MovieChat Forums > Heart of a Dog (2016) Discussion > Why would you not spare a dog suffering ...

Why would you not spare a dog suffering at the end of their life?


Humans are fighting for the right to a merciful quick death via euthanasia like animals have and yet here is someone who chooses to let their dog die slowly over 3 days at home for the purposes of art and "release." GMAFB Selfish.

reply

That bothered me a lot, too. I guess there might be some terminal conditions that are not painful or frightening, but I'm not sure what.

reply

There aren't any. This was pure selfishness on the part of her "loving", self-important mistress.

Only in Show Biz by injection

reply

It was absolute selfishness on the part of the film maker. She valued her own wishes (extended time with her pet) over that of her suffering pet. Also, she mentions the last "three days." But also talks about the numerous trips to the vets who advocated ending her dog's suffering. So it is very reasonable to assume her poor dog suffered MUCH LONGER than "three days."

It's also disgusting that she says, "We stayed with Lola - her breath slowed, and then stopped. We had learned to love LoLa, as she had loved us. With a tenderness we didn't know we had." WTF? You mean, by making her suffer because you couldn't bear the loss and so chose to keep her alive over letting her go peacefully?

I wonder if she ever actually stopped to think about the theme she presents at the beginning of this film and a couple of other times throughout: "Death is more about you than the person (in this case her dog) who died."

The fact she let her dog suffer for a period of time and didn't want to hear about how LoLa could be let her go peacefully and painlessly tells us a great deal about this woman. Something tells me she fails to see it in herself. How Pathetic.

reply

Laurie Anderson mentions the doctors in the movie who like to give their little speech about suffering. Now you all have given your little speech as well.
Thanks for illustrating the point Laurie Anderson was making ;)

I think it's cool how she defies the stupid doctors and just does what her grandmother would have done :)

reply

And now you have given your speech.

Acting like a sheep and following what her grandmother would have done. How courageous! And the dog still suffers.....

reply

My grandparents lived in an era where medicine even for people was not as advanced and 3 out of 4 of them died at ages younger than what I am now. So I would not make life decisions based on what was done back then. I want my elderly dogs to have more time, but only if it can continue to be comfortable. Two have cancer and so far are doing well, but I will not let them suffer if and when there is no hope.

reply

I shouldn't have read the message boards because I had to put my beloved 14 yr old American Eskimo to sleep because she was in pain..,wanted her to rest..she gave me her all...Amy was the best...including the mascot of my late moms nursing home...

reply

It also depends was the dog (or cat) is dying of. With some illness the animal (or person for the matter) will just drift others with other illness it can be an agonising death.

I had one of my cats 'put to sleep' in early 2012 as he had diabetes and was near entering a stage that would have resulted in a prolonged painful death. Any other choice was simply not acceptable and wrong.

My other cat died in 2012. As his liver was failing he was just drifting away. I also had him 'put to sleep' because I simply didn't see the point in him drifting off for a few days. It also would have prolonged my pain of watching him decline.

reply