was the right thing to do.

 

[jlk]

Have you tried him with boots on? My horse got really sensitive hooves when the roads got resurfaced and a friend reccomended Old Mac boots (i think there are some called boa boots aswell) because she had been using them on hers who had navicular, a couple of years on she no longer needs them. I still use them (only on the front hooves) i don't think i will every go back to metal shoes, my horse goes beeter wearing them and seems much more comfortable.
Obviously all horses are different and they may not be as effective on yours but its worth a try. They do look funny though, i'm always being asked why my horse is wearing shoes!
I hope you find a solution that means you're able to keep him, i'm sure it would be heartbreaking to have to let him go, good luck!

 

[PaddyMonty]

Actually, it is fair to the OP to PTS, but not from the horse's point of view unless there is absolutely no chance of the OP keeping him. The best outcome from the horse's POV is that the OP keeps him and ups his bute, unless he deteriorates to such a degree that he cannot be comfortable in the field.

And you dare to talk about other peoples arrogance?

 

[charlie76]

Is it actually fair to up the bute to keep the horse going for 'our' benefit. If bute is just putting off the what is going to happen anyway(the horse is going to deteriorate) then why put it on bute to stop you having to make the decision to PTS. Bute is not going to reverse the problem, its not going to treat it, its just going to prolong the enevitable result, the horse will have to be PTS.

I am not anti bute, we use it for our stiffer horses to give them a quality of life, but this is to reduce stiffness in an older horse, not to mask a chronic lameness just to keep the horse as a pet.

Horse have no idea that they are being PTS, none, if you have ever been there you will know this.

 

[Wagtail]

You sure know how to make someone feel worse than they already do. Have a bit of compunction do even if it isn't what you would like to happen; have enough decency to not labour your point.

I have enough decency not to lie to the OP. I was directly answering your post which I felt was misleading in saying that it was fair for the horse. I am in the same situation as the OP so I do know how she feels. In fact, I have not had my own horse to ride for more than 18 months due to having two horses that cannot be ridden and not being able to afford, or have room for a third. The OP asked 'What would YOU do?' not what SHE should do. What she does is up to her and what is right for her may not be right for others. Caring for an unridable horse does not mean the end of riding if you are a competent rider. Good riders are always in demand.

 

[Wagtail]

And you dare to talk about other peoples arrogance?

I believe it is arrrogant of us as humans to think that a horse cannot have a happy life with pain killers, whilst we are quite happy for other humans to take them to be more comfortable. It is like saying that horses are not worth it, and that IMO is arrogant.

 

[charlie76]

have you ever had a horse with crippling navicular? It gets to a point where 3 or 4 bute a day won't keep them sound. Not only are they not sound they are depressed.
My horse was still groomed daily when he was turned out for a year, he was not the same horse.
Where to you draw the line to keep the 'looking' sound for your own benefit, 10 bute a day???
As a horse owner, you know when its time to say enough is enough. That is far more benefical then keeping a field ornament for your own satisfaction.
I am not anti retirement but to basically state that PTS is a cop out is totally out of order.

I know of more than one person that would have opted for PTS rather than a life time on pain killers. Bute wrecks the liver and kidney in the end, its fine for short term treatment or long term in low doeses but to give them high amounts for no reason when there is the PTS option is sad IMO.

 

[touchstone]

I think the difference is that the horse needs bute to be ridden rather than pasture sound (if I've read the op's post right.) Personally I think its okay to bute to keep a horse comfortable and pts when more than a bute or two a day is needed or if the horse is depressed with retirement. We currently have an old horse that is kept comfortable with arthritis on a bute every other day. The fact that it damages liver/kidneys is irrelevant when you are facing pts as the only other option anyway. Yes, you are simply putting off the inevitable for a period of time and you've got to be prepared to monitor closely and do the deed when needed.

I think in this instance the op has stated that she doesn't want to pts just yet, so if the horse is comfortable in the paddock off bute then it is a viable option for a period of time until the horse is ready to go, if this is the route the owner wants to take.

As for myself, faced with a navicular case with bone damage, then I'd pts with no guilt involved, I've worked with denerved horses and seen horses left too long before being pts and it isn't pleasant or a route I'd take.

 

[A1fie]

I was in a similar situation in that I had a horse with navicular and had tried everything including all different types of shoeing and barefoot. Nothing worked. I couldn't keep him as a field ornament and ironically the only way I could guarantee he would not suffer or go downhill, was to pts. I didn't have any issue at all about doing it, although I was very distressed. I had a responsibility for him and as Juno and Masefen have said, that meant doing what was best for him, not me.

A quick painless death is not the worst thing for an animal.

 

[muff747]

OK, I'm really relieved you have tried Rockley, if they can't get him sound, it may not be navicular that is making him lame.
Since my gelding has been dx with Cushings nearly three years ago, I have done lots of research into other conditions which could have been affecting his feet and making him uncomfortable. Unfortunately, my struggle to get him sound and back to health has made me sceptical about vets as I have not had the support from them that I would have wished for.
I know you have X-rays showing damage to the navicular bone but research by Dr Bowker threw doubt on this being the reason for all lameness and some horses that had been pts after a life of soundness, he found had similar damage in that area to horses pts with chronic lameness dx as navicular.
After my extensive research into why my gelding was still lame, I found that his signs and symptoms were identical to horses dx with Degenerative Suspensory Ligament Desmitis. Further research now shows it not only affects SL but all connective tissue. Laminae is connective tissue, I believe that is what made my boy very uncomfortable as overloading of sugar makes it flair up.
All this doesn't help you though, I'm sorry to say, but if he were mine and as he is only 12, I would be trying to find other answers rather than accept the inevitable. But then that is me - I cannot take "no hope" as an answer. I did all the research myself and it hasn't cost me anything in terms of money, only many hundreds of hours on the internet!
Were any other explanations explored to find out if it definitely was navicular after his unsuccessful spell at Rockley? Did they suggest any other avenues to follow up, why did they think he didn't come sound - apart from his X-rays being evidence of navicular?
I do respect you are the one who has to make this decision and I do think only you can work this out for yourself. Although there have been many posts saying you are right to pts, you have to follow your own instincts. My advise would be to make sure you have done everything you can to make sure your horse comfortable and then you will have no regrets when it comes to that day, you can rest easy knowing you did all you could possibly do. I am in your position now but I opted to keep him comfortable in the field, he's on bute but showing signs of pain again and he's on high levels of Pergolide to keep his Cushings under control but I wonder how long this will carry on - and he's 24 this year.
Good luck, my heart goes out to you, I know I will be in your position one day.

 

[Wagtail]

have you ever had a horse with crippling navicular? It gets to a point where 3 or 4 bute a day won't keep them sound. Not only are they not sound they are depressed.
My horse was still groomed daily when he was turned out for a year, he was not the same horse.
Where to you draw the line to keep the 'looking' sound for your own benefit, 10 bute a day???
As a horse owner, you know when its time to say enough is enough. That is far more benefical then keeping a field ornament for your own satisfaction.
I am not anti retirement but to basically state that PTS is a cop out is totally out of order.

I know of more than one person that would have opted for PTS rather than a life time on pain killers. Bute wrecks the liver and kidney in the end, its fine for short term treatment or long term in low doeses but to give them high amounts for no reason when there is the PTS option is sad IMO.

I don't think anyone here is suggesting that a horse in continuous pain should be kept as a field ornament, nor that we give them 10 bute a day!

 

[M_G]

Hmmm or vice versa I have a client whose horse was diagnosed with navicular two years ago, she's tried all sorts to keep him hacking sound, but he too is deteriorating rapidly to the point where even unhorsey people are commenting, but she won't do the right thing by him and have him put down because, she told me, of what people might think

OP it is your decision and yours alone. If upping his bute helps, then try that. If you are not happy with that or if, as you say, he is deteriorating, there is nothing wrong with having him put down. There are far too many horses which in my opinion are kept alive because of the sensibilities of the owners rather than for the benefit of the horse.

I wouldn't even have a problem with you putting him down on economic grounds.

And before I get jumped on for being hard hearted and callous, I've got two retirees, one old and one young, so I don't just see them as instantly expendible when they can no longer work

Totally agree with this