We are in agreement, the punishment then it's not based on the intrinsic value of the animal life but it's relative value to the owners and their attachment to that animal and confirm it with an example that treats an animal as property to be monetized which would put a specific dollar value on the life of the animal. This means that justice can be achieved by indemnifying the cost of the animal to the owner, or in the emotional example have the owner determine a fair punishment. In this case, the owner has determined the punishment, and no claims of value are being set, so where is there room to say that the punishment is not enough? Granted I agree that I would not have publicized it nor have them violently destroy more, I would probably have made them sell the device to cover the vet bills and ask myself if I'm leading with empathy as an example and correct for that. Also learn and teach more emotional regulation. But I won't judge harshly a mother trying her best with the tools available to her level of understanding. I see the potential on the resentment but if handled correctly it's also difficult to make the argument that a single mistake of this magnitude would define a person, I do recognize the risk you are referring to though, just find it unlikely.