I don’t typically bash or even criticize another author’s work, but when I read the article highlighted below, I became more than a little irked. I commented on the site as follows:

I champion Ms. Litzinger’s efforts to fill the need of an important niche, grieving animal lovers. In writing my own book on the subject, “Good Grief: Finding Peace After Pet Loss,” I heard innumerable times of how much more difficult the process was for people to get through simply because of the dismissive attitudes of much of our society.

I must admit, as I read this article, I felt somewhat put off by what appeared to be a flippant tone used by the author. It doesn’t take a genius at reading between the lines to perceive the writer found the concept of providing counseling services to grieving pet owners to be a bit on the silly side. Quotes like “A Pennsylvania pet loss website (who knew?)…”; “…pet grief counseling differs from human grief counseling—besides referring to the deceased as Buster or Whiskers, of course”; and “This unique, uh, undertaking …” sounds like scoffing smart-assery to me. The subject deserves serious attention, and at least Ms. Litzinger’s quotes give it the proper tone, but the I-think-I’m-so-witty writer here does aptly portray the prevailing ignorant, insensitive sentiments out there.

The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review Eric Heyl column: Western Pennsylvania woman finds purrfect niche

Read it for yourself and let me know if it struck you the same way. —Sid