Is saving your own feelings (trying to spare yourself emotional pain when others are at stake) moral?

Asked by: savvga13
  • Our feelings are important

    To the specific cat example you gave, I'd say have the cat euthanized (however hard it is, is there anything to gain when you'd experience grief and suffering anyway seeing your lifelong companion in agony?) I don't feel that this example is typical of the situations in the argument topic, however, because I don't believe any feelings would be spared.
    However, in general, I feel that it is a very legitimate decision to save your own feelings (where they can be saved) and not to undergo emotional pain, depending on what the stakes are for the other beings in question. To make it immoral to save your own feelings opens the door to becoming a martyr to the whims of others and their demands. Ultimately we need to love and honor ourselves first, and then love and honor others.

  • Why should you hurt?

    There are always the exceptions, like your children, but if somebody is going to emotionally hurt in a situation, why should it be you? I get it, this sounds selfish, but that's what humans are right? There's nothing wrong with not wanting to be hurt.. We as humans naturally shy away from such things, which is completely normal. There are of course instances, like the one about the cat, where if the thing is in physical pain, ending the cat's life is better for the both of you in the end, because you will undoubtedly suffer from watching your cat suffer. Doing things so you hurt and others don't can cause you to look like a pushover who will take everything, even if they don't deserve it, and this can cause you even more pain in the future.

  • No, I do not think it is.

    Firstly, I'm sorry if this is something which is personally affecting you (to the person who posted), it's a tough thing to go through. However, I believe the right thing to do is what is best for the animal and put an end to their misery. Quality of life matters, being riddled with disease and crippled with pain removes all traces of that. This is precisely the reason I am for legal euthanasia. When you love someone, or a pet, you want to do the right thing by them, that's not always going to coincide with what is best or easiest for you. Love and compassion require courage.

  • I'm not sure, which is why I asked. Please disregard the stance I took.

    Here is a dilemma, just to clarify my question a bit more-

    Your cat has feline leukemia, and the vet says it is fatal. Since the disease will cause a lot of pain to your cat, the vet suggests to euthanize him in order to relieve him of suffering. Even your parents agree. However, you have know your cat ever since a toddler, and have grown up with him, playing, cuddling, whispering your secrets, etc. He has been a lifelong friend whom you can seek comfort. You really don't want to see your cat just leave you, and want him to stay with you as much as possible, until his last breath. On the other hand, you can't bear to see him unhappy and suffering . Is it moral to let him stay with you, so you can spare yourself some grief?

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
AnonyFeline says2013-07-08T03:01:41.357
It's up to the cat.

If it were a person, it's up to the person... Despite your feelings.
fractaldreams says2013-07-08T12:13:29.927
It's not up to the cat, it's up to the responsible pet owner to do the right thing.
AnonyFeline says2013-07-09T12:00:15.487
So by your logic, are you saying a dying loved one's life is based on that loved one's owner?
fractaldreams says2013-07-09T12:47:45.830
No, I don't think I am. What I am saying is that when it comes to domesticated animals, the right course of action needs to be determined by the owner. A cat or a dog cannot decide to put an end to their own suffering in a quick and painless manner and activate such a plan even if they could think of it (which is partly our fault, in the wild, these things happen naturally and ruthlessly, of course, you see it with a vulnerable animal in a pack taking themselves off to die), so, it's up to us to do the right and compassionate thing. Hey, AnonyFeline, what exactly are you saying? What is up to the cat? Perhaps we misunderstand each other...
AnonyFeline says2013-07-10T10:03:09.150
The cat is an allusion to the individual. The one dying has the ultimate choice.
fractaldreams says2013-07-10T10:55:13.523
Thank you for clarifying. Yes, in that case, we are in agreement that the feelings of the other party don't really come into it, what counts is respecting the wishes (which, hopefully, would have been clearly and unambiguously expressed by the patient in question before it got to be too late) of the person dying/suffering. It's a shame that the wishes of Tony Nicklinson, the man with locked-in syndrome who fought for the right for doctors to legally end his
life, were not respected by our legal system here in the UK. I think it's a sad reflection on our society that we are more easily inclined to be compassionate towards our pets than we are towards each other. I think it might be time to rethink our concept of what is sacred. For me, quality and dignity weigh more heavily upon the balance than mere biological functions.