wwyd dilemma

[Goldenstar]

I give up, I cnt win either way

This thread is not about you winning any thing this a pretty frank exchange of views on a emotive subject, which may or may not be helping you in the position you are in .
Talk to people in RL about this now your parents your OH your horsey friends and the BHS if you feel it might help.
You do have my best wishes .

 

[Parisexx]

I dnt have anyone to talk to about it thats why I put it on here. I will ring bhs though as suggested and feel slightly better getting it off my chest, feel trapped at the moment

 

[Arizahn]

You guys do know we're all going in circles arguing about this whilst the OP has left, right? The OP is new here, and appears to have either gotten the answer they need/want, been scared off, or was a sociologist.

If a horse has an ongoing medical issue, then it should be under the care of a vet, even if not on medication. It should be checked at regular intervals to assess how things are. The vet is the one who should advise on quality of life and whether PTS is the right thing to do at a given point.

Personally, I will PTS when the animal is deemed to have insufficient quality of life, or when sustaining that quality is impossible, as opposed to merely inconvenient. But I am calling sociologist on this particular thread, and would suggest that we all take a step back, lower our assorted weapons and move on for now.

If the OP returns with more information or questions, then we should of course respond, but for now this has gotten far too personal for a lot of those involved. And by a lot I mean everyone who is currently seething and/or feeling bad because of it. So hugs to all that are upset, and respect to all who have had to care for an ailing horse, or who have had or currently do have the PTS issue in their lives.

 

[Parisexx]

I havnt left I have replied numerous times

 

[*hic*]

This is really a very simple problem to solve.
Will all those in the 'a horse is for life camp' please form an orderly queue so that the OP can select which one of you gets to take it on.

Fabulous idea - but need to beware of buddy'smummy/jessicabeau etc.

I offered a group of cockerels to someone on here who was outraged that I was going to kill them for the pot as they were surplus to requirements. I even offered to transport them to her. She declined.

As for me, I go out each morning to see if the 30yo is still looking over his stable door. I've made sure I can keep mine for life. The cost of buying somewhere inconvenient to live so that the horses can be provided for is similar to buying in a convenient location with no land. So in this household the horses are catered for at the expense of the humans. Still, it's only an hour each way to my husband's work.

 

[HazyXmas]

It would be interesting, purely from an academic curiosity, to know the backgrounds of those who are pro putting the elderly, arthritic, sweet itch afflicted, unwanted mare down, and those who are con.

Here's a guess: Pro = people who have had multiple horses over a long time period (i.e. more than 10 years). Con = people who have never actually yet been in the situation.

P.S. I prefer putting down BEFORE there is suffering myself.

Spot On Cortez

 

[*hic*]

I give up, I cnt win either way

Unfortunately it's an emotive subject and other people want to give you their stories. What matters here is what you can cope with. If you can't cope with your mare then you need to solve that problem. IMHO the decision needs to be one that you and your partner are most content with so: stay as you are, for as long as it takes; loan and take the risk that you may be trying to do all this again in a hurry if she comes back; or pts at a time of your choice.

 

[Arizahn]

I havnt left I have replied numerous times

Apologies, I was typing very slowly after reading a batch of replies. In the meantime, you returned. Ask your vet re mare's quality of life. Explain the financial side of things to them too - if you don't PTS there will be the ongoing costs of caring for her, if you do PTS there are the costs of that and disposal. You need to know your options and what it is going to cost. And talk to your OH and your parents - they need to know how you feel. It isn't about being horsey: it's about supporting you.

I am fairly certain that by the time I finish typing this, the thread will have moved on. Hopefully everyone will be yelling at me instead of at each other.

 

[Moomin1]

Totally agree.

Completely agree

 

[ester]

I agree, I don't find RL anywhere near as trigger happy as HHO.



The phrase 'trendy attitudes' is spot on.



This is where I wish people would not beat around the bush and try and 'sugarcoat' everything.
You are not trying to do 'the right thing' (Which would be to find a way to take responsibility for the mare and keep her until her quality of life is genuinely compromised). You are trying to do the easy thing (PTS to save yourself this hassle).

Is that wrong? That's not for me to say, that's down to your own conscience.

But a lot of the phrases on this thread really annoy me, with people clearly just trying to justify to themselves.
'Its the kindest thing' - no, the kindest thing would be to keep her as long as she's happy and care for her.
'You're securing her future' - no, you're deleting her future so you don't have to worry about it.
'Its kinder than passing her on' - but who says you have to pass her on? Put some effort into finding some cheaper retirement livery and do without a few takeaways and new shoes. I don't see how retirement livery is an option for a horse with sweet itch?
'You're so brave' - no, brave would be to solve your problems head on, not simply eliminate them.

OP, if you want to have the mare PTS then that's up to you. Im not against it to prevent suffering.
But I just WISH that the people on this forum were capable of calling a spade a spade, and not coming out with the above crap to make the fact that you want to PTS your horse because you're fed up of it, a bit more palatable.

I have no issue with PTS whatever the reason really, the animal doesn't know and I do think some oldies are left too long.

 

[Mithras]

It would be interesting, purely from an academic curiosity, to know the backgrounds of those who are pro putting the elderly, arthritic, sweet itch afflicted, unwanted mare down, and those who are con.

Here's a guess: Pro = people who have had multiple horses over a long time period (i.e. more than 10 years). Con = people who have never actually yet been in the situation.

P.S. I prefer putting down BEFORE there is suffering myself.

Actually, in my experience, its the opposite. I know so many people who come from horsy families, or have had horses most of their lives, like me, who retire their old horses, whether that be from all work or in active work and just retired from competition, and keep them for years, when pts would save them time, money and effort. Whereas the few people I know who have pts horses tend to the be the newer horse owner type, which goes from one horse to another quite quickly, rather than working for a few years with a horse to get a partnership.

Often these are the people who tend to be quite tough in competition too, or in business, but I would say they have their values in the right place and are genuine, decent people. I guess its in situations like these that the real character of a person comes out.

If you pts horses BEFORE there is suffering, how do you know there is a reason to put them to sleep?

 

[Bestdogdash]

It would be interesting, purely from an academic curiosity, to know the backgrounds of those who are pro putting the elderly, arthritic, sweet itch afflicted, unwanted mare down, and those who are con.

Here's a guess: Pro = people who have had multiple horses over a long time period (i.e. more than 10 years). Con = people who have never actually yet been in the situation.

P.S. I prefer putting down BEFORE there is suffering myself.

I completely agree with this.

OP you have had a lot of posts with opinions, and I thought some practical advice may help if you have this mare shot. I had a six year old TB shot last week, who probably could have been passed on as a 'light hack'/companion etc. but I thought way too much of him for that. It isn't the 'kind' option, it is the cowards way of passing the buck.

I contacted the hunt who advised me to get a professional slaughter man in for the job. The huntsman (who is my godson) said that they shoot an horse about every two weeks. A professional does about 10 a day and is much much better at it. My horse had a week of pampering, a big bucket of grub and a sedative. The (exceptionally kind ) chap arrived, came to the stable, and 10 seconds later the horse was dead. I retired to the house and he took the body away. He charged £200. Much better than a vet, quicker, cleaner and no chance of it taking time.

I don't remotely feel guilty, I feel that I have done my duty by a very sweet horse.

 

[Exploding Chestnuts]

Apologies, I was typing very slowly after reading a batch of replies. In the meantime, you returned. Ask your vet re mare's quality of life. Explain the financial side of things to them too - if you don't PTS there will be the ongoing costs of caring for her, if you do PTS there are the costs of that and disposal. You need to know your options and what it is going to cost. And talk to your OH and your parents - they need to know how you feel. It isn't about being horsey: it's about supporting you.

I am fairly certain that by the time I finish typing this, the thread will have moved on. Hopefully everyone will be yelling at me instead of at each other.

A vet, who hardly knows a horse or the OP should really not be asked to be the arbiter of whether a horse is p-t-s or not ......
That is not to say that a vet could not be consulted in the same way as a BHS Officer could be consulted, more to increase OP's knowledge, and help her to make a decision. I might ask a vet for his opinion if it it were a condition I were unsure about, but in this case we know that mare has issues, which will not improve, and probably need medication some time in the future.
It is ok to say current costs are £200 per month, but then there is regular vet bills , £200 per annum, and there could easily be more veterinary expenses, more likely with age.

 

[Goldenstar]

Actually, in my experience, its the opposite. I know so many people who come from horsy families, or have had horses most of their lives, like me, who retire their old horses, whether that be from all work or in active work and just retired from competition, and keep them for years, when pts would save them time, money and effort. Whereas the few people I know who have pts horses tend to the be the newer horse owner type, which goes from one horse to another quite quickly, rather than working for a few years with a horse to get a partnership.

Often these are the people who tend to be quite tough in competition too, or in business, but I would say they have their values in the right place and are genuine, decent people. I guess its in situations like these that the real character of a person comes out.

If you pts horses BEFORE there is suffering, how do you know there is a reason to put them to sleep?

The reason is based on many things is that I have decided its time .
The last oldie I PTS was the field boss in his prime he had a slight undiagnosed lameness that did not repond to anti inflammatories he was almost field sound but not quite sometimes you see a slight unlevelness on tight turns .
He had lost his position as boss and the other horses started pushing him about him he had lost his sparkle it was the end of summer, I just got up one morning had coffee and made the call he was gone at lunchtime .
He still looked a picture but I knew him well I just felt it was time.
I see many less sound horses being ridden .

 

[Patterdale]

.

Here's a guess: Pro = people who have had multiple horses over a long time period (i.e. more than 10 years). Con = people who have never actually yet been in the situation.

This kind of attitude really annoys me actually.
'If you disagree it's because you're too novicey/inexperienced and have never been in that situation.' Basically.
Isn't it possible that people can just have a different view, without being clueless?

 

[Crugeran Celt]

I think the same applies to a dog or cat, if they are ill and you are no longer in a position to be able to care for them properly they would be better off PTS than passed on to an unknown future. I wouldn't hesitate to have my dogs PTS if I could no longer keep them same as my horses.

 

[Mithras]

I personally think what this poor old horse has been put through is disgusting.

Don't be so ridiculous. It had to be kept in, hence the sharers had to come up and muck out although they couldn't ride. The horse was under constant veterinary supervision, and recovered, looks fantastic, coat shining, excellent condition, sound, shining eyes. Are you seriously suggesting that every horse that suffers an illness should be pts? Or that every single horse which develops laminitis or Cushings should be immediately killed?

Is this not taking the HHO obsession with pts a bit far? I know it also seems to extend to putting to sleep every young healthy horse which occasionally shies or spooks or does something slightly untoward. My older horse went through a phase of stopping at jumps, from previously being a regular winner BS. Has always been a difficult horse to handle, I managed fine because I know what I'm doing. Some people suggested I pts. Guess what? After a year off competing, he has come back good as ever and if I'd listened to those idiots, I would have pts a damned good horse which people were projecting had all sorts of things wrong with it. But if he hadn't wanted to come back and just wanted to mooch around the field, I could not pts such a healthy active horse just because I'd moved onto a new one.

That is not her range of options. She cannot afford rent and livery. She can only afford livery if she continues to live, and make her partner live, with her mother and father.

In that case, I don't think people should buy horses if they do not consider what they will do with them in a few years time, should their circumstances change or the horse become ill or unsound. I think when you buy any animal, you make a commitment, as the greater species, to look after that animal for its natural lifespan. You see it with people who buy puppies and then want rid of them because they can't train them or its no longer so cute when it become an adult dog. I think treating horses as disposable material goods to be killed when they are no longer convenient to their owners isn't something that should be encouraged, by making pts healthy horses mainstream.

And what is the point of rehoming to a charity? It simply means that they will not have room for some other horse, which will then be put down, so no life will have been saved.

Whats the point in any charities? Some people want to run them, I don't see why they should be criticised (unless they're of that obsessive horse hoarder variety). Why not pts all horses automatically on reaching age 14 then, since this will undoubtedly mean more space for young horses with owners who want a horse for only a few years.

I admire your attitude to your own horses. I am currently deciding how long to keep my oldest horse, eleven this year, because if he's with me much longer I feel I will owe him a home for life. But that home for life would not include an endless retirement, far less allowing his life to dictate where and with whom I live.

I've kept horses on virtually no money while at university, and through various life changes. It is possible. I couldn't live with myself for pts a healthy horse which had served me well and which I had a partnership with. Of course there comes a time when a horse may not be healthy or suffering, in which case pts is the most humane option. Or as in the thread on here recently, a dangerous horse even in the field.

 

[Arizahn]

A vet, who hardly knows a horse or the OP should really not be asked to be the arbiter of whether a horse is p-t-s or not ......
That is not to say that a vet could not be consulted in the same way as a BHS Officer could be consulted, more to increase OP's knowledge, and help her to make a decision. I might ask a vet for his opinion if it it were a condition I were unsure about, but in this case we know that mare has issues, which will not improve, and probably need medication some time in the future.
It is ok to say current costs are £200 per month, but then there is regular vet bills , £200 per annum, and there could easily be more veterinary expenses, more likely with age.

The vet can however give her the costs of any treatment, assess the mare, and will actually know what they are talking about. Given that the OP's thread has devolved into an argument, I suspect that professional advice would be useful to her.

 

[Exploding Chestnuts]

I think the same applies to a dog or cat, if they are ill and you are no longer in a position to be able to care for them properly they would be better off PTS than passed on to an unknown future. I wouldn't hesitate to have my dogs PTS if I could no longer keep them same as my horses.

I have already "decided" to have my little one [cat1] put down if she ever needs any stressful daily medication, she is just too nervy. The other one [Cat2] would probably cope.
I am having no more ponies, its just too stressful for me!

 

[ester]

but whatever your forward planning as you say Mithras we all know circumstances do change... and what you plan to do with them if they do is then very dependent on their age and health as to whether it is appropriate to pass the horse on. - In this case it really isn't.

 

[Exploding Chestnuts]

The vet can however give her the costs of any treatment, assess the mare, and will actually know what they are talking about. Given that the OP's thread has devolved into an argument, I suspect that professional advice would be useful to her.

I think that is what I said in post.
She knows current costs of treatment, but there is no crystal ball, from experience we know that the vet bills will not decrease.

 

[Arizahn]

I think that is what I said in post.
She knows current costs of treatment, but there is no crystal ball, from experience we know that the vet bills will not decrease.

I am using the word treatment as code for PTS and disposal.

 

[Wagtail]

If I only had the experience of HHO forum members, I'd think it was perfectly acceptable to have any horse PTS because the owner didn't want it.
Happily, in over 50 years, I have been fortunate to have known both professional and private owners who did not think this way, with the exception of just 2 people.
Sometimes RL, is a breath of fresh air.

I too have found this. There is a stark contrast between here and real life. I hate the flippant way people can't wait to say PTS on here. However, I have also seen some horses that have been kept going far too long because their owners could not bear to part with them.

In this particular case I am unsure what to think. The mare is not on any medication. I wonder why that is if she is so bad that she cannot be ridden. However, I do think that this mare has a poor outlook if her owner does not want her, and she does not want her. She resents her. It is not her OH that is pushing for the horse to be PTS, on the contrary, he is discouraging it. He knows his girlfriend far better than any of us in a forum could know her. She is also wanting to leave home, not for her mother, but for herself. This is perfectly natural, and I would want to do the same in her shoes.

There is no good option for this mare other than for the OP to retire her and keep her whilst she is still comfortable and has a quality of life, or she is PTS. And the former is not a good option if the horse is resented. So sadly, in this case, I feel the only option is to put the mare to sleep.

 

[Elvis]

Much has already been discussed and valid points have been made from both sides of the discussion. However from my point of view, age and health conditions aside...

The owner has fallen out of love with horses, she no longer has that passion which is so important when having horses. If the mare was young and sound, everyone would be suggesting that she sells her. However I don't believe this, or loaning is an option, the risk of an uncertain and potentially awful future is just too high.

So that means, money problems aside, the owner has to keep a horse for potentially another 10 years that she no longer has a passion for. It's not her fault she was duped into buying an older horse and it isn't her fault she fell out of love with horses- that certainly isn't something you can foresee.

Yes I do understand that when you buy a horse you have to be committed, and those who argue that it isn't the horses fault that the owner no longer has an interest in horses have a point. However the mare clearly needs a lot of time and money to maintain her with the SI, and the arthritus will only get worse.

The owner despite no longer wanting horses has continued to give this horse a high level of care and foregone her own aspirations, surely as time goes on she will only start to resent the mare, and that isn't good for either parties.

It's hard enough living on the breadline so you can afford to maintain an unrideable elderly horse, can you imagine doing that when you no longer love horses?

I'm not saying there is a 'right' answer to this dilemma, but the well being of the owner as well as the mare need to be considered.

 

[Wagtail]

In real life, as opposed to the internet, I know so many people who own elderly and/or unsound horses that they can't ride any more but who still put a lot of effort into caring for them. Yes, it disrupts your life, but if you buy an elderly horse (appreciate you didn't know she was 19 when you got her but you must have known she was no spring chicken) that's inevitable. People go to university and manage horses either at livery, or loaning them out (as I did, as a companion) or people's live change in different ways. People get new jobs, go abroad, etc..

There was an elderly mare with cushings at my yard until recently, who the owner had lost interest in to the extent that she had two sharers. However I was so impressed with them because when she developed laminitis and the vet was pessimistic, they all pulled together to care for her round the clock, the owner paid the large vet's bills and then she was rehomed with a charity. It is possible. None of them were at all wealthy but they cared for the horse (and for two of them, it wasn't even their horse) which recovered and leads a happy life at the charity.

So the answer is OP, you have a choice between keeping the horse at DIY livery near wherever you move to, which is what tens of thousands of horse owners do, you try to rehome her to a charity or as a companion, you pay for her to go onto full livery, or you put her to sleep. I also know of several people who keep retired horses on full livery while they work full time or buy second horses.

Obviously, with this being HHO, and people being far more ready to put horses to sleep in the real world where people have consciences and things, you will be told repeatedly to pts. But since you have lost interest, you probably won't miss her anyway, and as she is an old unwanted horse, she is meant to be grateful for dying and no-one will miss her.

This is why I won't sell any of my horses once they are past 11 or 12 - I want to ensure they get good homes for life, with people that recognise that they deserve a retirement once they are past working age. I know where 4 of the horses I'd had for a while are, although 3 of them are old and retired now, and they are still in those homes I sold them to. Lucky horses.

Up to you entirely OP.

Excellent post. If only everyone thought that way.

 

[ester]

I guess all the people who are uphauled would continue to live with their parents for the next 10+ years then given that this mare really doesn't have any other optimistic looking options?

 

[TarrSteps]

Mithras it's clear you feel strongly about your stance, and that is absolutely your right. I am pleased that you have always been in a position where you have been able to home and care for your retired horses. (I have had one horse that was still with me in old age and I had him for 24 years, just for the record. Every other horse I have owned, I know where it is or how it lived out its life, so I am not speaking with a guilty conscience. I currently have one standing in a field who could reasonably be there another 15 years!). But this is not everyone's reality. Of course people should think before purchasing and make arrangements but life does not always go according to plan.

What I am most interested in on this thread is that no one has mentioned the OPs parents! Why are they not due any consideration? (I have to say, horsey people seem to have a higher than normal sense that their parents should infinitely indugle their horsey interests.) So the OP lives at home until what? The mare dies of natural causes? The bills become too large for the OP to handle?

As far as passing the horse on. . .what was the stat this week? The conservative estimate is that there are now 7000 - 7000!! - horses in the UK "at risk". I suspect this doesn't include the ones already with the full up charities. How can people possibly kid themselves that there is a huge untapped resource of people just waiting to care for older horses?? How can sending an old horse out into that environment possibly be guaranteed to end well?

I'm going to say something really unpopular now. During the last recession there was a huge "correction" in the equine population. Some of it was due to lower breeding numbers but I bet not all of it. We may not want to see it but that is, of course, how populations work in the wild and, frankly, it gives the ones left a fighting chance. I would like to know that every horse born would go to a caring home but that ain't going to happen. Failing that, I'd like everyone to be able to keep their old horses in the manner to which they have become accustomed. Hmm, probably not going to get that, either. So, being a realist, I hope that at least every horse lives its life being comfortable and well cared for, however long or short that life.

Horses are expensive. I love the fact that people are happy to take money for them when they sell them but somehow when it comes to this situation, then money is not supposed to enter into it at all. I would love to live in that world.

As to people not being "pts" . . .not everyone agrees with you there! There are lots of ill people who would be happy to save their families the agony and yes, the expense, on many levels, of fighting a losing battle.

No one is happy about putting horses down. We would love there not to be a need for it. But I'd rather people faced reality and saw the cost of their choices than lived in some fantasy land where other people will make it okay if they can't. I really do not think people are "telling" owners to put horses down in posts like this, I think they are, consciously or not, "giving permission". No one is really going to make that decision because of what people on the Internet say. Posters are merely saying that yes, that decision gets made every day and no, it's not nice but sometimes the options are worse.

Btw, it's an offshoot of my business that I do sometimes see horses put down that I, personally, would make a different choice for. But it isn't my choice. So I save my breath (most of the time) and do the best for the ones I can help.

 

[touchstone]

Tarrsteps - agree totally.

 

[undergroundoli]

Work harder then, think outside the box, buy land to self build, buy in a cheap area and move when more financially established . Make sacrifices , second jobs.

I'm s firm believer if you want something badly enough you'll find a way.

People have commitments that are not compatible with all this though, especially living in a cheaper area.

I'd love to own a house with land, and if I moved to Scotland I could probably afford one. However my partner spends most of his weekends in Bognor Regis helping his parents look after his grandfather who has dementia, and I check in on my mother in Oxford fairly regularly. The is a distinct lack of cheap areas in the South East and we live in a scuzzy part of South London, where two bed flats conveniently located for stabbings start at about 300,000.

I bet loads of people on hear have ties that make owning a home with land unrealistic.

Life is the art of the possible.

OP you have 2 options.

1.) try and find someone else to take this mare on, knowing that once you do there is nothing to stop her ending up having an uncertain future, ending up who knows where and in who knows what state. Yes you might luckily find someone genuine to take her but you don't know that until it's too late. I know I wouldn't take the risk with such an old, unrideable horse.

2.) have her pts knowing she went without realising a thing and that you have secured her future and know she will never ever end up in the wrong hands.

I know which I'd pick, but essentially those are your options. In a nutshell.

Aside from the lunatic turn her out on a nice moor idea I agree. You've provided her with two years of retirement. People do need to move on with their lives, its not healthy to be economically stuck in kidulthood.

 

[Patterdale]

I guess all the people who are uphauled would continue to live with their parents for the next 10+ years then given that this mare really doesn't have any other optimistic looking options?

No, as previously stated I'd face up to my responsibilities and get an evening job/forego a couple of luxuries to put it on retirement livery. This is because I personally could not have it on my conscience that I'd killed a happy horse because I'd gone off it and didnt want the hassle.

You asked, and that's my own personal opinion