Supporting Clients’ Ability to Navigate the Ethics Surrounding the Treatment of Cancer in Animals

Supporting clients’ ability to navigate the ethics surrounding the treatment of cancer in animals

As a society, our relationship with animals has evolved, with companion animals today often esteemed as valued members of the family. With the human-animal bond shown to correlate with the quality of veterinary health care sought,¹ demands for improved veterinary health care over the past three decades have challenged the profession to provide ever-increasing levels of sophistication in medical services.^{2, 3} This has resulted in the development of specialty fields of practice,⁴ such as veterinary oncology, to provide comprehensive, state-of-the art care. Oncological treatment modalities have evolved to include what are now considered traditional in veterinary cancer intervention: surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy.

Despite these societal-driven advancements, attitudes towards the treatment of cancer in animals vary, as identified in recent qualitative and quantitative studies.⁵ For clients, this creates substantial psychological dissonance as they attempt to care for their pet while pushing against a current of spoken and unspoken criticism and judgment. Such dissonance is an added burden for clients already traumatized by the diagnosis of a serious, life-threatening cancer. As social workers, it raises the imperative to be aware of this phenomenon – sourced from contradictory ethics on the treatment of cancer in animals – and support clients’ ability to successfully navigate the cancer journey while being cognizant of one’s own attitudes. Diverse societal mindsets concerning resources, the human-animal bond, and animal welfare challenge the larger ethics that define the limits of intervention.

1. Lue TW, Pantenburg DP, Crawford PM. Impact of the owner-pet and client-veterinarian bond on the care that pets receive. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2008;232:531-540.
2. Dennis JS. Referrals: What, where, and why. Vet Med 1997;92.:954-961.
3. Villalobos, A. (with Kaplan L). Canine and Feline Oncology: Honoring the Human-Animal Bond. Ames, Iowa: Blackwell Publishing, 2007.
4. Rollin BE. The use and abuse of Aesculapian authority in veterinary medicine. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002;220:1144-1149.
5. Stoewen DS. Clients’ Service Expectations and Practitioners’ Treatment Recommendations in Veterinary Oncology. PhD Thesis, 2012.

Dr. Debbie Stoewen has a DVM and MSW, and most recently, a PhD in epidemiology, specializing in veterinary communication and decision-making. She is interested in promoting the many bridges between veterinary medicine and social work.

University of Guelph, recent PhD graduate, DVM, MSW, PhD