Veterinary Care: The Means to an Unequivocal End

Under what circumstances do the ideals of animal care as a priority to human welfare become justified? The line between reasonable affection and foolishness becomes so blatantly obvious as people have transitioned from conventional veterinary checkups to large-scale surgeries for pets. The relationship between veterinary care and human welfare entails a question of the frivolity of emotion. To any and all the notion of spending thousands of dollars to give a pet a few more years or even months to live should be completely out of the question. This is, however, not quite the case as human emotion crosses the line of logic and attachment to one's pets then drives him or her to destroy their own economic standing for them. Anything from spending a few extra dollars on purified water to spending "$2000 for an entire pet wardrobe," pet owners are willing to completely ruin their financial situation for the happiness of their pets (Dunn). If not to the destruction of his or her own future, then the over accentuated fantasy with animals pushes one to the demise of those in greater need. Through the many barriers constituting the animal rights ideals exists the treason that occurs as those rights leave many people to die unchecked and without proper or rather, available care. Where then, one may ask, do these actions truly achieve justification?

In his publication in "The New Yorker," Burkhard Bilger follows an almost identical view of veterinary care in "The Last Meow." In his lengthy article Bilger describes the interplay of economy and animal care as having "gotten out of control" (Bilger). The reason for this being that in the past seven years in the U.S. veterinary expenses have tripled from an already overwhelming amount at $19 billion to around $ 47 billion. In light of the present-day Recession in the United States, this great expense is one that is not to be taken lightly. As such, it has truly become apparent that Bilger's take on the veterinary situation was correct in that emotional fallacies with pets have become too unstable. In lament's terms the complaints directed toward frivolous governmental budget decisions by the common citizen should instead be directed towards their own destructive personal habits. Their desires for financial security are overshadowed by the common person's love for his new puppy or kitty though seemingly to the owner to be just the opposite. The disturbing truth of the matter is that many pet owners are unwilling to accept this when the time truly comes as emotions often take the place of reason. Those who create budget plans their for pets in crisis of find "their convictions wavering when the time actually comes"(Weston). To avoid this would only require a reminder to oneself that the heartache of the bankruptcy and financial problems that would ensue would be far greater. All of this is in an effort to say that, despite how callous, how heartless, how blatantly cruel it may seem, Americans should look to the common good and abandon the obsessive need for pet hotels and commodities.

On a more specific scale, the idea of the average-income pet owner spending his or her life savings on a pet may seem absurd, but it is not entirely unheard of. There is no logical reasoning for this extreme sacrifice for a pet and yet many are willing to go into utter bankruptcy for their animals. Others are willing, out of love or envy, to spend thousands on mere accessories. The motto, '"Your best friend deserves the best"' has become a variantly and yet universally understood concept around the U.S. and as such entails erratic and often irrational spending on animals (Coder). This pampering and the budget extremities that come with it bring into the limelight yet again the instability of the veterinary situation. When the day comes that a pet's happiness takes precedence over the owner's survival, the need for reduced attachment to pets becomes necessary. Pet owners are forgoing the amenities of their own comfortable lifestyles often in an effort to skirt the "No Pet" signs in apartment and penthouse lobbies. They are also fully willing, without hesitation, to "sacrifice on themselves before trimming back on their four-legged friends" (Heher). Such actions not only serve fairly little purpose as the animal's lifespan stops far short of the human's, but can also be irreversible and life impacting.

From where is the logic behind placing veterinary expenses over the lives of suffering people derived. As of now, the existence of such high veterinary deficits completely eclipses those of some human welfare centers (hospitals, R & D centers, etc.). This is true in many ways as veterinary hospitals have taken priority over the construction of would-be major health institutions and as a result has indirectly denied many the care and treatment necessary for their survival. To all but the most infantile this mere fact should be a source of outrage as the few months on average that animals typically receive from massive scale surgery is not an equivalent exchange for hundreds, possibly thousands of human lives that could have been saved with a simple procedure. From any angle the most simplistic and logical decision is to forgo the unnecessary canine neural implants for routine human diagnostics.

As of now there is nothing further to say upon this matter as such an issue should be so easily resolved. Under no condition should an animal's presence take precedence over the lives of thousands of human beings. No deviation should be applicable when dealing with the removal of such an unnecessary luxury amenity for the greater good. A human's welfare is not to be compared to that of an animal that holds little to no regard for their human counterparts. This view is apparently not held by a great many, however. Thus, as the issue stands, no relenting appears to be occurring in the region of veterinary care and obsession, but such sustenance does not make permissible this acclimated version of treason.

Heher, Ashley. "Pets get their goodies, even in tough times." 31 Oct 2008. News & Record. 17 Apr 2009 .

Dunn, Darlene. "Some Spare No Expense To Pamper Pets." 03 May 2007. LifeWhile. 17 Apr 2009 .