By proceeding, I agree that I understand the following disclosures:
I. How We Work in Washington. Based on your preferences, we provide you with information about one or more of our contracted senior living providers ("Participating Communities") and provide your Senior Living Care Information to Participating Communities. The Participating Communities may contact you directly regarding their services. APFM does not endorse or recommend any provider. It is your sole responsibility to select the appropriate care for yourself or your loved one. We work with both you and the Participating Communities in your search. We do not permit our Advisors to have an ownership interest in Participating Communities.
II. How We Are Paid. We do not charge you any fee – we are paid by the Participating Communities. Some Participating Communities pay us a percentage of the first month's standard rate for the rent and care services you select. We invoice these fees after the senior moves in.
III. When We Tour. APFM tours certain Participating Communities in Washington (typically more in metropolitan areas than in rural areas.) During the 12 month period prior to December 31, 2017, we toured 86.2% of Participating Communities with capacity for 20 or more residents.
IV. No Obligation or Commitment. You have no obligation to use or to continue to use our services. Because you pay no fee to us, you will never need to ask for a refund.
V. Complaints. Please contact our Family Feedback Line at (866) 584-7340 or
[email protected] to report any complaint. Consumers have many avenues to address a dispute with any referral service company, including the right to file a complaint with the Attorney General's office at: Consumer Protection Division, 800 5th Avenue, Ste. 2000, Seattle, 98104 or 800-551-4636.
VI. No Waiver of Your Rights. APFM does not (and may not) require or even ask consumers seeking senior housing or care services in Washington State to sign waivers of liability for losses of personal property or injury or to sign waivers of any rights established under law.I agree that: A.I authorize A Place For Mom ("APFM") to collect certain personal and contact detail information, as well as relevant health care information about me or from me about the senior family member or relative I am assisting ("Senior Living Care Information"). B.APFM may provide information to me electronically. My electronic signature on agreements and documents has the same effect as if I signed them in ink. C.APFM may send all communications to me electronically via e-mail or by access to an APFM web site. D.If I want a paper copy, I can print a copy of the Disclosures or download the Disclosures for my records. E.This E-Sign Acknowledgement and Authorization applies to these Disclosures and all future Disclosures related to APFM's services, unless I revoke my authorization. You may revoke this authorization in writing at any time (except where we have already disclosed information before receiving your revocation.) This authorization will expire after one year. F.You consent to APFM's reaching out to you using a phone system than can auto-dial numbers (we miss rotary phones, too!), but this consent is not required to use our service.
*If I am consenting on behalf of someone else, I have the proper authorization to do so. By clicking Get My Results, you agree to our
Privacy Policy. You also consent to receive calls and texts, which may be autodialed, from us and our customer communities. Your consent is not a condition to using our service. Please visit our
Terms of Use. for information about our privacy practices.
Now I asked my question because while the doc advises this... As the old joke goes: God doesn't think he's a doctor. I don't think doctors are God. But I do trust the experiences of those who have been in this situation to give me their take on things.
It's true that it would sometimes be kind to put a human to sleep. I faced that in a mild form when my father wanted to call Dr. Kevorkian. I do see that we can't "just" put people to sleep the way we can pets. (OMG, that poor brain-dead woman in Texas and her family!!!) Animals deserve consideration, love and care, but people come first.
Still, make a few phone calls about a shelter for Fido. Maybe someone would love to take him in. As we know, people aren't rational about animals.
--
Good health? eh... not so sure. He's always had seizures and been on meds for it...so the health being good??? I guess that is a personal view of what good is. The cause is humans trying to breed dogs smaller and smaller as I understand it... and getting the results of the bad side of that genetic desire.
We 're-homed' MIL's mother's cat, but that was a different situation, though it only takes seconds to call a shelter... When I think of all the dogs in shelters though and this dog competing???? eh...
The thought of having to put the dog down is not a pleasurable thing. If it were, we would have done it when the legit opportunity presented itself with the teeth extraction deal... but we didn't.
I must say though... I never thought a question of timing and pets would reveal so much about peoples fears of death. Wow! Tons of avoidance and denial.
That said, animals give people more comfort than you will ever know. Ever wonder why nursing homes are regularly visited by animals ... of course not, you seem to hate your MIL and everyone else around you along with the world in general. Along with your MIL and the poor dog I feel so sorry for your husband but I guess he doesn`t have the balls to deal with his own mother. I wonder how fast hubby will run away from you when you put his mother in a nursing home.
If your MIL has to part with the dog there are rescues that will take him and let him live out his life hospice style.
When my mother went into a NH I inherited her little dog and I take Sue to visit from time to time. Nearing the end of her life it gives her so much joy and comfort. In between Sue`s visits she has stuffed animals she sleeps with that give her some comfort.
You come across as so very cruel and hard hearted and perhaps I`m the only one that has the guts to say so ... so bite me.
RUk, if the dog is suffering, do the deed. PS's gradual approach sounds good to me, except I'd keep the collar and photo to one side unless/until they were asked for - don't prompt distressing memories if you can help it. I'm not being macabre, but a cuddly toy animal makes a good love object. I may roll my eyes about my mother's sodding stuffed elephant but if it makes her happy..?
Um. I also agree it does sound a bit like things possibly coming to a head? It sounds as if you're finding it very hard to like your MIL (nobody, surely, would blame you). Nothing to add, I just hate the thought of both you and your MIL being made miserable if it's all become too much. Tough times, I'm sorry.
Thanks.
The questions is: Doctor's words vs. the timing (because obviously it's gotta happen at some point)... Do it now and be there for this part of her transition in life or wait until she can only be continually upset about it?
"...not a good subject for caregiver support.." But it is a reality of life and a decision made in caregiving.
Not really sorry if some are exaggeratedly offended. Frankly, some countries have pets as a food source-- I'm not as closed minded as some.
Animals are NOT people. RUKiddinME is taking care of a dog she did not choose. The dog has epilepsy and vomits all the time. The dog is pretty near the end. Taking care of MIL is not easy and won't get easier. RU is trying to get advice on what's best for MIL.
I love cats, but I would never adopt a cat in that condition. I think someone who would is a little bit nuts. In a nice way, but still nuts.
Since the question went on an unwarranted sidebar...
Rethinking the Value of Pets
By SUSAN SELIGER
Will your elder die if they don't have their pet comes to mind. But there is a lot of opinion and no science.
Think an elderly family member is better off with a pet? You may want to think again.
Sure, there have been hundreds of articles claiming dogs and cats can lower blood pressure, zap stress and combat depression and loneliness. But some experts say the evidence that pet companionship is healthy is not all that definitive. And for the elderly, having a dog and cat can be both stressful and dangerous.
Falls involving pets and their paraphernalia are an underappreciated health hazard. “Over 86,000 people per year have to go to the emergency room because of falls involving their dogs and cats, and these fractures can be devastating for the elderly,” said Judy Stevens, an epidemiologist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and lead author of a report on this peril.
“If we were giving a drug that had such a serious side effect, we’d consider taking that drug off the market,” said Harold Herzog, professor of psychology at Western Carolina University.
In a 2011 report in the journal Current Directions in Psychological Science, Dr. Herzog took aim at a central tenet of pet ownership: the widely touted evidence that pets are good for people.
Take a truth that we animal-lovers hold to be self-evident — that pets cheer us up. A December 2011 study in The Journal of Personality and Social Psychology found that pet owners had greater self-esteem, were less lonely and tended to be less fearful than people without pets. And another study reported that pets eased depression and agitation and improved nutritional well-being among nursing home patients with dementia and Alzheimer’s.
Dr. Herzog, who is also author of “Some We Love, Some We Hate, Some We Eat: Why It’s So Hard to Think Straight About Animals,” is having none of it. Contradictory findings haven’t gotten anywhere near as much publicity, he said. A 2011 study of elderly people in Pennsylvania found that the more attached they were to their pets, the more depressed they were, he pointed out.
Researchers have reported more than once that if you have a strong social network, having pets won’t make you any happier.
Indeed, a new study of 8,709 adolescents in Sweden, published this month, found that those with pets reported more psychological problems than those without.
A survey of 3,000 Americans by the Pew Center found no difference between pet owners and people without pets in the proportion who rated themselves “very happy.” And Dr. Herzog cited a 2007 longitudinal study in England showing that even though people who got pets said they felt happier and less lonely, their responses on more objective psychological tests didn’t show them to be.
As for pets easing stress and lowering blood pressure, a widely cited benefit, Dr. Herzog acknowledged one “good, clinically controlled study” to back the conclusion. (There was another, arguably: Medicare patients with pets reported feeling less stress than people without pets and visited doctors’ offices less often.)
Some of those results have been tough to replicate. Two similar studies (published in Anthrozoos in 1997 and in Epidemiology in 2007) found that the presence of pets did not lower blood pressure.
Furthermore, among the elderly, pets can actually add to the stress, rather than ease it, if the aging owners find it difficult to keep up with the care.
“Getting outside a few times a day to walk the pet is an incredible burden — that’s why most of our clients are elderly,” said Rachel Herman, founder of Pets are Wonderful Support, or PAWS, a New York City nonprofit group that helps low-income residents care for their pets. “And often they can’t afford the vet.”
And then there’s the heartbreak that the death of a beloved pet can bring.
“Grief over an animal is very real,” said Alan Beck, professor of animal ecology at the Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine, who has conducted research on the positive effects of pets on Alzheimer’s patients. But Dr. Beck thinks the benefits of ownership probably outweigh the drawbacks for the elderly.
Both sides agree that pets can help increase the amount of exercise their owners get. A Canadian study found that dog owners walked nearly twice as much per week, 300 minutes, compared with their dog-free counterparts, clocking in at only 168 minutes (though a California study by the National Cancer Institute credited dog owners with walking only 18.9 minutes more each week than people without dogs).
But the evidence is mixed regarding pets and heart disease. One of the first peer-reviewed studies into the healing power of pets, in 1980, found that 28 percent of pet owners survived the risky first year after a heart attack, while only 6 percent of patients without pets did. And even cats, which rarely submit to walks, somehow lowered their owners’ chances of dying of heart attack, stroke and other cardiovascular diseases, compared with people who didn’t own a cat, according to a new study by the University of Minnesota Stroke Research Center.
But just to show you how slippery pet research can be, this same Minnesota research did not find any heart-attack protection among owners of dogs (or any other pets).
And Dr. Herzog said, after excusing himself for a minute to let his cat in during our phone call, “there’s another study in which cat owners had four times the hospital readmission rate of non-cat owners after a heart attack.”
So is pet ownership healthy or harmful for the elderly? There is little debate about the safety and success of pet programs that bring animals into nursing homes or hospitals for patients to play with and pet.
But individual pet ownership may be a different proposition, and it depends a great deal on the strengths and weaknesses of the owner. “I’m not a Grinch,” said Dr. Herzog, “but the science is not as clear as most people think.”
Dr. Beck countered: “Herzog’s wrong, even if he is a friend. He’d probably like to find that apple pie causes cancer.”
He added, “When the benefits are so much larger than the risk, you take the risk.”
Are they? Do you?
Unless you're in Hawaii, you need to get in touch with the better part of you. Intentional suffering on a another living creature is not a good thing.
As for the question of when, run a test .. don't let the dog be around her for a while, give whatever excuse seems to work. See what her reaction is. Measure that against how quickly her dementia is increasing, along with her memory. And remember the 'kind lie' .. do whatever helps decrease her anxiety.
As two penn'orths go, it's about the least helpful I've heard recently. What a wombat.
He's in the garage, wears his doggie clothes, he has his bed and blankets and toys, food and water and the side door is open so he can go outside--not that I do not have to clean up the dog poo, piss and vomit since Alz MIL is oblivious to that as a daily chore. The state I am in is warm--moving here only 1 1/2 year ago; but for the peace of mind of the apparently fragile, he was in the house with us when we had a finished basement and lived in -40 weather. But there it was a separate part of the house and those in our family with pet allergies weren't exposed to the dog. I think some forget that they don't know us personally, nor any of the history ... and let their mouth run off without their brain attached. So... are people suggesting I should let other family members suffer their health issues with allergies and add their additional doctor's appts for them to our schedule?
RuK, I've got a "fume" that's been growing over the last hours: what the blazes did your mother's doctor think he was doing to help with that idiotic hint-hint remark? "You'd better get used to living without the dog…" meaning what, exactly?
I dunno. Hubbie takes her to the appts. and that is what he told me the doctor said to her. And I don't know why the doctor would say that to her. Even I said to hubbie, "He said that TO her?" And he said yes... so... I said... okay...and how did she take that.
The dog is 13 years old. As I said, he has seizures, vomits daily etc... And for those that missed it completely due to emo overload... I already replied to one level headed poster that it only takes a few seconds to call a shelter which clearly hubbie and I will consider, but when I think of all the dogs in shelters?
By the replies from pet enthusiasts, seems they have the same fundamentalist mentality as the religious who refuse to bake a cake for gays.