I saw the headline for Jeanne Armstrong’s letter and my heart went out to her, and then I read the letter.

While I agree people should be aware the animal shelter is no place to bring a family pet for euthanasia, I’m troubled by Armstrong’s actions. Their dog was in need of medical attention, not incarceration, yet they knowingly took it to “a prison.”

What compassionate person would have a warden or jailer euthanize their well-loved pet in probably the most terrifying and stressful environment possible?

Additionally, it didn’t sound like the only option was euthanasia. The dog’s ailments seemed manageable and, most importantly, a confirmed diagnosis of something dire hadn’t been given.

How could they say the suspected “abdominal mass will probably rupture soon” when they have no idea what it was!

And how was a vet who can’t do biopsies able to diagnose “multiple lymphomas”––meaning cancer of the lymphatic system? Perhaps they said lipomas, as in noncancerous fatty lumps.

Maybe the “abdominal mass” was more of the same? And what vet can’t euthanize? Or is it that the vet refused (i.e., disagreeing with the decision)?

I can’t imagine why anyone would take a beloved pet to a county “prison” to sit for three days while waiting to die (as required by law unless “irremediably suffering”) at the hand of someone who neither knows nor cares about the animal.

That isn’t how they “go peacefully to doggie heaven.”

People, don’t be cheap and heartless at the end of your animal’s life; show it the respect and compassion it deserves and take it to a “real” vet. And yes, shame on the shelter but only for returning the dog to the Armstrongs, who clearly had no intention of pursuing a proper diagnosis. Francis Soto Thousand Oaks