Veterinary Ethics in Practice: Euthanasia Decision Making for Companion and Street Dogs in Istanbul

This article examines how veterinarians in Istanbul experience and navigate the ethical, emotional, and institutional complexities of performing euthanasia on dogs, with particular attention to the differences between companion and street dogs. Drawing on 29 in-depth interviews with private practice veterinarians in Istanbul, this study employs qualitative analysis using the NVivo 12 Plus software and reflexive thematic analysis to identify key patterns in moral reasoning, emotional labor, and clinical decision making. The findings indicate that euthanasia of companion dogs is often framed through shared decision making with guardians, emotional preparation, and post-procedural grief rituals. While still emotionally taxing, these cases are supported by relational presence and mutual acknowledgment. In contrast, euthanasia of street dogs frequently occurs in the absence of legal ownership, institutional accountability, or consistent caregiving, leaving veterinarians to bear the full moral and emotional weight of the decision. Participants described these cases as ethically distinct, marked by relational solitude, clinical ambiguity, and heightened moral distress. Six key themes that reveal how euthanasia becomes a site of both care and conflict when structural support is lacking are identified in this study, including emotional burden, ethical strain, and resistance to routinized killing. By foregrounding the roles of institutional absence and relational asymmetry in shaping end-of-life decisions, this study contributes to empirical veterinary ethics and calls for more contextually attuned ethical frameworks, particularly in urban settings with large populations of street dogs and culturally entrenched practices of collective guardianship and caregiving.