A Cross-Cultural Study of Veterinarians’ Attitudes to the Euthanasia of Companion Animals

Abstract

ABSTRACTThe attitudes of veterinarians to the euthanasia of companion animals were investigated using an online questionnaire in Hungary (n = 93), Sweden (n = 145), and Jordan (n = 40). The questions concerned the number of euthanasia performed and the reasons for and circumstances surrounding them, the veterinarians’ opinions on four clinical cases, and the mental burden associated with euthanasia (using a 7-point Likert scale). The monthly number of euthanasia performed by the veterinarians was significantly related to the country (highest in Sweden), but no differences were found by age group (≤ 34 years, 35–54 years, ≥ 55 years) or gender. Untreatable conditions were the most common reason for euthanasia in all countries, but old age was also an important factor in Sweden. Swedish respondents were the most likely, and Jordanians the least likely, to fulfill euthanasia requests about aggressive, but otherwise healthy, animals. The reported mental burden of euthanasia was lowest in Sweden and highest in Jordan, and male veterinarians reported a lower burden than female veterinarians. The attachment of owners to their animals was not associated with the ethical burden of euthanasia experienced by the respondents. Veterinarians who performed more euthanasia per month reported a lower ethical burden. Most respondents considered what they had learned about the topic during their university education to be insufficient. According to our model, veterinarians’ attitudes toward euthanasia are associated with a combination of personal (gender, age, training background) and social (cultural, religious background) factors. Further research on this topic is important, not only for animal welfare rules and practices but also for the protection of veterinarians’ mental health.KEYWORDS: Attitudescross-culturalethicseuthanasiahuman–animal interactionveterinarian Disclosure StatementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Additional informationFundingThe Project was supported by the European Union and co-financed by the European Social Fund: EFOP-3.6.3-VEKOP-16-2017-00005 “Strengthening the scientific replacement by supporting the academic workshops and programs of students, developing a mentoring process.”