Filenews 29 October 2023 - by Angelos Nicolaou
The euthanasia of healthy but stray (abandoned dogs) is characterized as murder by the Federation of Animal Welfare Organizations of Cyprus under the name "Voice for the Animals of Cyprus".
It speaks of a barbaric and immoral practice and is not appropriate for a developed and sensitive European society, and therefore unacceptable to civil society.
Speaking to "F", the president of the Voice for the Animals of Cyprus Mary Chrysochou – Anastasis on the issue being discussed in Parliament in the context of the amendments to the dog law as put by "Foni" seems to find agreement with MPs, members of the parliamentary Committee on the Environment who are particularly concerned about the provision of euthanasia, especially when it is not a dangerous dog.
However, local authorities have strong reservations about not changing anything in the current legislation. According to the proposal, stray dogs are confiscated by local authorities, kept in temporary custody premises and if within 30 days it is not possible to dispose of them to an animal protection organization or another person, then they are handed over to the veterinary services for euthanasia.
The time has come for the State to take seriously the will of the people and consider the right to life of animals, based on the extensive research of scientists involved in the field of animal rights.
The method of euthanasia to control the overpopulation of companion animals is practiced worldwide with only a few exceptions to the rule. Over the years, euthanasia of healthy animals has been the subject of much discussion with many proponents of banning this vile practice, which tarnishes our culture as a people.
Several studies have been conducted by leading scientists that have proven that animals are fully thinking and emotional entities that demand a similar "right to life" as humans, arguing that language is not necessary to have beliefs for learning and exemplifying the method by which children, initially, must have pre-verbal beliefs to learn language. e.g. If a child is shown a ball while someone says the word "ball", the child must believe that the object is the specific thing being mentioned. Without this belief, the connection between the ball and the word "ball" cannot be developed. This belief, however, must exist before language and is also a prerequisite for language learning (Tom Regan (Case for Animal Rights 39).
Tom Regan links this example to animal behaviours that suggest they do have beliefs such as: "We can assume that the Fido dog chooses to head to his bone after he desires to, on the grounds that past experience has taught him to believe that it will be delicious" (e.g. in Garner 23). Similarly, a cat begins to purr as it approaches its owner's paws, clearly with the expectation and belief that such an action will lead to a response from the owner (eg, petting) which the cat will find pleasant. Therefore, animals show preferences for things and have the ability to initiate actions to see that these preferences are met. This means that animals are interested in living, not so that they can make plans for their lives, but to continue to satisfy their preferences.
This seems to be the case, that animals are interested in living, since the motivation to live is the main purpose of evolution. Animals are made to do everything they can to stay alive until they can reproduce. (Tom Regan, former professor at North Carolina State University – Case for Animal Rights)
According to Donald Griffin, a professor at the Rockefeller University, nonhuman animals are capable of having the same type of knowledge as humans who rely, in part, on similar neurophysiology.
From observing the behaviour of hundreds of species over several decades, he claims that the communications he has observed in many species (e.g., bee dancing, dolphin echolocation, or even an owner's gestures toward his dog) suggest the ability of complex mental processes.
Tom Regan takes these views a step further, saying that "perception, memory, desire, belief, self-consciousness, intention, sense of the future – these are among the main characteristics of the mental life of normal mammalian animals aged one year or more" (Case for Animal Rights 81). The arguments of Griffin and Regan lead to the view that animals have "intrinsic value" and that they should share the same rights to life as humans (Animal Minds 246).
Quality of life determination
The debate on quality of life is really the important issue based on decisions on animal euthanasia.
Marian Stamp Dawkins, a professor at the University of Oxford, sets out a method for determining an animal's quality of life. Just as humans continue to do things in which they find pleasure, so do animals. The opposite is also true. Animals and humans will not continue to do things they do not like. Dawkins characterizes these trends as positive and negative reinforcements, respectively. When an animal stops doing things that come from positive reinforcements, it could mean that the animal's quality of life decreases (Dawkins 940). "I tend to agree with that." "If I got to the point where I couldn't do the things that made me happy, and I couldn't avoid painful things, my quality of life would be quite low. This then brings me to a possible approach to pet euthanasia that uses quality of life measurement."
Countries that banned euthanasia of healthy dogs
In Greece, Italy, Taiwan, India, Austria, Germany and the Netherlands, euthanasia is allowed only when there are reasons such as an incurable disease or serious behavioural problems that make the dog dangerous. In the Netherlands, killing due to behavioural problems is only allowed if the problem cannot be solved through education and behavioural advice to the owner.
In Greece, two veterinarians need to be diagnosed in order to proceed with euthanasia. In India it has even been held by the Supreme Court that only "irreparably ill" and "mortally injured" dogs can be euthanized, and this too in a humane way, and euthanasia of a healthy dog can bring legal prosecution under section 11(1) of the Prevention Against Cruelty to Animals Act and Section 429 of the Indian Penal Code.
In Cyprus, the Protection and Welfare of Animals Law 46(1)/1994 Article 31.-(1)(h), (g) Prohibits euthanasia of healthy animals unless they are in an irreversible poor state of health, so that any attempt to prolong or keep it alive would be incompatible with a reasonably acceptable level of welfare of the animal or would constitute an imminent danger to the health or safety of humans or other animals; the competent authority may, upon the joint recommendation of two veterinary officers of the Department of Veterinary Services, order the immediate killing of the animal, using one of the generally accepted methods of euthanasia.
According to the president of the Voice for the Animals of Cyprus, Mary Chrysochou-Anastasis, there is a conflict between the provisions of the legislation regarding the euthanasia of animals that are healthy. While in the Animal Welfare and Protection Law, euthanasia of healthy animals is prohibited, nevertheless in Paragraphs 2 and 3 of article 6 of the Dogs Law (184(I)/2002), The following shall be indicated:
(2) If, following a complaint by the competent authority to the District Animal Welfare Commission, the latter finds, following an investigation, that a dog owner is acting in breach of the provisions of this section, his dog shall be handed over to the competent authority. The competent authority shall then arrange through the Provincial Committee for Animal Welfare that the dog is made available to an animal protection organisation or other person.
(3) If the disposal of the dog under subsection (2) to an animal protection organisation or other person is not possible within thirty days from the day on which the dog is handed over to the competent authority, then the dog shall be handed over to the Veterinary Services for euthanasia.
When does euthanasia become moral?
The president of the Voice for the Animals of Cyprus underlines that veterinarians cannot ignore the fact that pets are living, thinking and emotional entities. The conventional view of animal euthanasia holds that human interests are always superior to the interests of animals. This view holds that animal lives can be morally sacrificed for the benefit of human interests and that man's only obligation to animals is to give them a life with as little pain as reasonable that ends painlessly."
According to Anastasis, this view fails to give enough credence to the feeling of pets. Many mammals not only have the ability to feel pain and suffering like humans, but they also have an interest in living to ensure that their "preferences" are met. This leads to the conclusion that animals cannot be replaced and have intrinsic value. It also implies that the justification for euthanizing animals is the same as for humans. Therefore, animals should be allowed to continue living and receiving medical care as long as they are allowed to do any of the things that have given them pleasure. When they can no longer do these things, euthanasia would become moral.
