German Shepherds Forum banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
If the dam is experienced, I'm wondering if there is a case for letting puppies that she knows just aren't thriving to die (or removing them to have them PTS). I know there are folks in the Tamaskan dog community in Europe who practice this regularly, as mom often knows more about her pups than we can tell. If it's a practice in the USA the breeders I know sure keep quiet about it.
I think new mothers cannot be counted on to identify a trouble puppy, as some accidentally exclude or crush their pups out of inexperience or even confusedly treat them as whiny squeaky toys. But a mother on her second or third litter is a bitch whose instincts I'd be more keen to trust. There's usually a reason that she persistently refuses to feed or removes a puppy from the whelping box, and I'm just wondering if our human desire to 'save them all' is really the best plan for them.

I have multiple threads about my dogs on here, but one in particular has been nothing but a medical headache since he was born. He would not nurse when whelped, mom kept leaving him at the cooler end of the box, he did not seek his littermates, and received sub-q fluids twice in the first three days. He picked up just fine after that and by week 7 was the largest in the litter, but I always harbored a reservation about that in the back of my mind. His breeder said it happens all the time and they just need some help sometimes, and I believed it and thought no more of it. I'm sure a lot of the time a fading puppy just needs a little boost and then is right back on track.

Since then, we've had issues. All the dogs and puppies at his breeder got hookworms and my boy had the worst complications. It took him longest to resolve the diarrhea and he was the only one who had lethargy problems. When he was 10 weeks old he developed a limp that continued till recently, and he was diagnosed with non-traveling pano that has now become full-limb pano in the past few days. As I type this he is curled in a ball in bed because all his legs hurt so bad. And he's an extremely stoic dog.
He cannot have Rimadyl or Vetprofen because when he was on pain management for his pano initially he developed a severe gastric complication (may not have been related to the medications, but to be safe he no longer takes them), in which his stomach flora succumbed to enterococcus, his gut shut down, and we had to open him up twice. He had four inches of dead intestine removed and had his pyloris cut after being hospitalized and not being able to digest food for over a week (constant vomiting).
Most recently and perhaps as a complication of his 'outbreak' of all-limb pano he has stopped eating and had uncurable diarrhea for five days. Despite sub-q fluids, pro-pectalin, probiotics, and metro his diarrhea has continued. His prostate is enlarged and mildly painful. He has diminished appetite, each day he refuses food more.
He's also had spotty hair loss around his mouth (checked for demodex even though both parents back at least three generations have no signs whatsoever, scrape was negative).

He is obviously not a breeding candidate, and I was going to rehome him with a family I know who has his sister and uncle, but I'm going to keep him as a pet instead. He 's just too complicated to pawn off on somebody else and I have an employee discount working at my vet so it's a lot easier for me to handle all this crap than whichever family he ends up with.

I love him and he's the sweetest boy I know, but I can't help but wonder if 'saving' him in the whelping box was the best choice. His mother has had litters before and she's a good mother. Continually excluding him may have been done for a very good reason. Maybe he has a systemic disorder that we just haven't diagnosed yet. Maybe he has an auto-immune disease. One more system problem and we'll have to find a specialist like Dr. House to see if there's a common thread that unites all his issues or if he really is just the unluckiest dog in the medical world.

Luckily, the pano will resolve some day. We'll see how his diarrhea goes; if we have to open him up again to re-cut his pyloris I might have to make a hard decision. I cannot have him put under every 4 months and cut open. That's too cruel and unnecessary. I hope it doesn't come to that. I'd hate to have to euthanize him for that. I'm just glad he was free; I've paid far more than his sale price would have been just to keep him alive. He's been by far the most complicated dog I've ever owned. One of my females has HD, but that was simple. Another female has had zero problems and I didn't realize how nice that was until I had this male to compare it to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,360 Posts
I don't really have anything to add, but I am curious as to what others have to say. There was a puppy from Jackson's litter that was struggling to survive. He was about 1/3 he size of his littermates by 4 weeks old. The breeder helped him through, but even as he grew, he was constantly picked on and harassed by the litter- he rehomed the puppy early because he was being pushed so far by his littermates, he felt it would be better for his development to remove this puppy. I wonder how he is doing now. I really am curious and think about that puppy every so often.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Yeah, I expect we'll see pretty polar views on this. When I first heard about letting pups die in the Tamaskan community I was shocked and thought them callous, in the same league as large litter culling like they used to do back in the day when they were just test breeding. But now I wonder if there's some merit to it, and I am really interested to see what folks think. I bet there's a big difference between the US and international inputs; we're a very different animal culture here, it seems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,451 Posts
I am on a few breeder lists and forums with more breeders and it seems the general consensus is that the breeder will leave alone a puppy that the mother is rejecting and the pup is not thriving. Most say they will intervene if the pup is really trying to suckle but can't (maybe he is runty, the litter is very large, etc), but if the pup is not demonstrating a will to fight and the mother is not helping or continues to reject the puppy, it is often PTS or left alone, no heroic measures. I've heard a few stories of people trying to save problem puppies and either spent a lot of money and lost the puppy early on anyway, or as the pup grew it was apparent there was something majorly wrong. I guess you really have to know and trust the bitch though, not all are great mothers.

If there is something wrong with the mother, that's another thing. My first GSD was tube fed and went to a surrogate because the mother stopped producing milk. Not ideal, but not the pup's fault and not the same as being rejected by the mother.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
If there is something wrong with the mother, that's another thing. My first GSD was tube fed and went to a surrogate because the mother stopped producing milk. Not ideal, but not the pup's fault and not the same as being rejected by the mother.
Absolutely. Mastitis, eclampsia, difficult recovery from c-section etc... all totally not the puppy's fault.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,574 Posts
I'm not a breeder and obviously I have no experience with this, but taking the situation that Liesje describes as a pure hypothetical, I think I'd remove an obviously failing/rejected puppy and have it PTS rather than letting it die slowly as a result of maternal neglect.

Just seems like once the decision is made, why drag it out, you know? Unless puppies die pretty quickly and painlessly in that situation (which I have absolutely no idea about), my only priority would be to reduce the little guy's suffering.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,150 Posts
Interesting concept, although knowing myself, I could not let them die, I'd intervene and hand raise if necessary. Not that it's better, I guess it would just be better for me and my guilty conscience ;)

My aunt used to breed Siamese cats and I was cat-sitting for her and she had two litters of kittens.

The one day I went into the cattery and the one mamma cat was nursing all the kittens but one. This one was meowing at the door of the cage, was obviously trying to find mom who was chirping to it and it was responding but unable to find her. I picked it up and put it in with her and the other kittens and mom purred and little kitty was happy.

Next day I came by in the morning and I was shocked to find the mother cat had killed and decapitated the kitten.

They know when something isn't right. It was pretty awful for me to find, but my aunt said there was something wrong with it for her to do that. There were no other problems with her and her remaining kittens.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,661 Posts
The only experience I have is from conversations with Finn's breeder. Finn came from a large litter dropped by an experienced bitch. She refused to nurse two of the puppies and would move them to the other side of the whelping room and hide them under the hay and blankets. After a few days when it was obvious mum wasn't going to do anything and they weren't thriving under hand feeding, she had the pups PTS humanely.

The breeder said that, 9 times out of 10, if mum isn't taking care of the pups then they aren't going to survive or they will, but their quality of life would be poor. She told me the story of one of her first litters where she hand fed and took care of the "runt" of the liter that mum had given up on. The pup ended up having severe medical problems; couldn't walk right, was deaf, was epileptic and it wasn't controlled by meds...basically everything you can think of went wrong with that pup. She ended up having him PTS after about four months of doing everything she could.

I don't see anything wrong with it, personally. If it's not a bitch issue, but she is constantly rejecting the puppy while all the others are thriving and doing fine, then if I were a breeder, I'd take it as a sign of an issue and I'd probably humanely euthanize as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,157 Posts
I had a cat once. We rescued her from being dropped at the humane society. I was 14 years old. I'd had to have my last cat put to sleep because she was so sick there was just no coming back from it. I was devastated. My grandpa saw how hurt I was over the loss of my best friend. About 2 months later, we were heading to Walmart near the humane society. There was a beautiful calico kitten in the car next to us. My grandpa decided to follow them. Turns out they were taking her to the PPHS. They were so thrilled we were willing to take her.

About a year later, after getting outside, she had a litter of 4 kittens. The first kitten, perfectly fine. The second kitten, rejected. Third and fourth kittens, perfectly fine. When we inspected the second kitten, we saw why she's rejected him. Heart was outside the body. We could have taken the kitten to the vet and basically taken extreme measures that likely would have failed. Sugar had rejected the kitten. Even had the kitten been formed correctly/complete and she'd rejected him, we would have allowed the rejection because she would have known better than us.

If a pup is born that has a will to fight and is trying, I can understand helping. If not, it will only be a struggle for the handler AND the pup in question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,355 Posts
It is easy to plan on passively culling the ones who don"t seem to be able to make it. That is...until you see them being born and realizing that they all were born with a desire to live. This happened to me while rescuing a pregnant mutt from the streets She was huge and I planned on not interfering after birth regarding this issue. Well, she birth 10 pups and five were small and weaker but I managed to keep them alive and grow up healthy by rotating them in nursing shifts.
Maybe it helped that the mother dog never rejected anyone of them. In that case it might have been different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,353 Posts
I'd have to say that, if the mother was completely rejecting a pup, I'd want to look into why.

I'm reminded of my friend whos dog had pups. She had 8 pups total,but rejected one of them. To the point that she would take that pup and take it AWAY from the others, drop it and leave it. I didn't agree with the practice, but my friend and her parents would go get the pup and kept bringing it back, and would hold the mom down while the pup tried to feed. They still had to end up bottle feeding it. Anyways, the mother, who was normally very sweet, fought them and bit at them. Can't say I blame her really. But she didn't want anything at all to do with this pup. They finally listened to reason and took the pup completely away after a vet told them that if the mother was this against it, she may kill it herself if they forced it on her.

The kept the pup, but had to keep the mother and her separate. Eventually the pup went to live with her grandmother, and ended up being a mess. Constant vet care and eventually died of a tumor in her stomach. I'm not sure how old she was, she lived for a good while, but always needed some kind of vet care all the time.

ETA: I honestly think at times the dog was miserable and only stayed alive by will of the people around it. I think it would have been kinder to let the pup go when it was born.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
482 Posts
My grandmother bred Border Collies my whole life, we have bred and raised many farm animals, and of course barn cats. IMO it is called natural selection. There is a reason that an experienced mother rejects a baby. If you have ever seen a mother mourn when her baby did not make it or they are taking away you would know what I mean. Dogs (animals in general) have been having babies long before humans ever interacted and they did this on their own. Now that humans interact with this there is a rise in unstable animals that have to be PTS. Nature will take care of itself and if a mother rejects its baby there is a reason. Just my opinion and I know many others will strongly disagree but growing up my whole life on a farm with animals from every walk of life and hand raising babies of more species I can count... There IS a reason... The only time we would intervene is when momma could not produce enough milk or mother did not make it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,157 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,742 Posts
When I hand raised the litter of abandoned pups last year, one of them got pneumonia. I did what was in my hands to save her: I kept her hydrated, warm and gave her ABs ,but pneumonia is a complication BECAUSE of bottle feeding, not because there was something wrong with the pup itself. I could have taken her to the hospital and have her on O2 and IV and gone far and beyond saving her but I didn't want to push further. My philosophy was that either she would have the will to live or would die warm and loved on my arms and I was ok with both possible endings.

After a rough night where I gave intraperitoneal fluids only once I kept hydrating her every hour orally with a syringe. By afternoon of the next day she fought me so hard no to take it that she convinced me she was strong enough not to need it anymore :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,139 Posts
My grandmother bred Border Collies my whole life, we have bred and raised many farm animals, and of course barn cats. IMO it is called natural selection. There is a reason that an experienced mother rejects a baby. If you have ever seen a mother mourn when her baby did not make it or they are taking away you would know what I mean. Dogs (animals in general) have been having babies long before humans ever interacted and they did this on their own. Now that humans interact with this there is a rise in unstable animals that have to be PTS. Nature will take care of itself and if a mother rejects its baby there is a reason. Just my opinion and I know many others will strongly disagree but growing up my whole life on a farm with animals from every walk of life and hand raising babies of more species I can count... There IS a reason... The only time we would intervene is when momma could not produce enough milk or mother did not make it.

Yes. I agree completely. There are things about nature that we as compassionate humans either don't understand or have trouble accepting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,379 Posts
I think it's human nature to want to do all that is possible to assit a new life. I know if I were playing nurse maid to a new litter of pups / kittens, I'd try to force it on the mother.

However, as soon as I realized the lack of the mother's attention wasn't an over sight, I'd allow nature to take it's course.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top