About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

85 California Attorney General Reports and Opinions 1 (2002)

handle is hein.sag/sagca0085 and id is 1 raw text is: ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINIONS Opinion No. 01-103-January 2, 2002 Requested by: PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE STATE SENATE Opinion by: BILL LOCKYER, Attorney General Gregory L. Gonot, Deputy THE HONORABLE JOHN BURTON, PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE STATE SENATE, has requested an opinion on the following question: Is it a violation of the state's animal cruelty laws for an animal control officer or humane society officer to use intracardiac administration of euthanasia on a conscious animal in an animal shelter or humane society facility? CONCLUSION It is a violation of the state's animal cruelty laws for an animal control officer or humane society officer to use intracardiac administration of euthanasia on a conscious animal in an animal shelter or humane society facility if the animal may first be rendered unconscious in a humane manner or if, in light of all the circumstances, the procedure is unjustifiable. ANALYSIS The question presented for analysis concerns a particular method of euthanizing sick, injured, homeless, or unwanted domestic pets or animals by an animal control officer or humane society officer in an animal shelter or humane society facility.1 This method of euthanasia involves the injection of sodium phenobarbital directly into the heart of the animal and is one of several methods of injection euthanasia. Would the animal control or humane society officer violate the state's animal cruelty statutes if he or she administers an intracardiac injection to a conscious animal, as opposed to an unconscious or heavily sedated one?2 We conclude that an officer administering an intracardiac injection may violate the animal cruelty laws if in so doing, he or she causes or permits the infliction of unnecessary or unjustifiable pain or suffering. 1 We include as officers the employees of an animal control shelter or humane society who have been trained in the administration of sodium phenobarbital for purposes of euthanasia. 2 Situations involving animal health emergencies or other exigent circumstances encountered in the field are beyond the scope of this opinion. Also, veterinarians may use their professional judgment in determining when the use of this method of euthanasia on conscious animals is necessary and justifiable in a particular situation. Accordingly, our analysis does not apply to veterinarians. January 2002 1

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most