To PTS or kill?

My response to a DOL thread where someone posed the question;

With the term PTS (‘Put to sleep’) I think we actually inadvertently sanitise/minimise what actually happens to hundreds of thousands of perfectly healthy rehomable dogs in pounds around Australia each year. They aren’t ‘sleeping’.

Wouldn’t it be more helpful and accurate in relation to pound euthanasia if we called it what it is? PTD or ‘Put to death’? I know its not comfortable – but the number of dogs who die in pounds each year isn’t either. Maybe we need to ratchet up the accurate publicity of these mass killings through DOL and elsewhere using accurate language around what actually happens in pounds each year.

It’s lovely to hear such progressive thoughts being aired in a public forum in Oz and well done to ‘westiemum’ for bravely heading into the lions den. But I knew my own answer would be longer than what is appropriate for a forum, so here goes ;)

Although PetRescue’s message has always been a deliberately positive one, we’ve never shied away from using the term ‘killed’ when describing pets destroyed in pounds. We’ve had feedback from the industry recommending that we change this policy but seeing a pets life ended as a system failure, not a necessary evil, has always been an important part of what we’re trying to achieve. We feel that glossing over the act of killing with a euphemism is being neither respectful to the animal, nor honest with the public.

Using the word ‘kill’ represents part of a new wave of accountability that’s happening in all facets of society. Since the inception of the internet, both commercial and non-profit businesses have been hit with a demand for transparency like we’ve never seen before. People can question policies and procedures in very public ways. Anyone from the top executive to the front line worker can be a whistle blower. And they’ve got a voice like never before.

The public is also becoming more discerning. They are making appraisals on who to support based on information that’s freely available and no longer able to be controlled and sanitised by those in power. In short, people now know everything about you, so you’d better be performing. Or they’ll instead support someone who is.

Animal rescues who are innovative, welfare focussed and saving the lives of the pets they’ve been encharged to care for will continue to thrive in this new environment. They’ll come up with fantastic new ideas, encourage the next generation to get involved and make enormous improvements in the industry. Under-resourced council pounds have the capacity to ask for help in ways we’ve never seen before; they can get their animals up on the internet to improve their adoptions, they can send messages to their public to say ‘help us’ and they can coordinate with rescue groups both locally and nation wide. They can be an efficient and caring first step in a process which sees all adoptable animals come out alive and improved for the experience.

By contrast, the days of under performing groups are numbered. Whereas in the past the solution was to shift blame onto the public, kill animals and hide behind euphemisms, the public now demand answers. They’re going to want to know why their local pound has high kill rates if other don’t. They’re going to want to know why they should give their cash to a rescue group who’s kill rate hasn’t improved in years. They’re going to want to know all about your operations. And they’re going to be outraged if you’re found to be acting inhumanely as we saw recently with the Wyong Pound media lynching.

But mostly, they’re going to want to be allowed to have a say, help out, be part of your fan club and make things better and this is a very, very good thing. Sure, a team of overworked pound staff are going to find people questioning their performance confronting – but the upshot is with this new level of accountability comes the support of a humane community with unlimited resources, new ideas and enthusiasm like we’ve never seen before.

Humans can do anything if we truly put our mind to it. We cure diseases, transport people across the world and build unimaginably large buildings. To claim  it’s impossible to save the hundred thousand pets annually that we’re presently killing is selling ourselves ridiculously short. No Kill communities are not only desirable, but inevitable as we all get better at harnessing the resources available to us.

The first step is acknowledging, without excuses, blame shifting or sugar coatings… that we KILL these pets. And that’s it’s a failure on our part when we do.