this poor dog should be put down. When we refuse to give a terminally ill animal under our care a release from pain and suffering, we may well be saying more about our need for the animal than for our love for it.

And before we get started on a discussion of assisted suicide or euthanasia, let me say that I do recognize a difference between people and animals. Our animals don't have the choices we have and we are responsible for them.

Let you dog go in peace. My son and his wife put their beloved dog through Chemo and had his leg removed from the hip down. Hunter lived for a few more months but I think he still lived through the pain.

The dog isn't the one who made the commitment. However, the couple made a commitment to the dog when they got it: to care for it and treat it well. This commitment outweighs the one made later at a time when there was no reason to think it would run counter to the first.

The husband's real problem may be admitting the mortality of a creature he loves. By making the fight about keeping a promise - and denying that the dog is too sick to make keeping it an act of cruelty - he gets to avoid talking about whether or not it's best to let the dog go or the fact that it may well be dead on its own before the three months are up.

But, if it really is about keeping his word, I'm sure the seniors would be willing to release him from his promise if the understood the situation.

If he's too proud to do that, someone needs to ask him what kind of man breaks a promise to a dumb animal that can't understand why it's suffering rather than talk to a human being.