New Research Confirms What Veterinarians Already Know: Losing a Dog Hurts the Same Whether You Were Ready or Not

Two studies from the Dog Aging Project find that grief is grief and that veterinarians have a responsibility that extends beyond the animal in the room.

Two new studies published in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association are adding research weight to something the veterinary profession has understood intuitively for years: the loss of a dog is the loss of a family member, and the grief that follows is profound regardless of how or when it happens.

The studies, both drawing from the Dog Aging Project’s End of Life Survey, examined how dog owners perceive canine death, make end-of-life decisions, and experience grief in the aftermath. One focused on the factors that influence euthanasia decisions and owner understanding of their dog’s condition at end of life. The other compared emotional experiences between owners whose dogs were euthanized and owners whose dogs died without veterinary intervention.

The finding that cuts across both: loss is loss. The manner of death did not significantly change the emotional experience of the people left behind.

What owners are actually feeling

The second study, led by Dr. Jake Ryave, a clinical intern in the Texas A&M College of Veterinary Medicine’s Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, analyzed free-text survey responses from owners in both groups. Ryave expected to find more intense negative emotions in owners whose dogs died unexpectedly, without euthanasia, on the assumption that having time to prepare might buffer some of the grief.

That is not what the data showed.

Feelings of grief, guilt, and blame occurred at similar rates across both groups. Sudden death was more commonly mentioned among dogs that died without euthanasia, but the emotional weight of the loss tracked closely regardless of the circumstances. “Loss is loss regardless of how it happens,” Ryave said. “The human-animal bond is really strong, and regardless of how a pet passes, that bond doesn’t change.”

What the survey also captured, alongside the grief, were positive memories. Many owners used the optional free-text section to describe their dogs’ final days in detail, including illness progression and declining quality of life, but also the joy the animal had brought to their lives. “Even after a difficult loss, many people focused on the joy their pets brought to their lives,” Ryave noted.

What owners don’t always know about pain and aging

The first study, led by Dr. Kellyn McNulty, a former internal medicine resident at Texas A&M VMBS, looked specifically at how owner perceptions shape end-of-life decisions. Pain and suffering were the most common reasons owners elected euthanasia, followed by poor quality of life and poor prognosis.

But the research also surfaced a knowledge gap that practitioners will recognize from clinical experience: some owners struggle to distinguish between signs of pain and the normal changes of aging. Owners described behavioral and physical cues that led them to believe their dogs were suffering, including vocalizations, changes in mobility, and subtle shifts in expression. The phrase “he looked at me and I knew it was time” appeared in the data. That kind of owner attunement is real and should not be dismissed.

At the same time, the research found that some owners may not fully understand how to recognize pain or differentiate it from age-related decline. A notable percentage reported that prognosis was not discussed or not fully understood during veterinary visits near the end of their dog’s life.

McNulty’s framing of this finding is direct: “Given that pain and/or suffering was the most common reason for euthanasia and our data suggests that owners may find it challenging to differentiate chronic pain from cognitive decline, it is our responsibility as veterinary professionals to educate and empower owners to effectively recognize and treat both chronic pain and age-related ailments.”

The clinical communication gap

The studies together identify a gap that most small animal practitioners will recognize: end-of-life conversations are not happening early enough, consistently enough, or with enough specificity to prepare owners for what they will eventually face.

Prognosis discussions that owners report as incomplete or absent near end of life are not a failure of caring. They are often a failure of timing and structure. By the time a dog is visibly failing, the window for the conversations that help owners understand what they are seeing, what to watch for, and what their options are has often already passed. The education component of quality-of-life assessment and pain recognition belongs earlier in the relationship, not only in the final visits.

The finding about grief support is equally practical. Owners whose pets die unexpectedly, outside the veterinary clinic, do not have access to the same resources and support that a euthanasia appointment provides. There is no appointment at which to offer grief resources. There is no practitioner present at the moment of loss to acknowledge what just happened. The research is explicit about the implication: providing grief resources to all clients who experience the loss of a pet, regardless of how the death occurred, addresses a real gap in care.

The part that is easy to overlook

Ryave’s closing observation in the research is worth sitting with: “We get into this field because we want to help animals. But animals always come with people, and supporting those people is part of our responsibility, too.”

That is not a soft statement about emotional support as an optional service. It is a description of what comprehensive veterinary care actually involves. The animal in the exam room has an owner attached to it, and that owner is going to experience the loss of that animal with the full weight of grief that the research documents. Whether the veterinary profession equips those owners with the knowledge to recognize pain and decline, the framework to make informed end-of-life decisions, and access to grief support after a loss is a clinical and professional responsibility, not an add-on.

The Dog Aging Project’s End of Life Survey data is providing the evidence base. The next step is making what it reveals routine in practice.

The two studies are published in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. The first, examining owner perceptions of canine death and end-of-life decisions, is available at doi.org/10.2460/javma.25.12.0863. The second, examining grief experiences across euthanasia and unassisted death, is at doi.org/10.2460/javma.25.07.0464.