Saturday, October 19, 2013

Are there protocols for euthanasia requests by pet owners?

16 Oct 2013

Today Voices

While animal welfare groups have stepped up efforts to promote the humane treatment of animals here, the legislative framework seems somewhat ambiguous following the latest incident.

[Hoo boy. Assumptions. Damn Assumptions. Presumptions. Short answer: Animal welfare groups have not done any work in reforming the legislative framework. And what do you mean "ambiguous"? Where is the ambiguity?]

...Given the increasing animal abuse here and the grey areas in our animal welfare legislation, I am concerned about the veterinary protocols concerning euthanasia requests by pet owners.


[Again. What "grey areas"?]

For example, are there conditions where veterinarians may exercise professional prerogative over such decisions? Are there conditions that constitute abuse or negligence on the owner’s part when a healthy pet is sent for euthanasia without exploring alternatives?

[You have neither made a case or proven that a) there are conditions where vets can or should over-ride pet-owners' requests, nor b) that "euthanasia" of pets must be supported by a list of approved reasons, or only as a last resort. And no, this is not jeopardy. You do not need to frame your answer in the form of a question. You just want to redefine abuse to include euthanising a healthy pet? Just say so... but it helps if you explain why and you show you at least appreciate the reality of the situation, even if you seem divorced from reality]

Also, what access rights do owners and rescuers have to an animal’s medical records in the event of a dispute, and what avenues may one seek regarding errant vets?

[The right of privacy of the animal records are covered by the... oh wait! There are no such rights. Nor are these records a matter of public interests or public information. If a vet writes up his observation, it is HIS (or HER) observation. There are NO rules governing medical records of pets. Where did this "errant vet" come from? Define "errant"?]

Animal abuse should not be limited to signs of physical injury. Legally, it should also encompass mental harm and any malicious intent that contributes to the unnecessary suffering or death of an animal.

[So how was the owner of the puppy "malicious"? You are not legally trained are you? Tossing in "intent" is just going to make prosecution harder. Which brings us to the next question: who is going to investigate and prosecute such cases? Who will pay for the legal proceedings? Do we want to tie up our courts with such proceedings?]

Perhaps another legislative review is in order to address all of the above and to move Singapore closer to being an animal-centric and inclusive society.

Tan Pei Ying

[I will assume you mean "animal-centric" and "animal-inclusive" society. 

Wow.

Those are big dreams. 

Stupid dreams. But Big. 

Big, Stupid Dreams. 

"Animal-centric" huh? So Animals will be the centre of Singapore society? How does that even start? Do you mean ALL animals, or just the ones you like. You know, like dogs.

I'm not sure, but the neighbourhood garbage centre at my place is quite animal-centric. Rats, Crows, Pigeons, and even Cats and Dogs gather there. The hawker centre nearby is also Animal-centric. Crows, Mynahs and Pigeons scavenge food off the tables. The hawker patrons are quite Animal-centric. They leave scraps of food on the table for the animals to pick, instead of clearing their plates to the tray return point.

There are some Cat lovers around my place. The responsible ones will feed the stray cats and then clear up the uneaten food. But the animal-centric ones will just leave the uneaten food for rats, and other animals. I used to think they were just irresponsible. But now I see that they are actually animal-centric. 

Comment: There are different types of animal lovers. But the true animal lovers are respecters of animals. They allow animals to be exactly what they are. In other words, they won't keep animals. They consider it a cruelty at worst and an indignity at best to the animal.

The so-called "animal lovers" who keep pets, give them names, domesticate them, dress them up in ridiculous clothes they think are cute, and otherwise tries to anthropomorphise the animals are sad, insecure people seeking vicarious validation of their life choices.

Or they just need to get a life.

Then there are "pet owners". These range from the "animal lovers" mentioned aforehand, to animal "farmers" who try to make money from the animals, usually by breeding them for sale. The choice is often between cruelty and unnatural control/indignity.

Which is not to say that there are no "good" pet owners. But these are usually people with large compounds for the dogs to run freely, explore excitedly, and mark naturally. Most SG pet owners do not have that luxury.

The argument over whether the puppy could have been saved or re-homed misses the bigger picture. 

The point is, there are different views and values about pets and the value of an animal's life. You may believe that all life is sacrosanct. That is your right. But it is the right equally of others to believe otherwise, or not to the same extent as you. 

Imposing your views, or wanting your views to be paramount, is not much different from Lawrence Khong believing that adultery should be punished with dismissal from the job, regardless of one's pregnancy or need for income at one of the most critical point in one's life, or the law of the land. The issue of the death of that puppy is at best a moral issue. And moral issues are personal choices. It is not a legal issue.]



Thursday, October 3, 2013

A German's lifelong love affair with S'pore

Oct 03, 2013

Among the birthday wishes Mr Lee Kuan Yew received for his 90th birthday was this letter from accountant Stefanie Tuczek, 51, of Germany. This is an edited excerpt.




[This is not an ST Forum Page letter, but it is a letter. So I put it here.]

DEAR Mr Lee,

I am from Munich, Germany. My first time in Singapore was in 1978 when our family was on our way to Australia. (My father was a physicist and he was about to spend a working semester there.) I had my 16th birthday in Singapore and I instantly fell in love with your island. Although we travelled around the world and we visited many places such as Hong Kong, Sydney, Hawaii and Tahiti, Singapore always remained my favourite.

In retrospect, I think Singapore Airlines was partly responsible for that: I still remember when my father told us that he booked our flights with some "obscure" airline because they were the cheapest. Nobody knew SIA at that time, at least not in Europe.

From the moment we boarded the plane in Frankfurt, we were thrilled. It took me two more weeks and two more SIA flights before I actually came to Singapore, but I knew right from the beginning that a country with such an exceptional airline must be something special.

[Bravo SIA! But some travellers have felt that SIA standards have fallen. Or rather, not kept up with other airlines. Can't rest on 35-year-old laurels.]

In 1991, I had a brief stopover in Singapore and saw that the Singapore River was cleaned up and not that filthy water I used to know. What an achievement. I could hardly believe my eyes!

In 1998, my mother and I planned to spend a vacation in Batam. We thought it would be nice to combine an Indonesian island close to Singapore which would give us two weeks at a beach and one week in Singapore.

Being back in Singapore was awesome: the clean river and all the new or restored buildings, the MRT, Changi Airport.

Soon we took the ferry for a day trip to Batam to look for a hotel for the beach vacation. But after my mother's passport was stolen, we spent the rest of the day oscillating between the local police station and the immigration at the harbour. It was really hard work to get back to the ferry to Singapore without a passport and without bribing anybody. But when we finally made it, we really appreciated the Singaporean immigration office: nice people, no chaos, no bribes, rules and regulations which were followed strictly! I loved this place even more.

The next day, my mother got a new passport from the German embassy. But we had made up our minds not to leave. Singapore was a safe haven in the middle of strange worlds.

[And that is our selling point. For the less adventurous, for those who want safety and comfort when they travel, Singapore is it.]

And we had a great time. We even went to the beach in Sentosa. In 1978, we just had a cable car ride and we couldn't find proper places to swim.

Since 2000, we have always combined our vacations in Vietnam, Shanghai or Malaysia with Singapore. But the time we spent in Singapore became longer and longer. Now, it is only Singapore. Once or twice a year, we come back for a few weeks. There is always something new.

I tried to learn more about this stunning development. Your memoir, From Third World To First, is definitely one of my favourite books.

Most of my German friends cannot understand why I always go to Singapore. In their opinion it is a police state with corporal punishment and absurd laws, such as no chewing gum and no littering. I gave up arguing with them. Over here it seems quite often that the authorities believe that people will behave without the threat of corporal punishment, which of course doesn't work.

And they make fun of Singaporean campaigns to educate the people. But I never understood what is bad about that. I still remember the signs back in 1978 in public buses - "Courtesy is our way of life." I liked that, it gives you a good feeling.

Or the reminder "Use it, don't lose it" for the Chinese not to forget their native language. Sometimes I ask my Singaporean friends to write some sentences in Chinese characters on my postcards. At first I was surprised how many couldn't do this properly.

They were surprised that I wanted these sentences to impress my friends back home. They couldn't imagine that angmohs are fascinated with the Chinese language. It's so easy to learn it as a child but it's just as easy to forget it as a grown-up. So sad.

Singaporeans are also astonished that I spend so much time in their country. Many think that everything in Germany must be a lot better. I once praised the toilets in MRT stations. The reply was: "OK-lah. But I suppose they are much better in Germany!" Unfortunately I had to answer that if there is a subway toilet, it is either filthy or closed because of vandalism.

I think in both countries many younger people take the status quo for granted and don't consider the hard work done to achieve this level.

Anyway, this is just a story of somebody from Europe who loves your country a lot, and who is well aware that all these great developments happened thanks to you. I wish we had wise politicians like you in Europe, but I know that this will never happen.

I look forward to November when I will have the great pleasure again to spend four divine weeks in Singapore. I wish you a very happy birthday and I hope that you will be Singapore's mastermind for many more years!

Alles Gute fur Sie und Ihre Familie (All the best for you and your family).

http://www.singapolitics.sg/views/germans-lifelong-love-affair-spore