RSS Feeds
Facebook
GRS Twitter
The other day, I made a passing comment in my article about judging (or not judging) others. I mentioned that although my friend Michael is in dire financial straits, he’s still making life decisions based around the fact that his family has two dogs. (They’re renting a larger, more expensive home than they otherwise would, for example.) “What about getting rid of the dogs?” I asked.
Well.
This suggestion struck a nerve with a lot of people. Many GRS readers argued that giving up pets during financial crisis is irresponsible. Tiffany’s response was typical:
Sorry, but dogs are like kids, you can’t just get rid of them in hard times. Certainly, you shouldn’t take on dogs when you’re not financially able to (and similarly, you should do your utmost to not have kids when you can’t support them). If you’ve already got dogs when the financial hard times hit, well then too bad, they’re still your responsibility. You can’t get rid of the kids, can’t get rid of the dogs. No real pet owner would want to, either.
Let me quell some concerns: I own four cats, and if Kris would let me, I’d own a dozen more. Plus a couple of dogs. And some birds (I really want a parrot). And some fish. I’m an animal person, and am often amazed that I still eat meat. (That cognitive dissonance is a topic for another time.)
I’m about as pro-animal as you can get. (Except that I’m not vegetarian — yet.) In general, I actually agree with those who scolded me. Pets are not furniture. They’re not possessions to be disposed of carelessly. They’re thinking, emotional beings, and ought to be treated with consideration and respect.
As many of you know, one of my pet projects (ha!) is an ongoing documentation of animal intelligence; I read everything I can find on the subject. (My friends are always sending me stories about amazing animals because they know I love them.) At the same time I started Get Rich Slowly, I started an animal intelligence blog, though that site has long since faded to nothing.
People are passionate about pets
Despite my deep respect and admiration for animals, I don’t think this issue is as crystal clear as many GRS readers make it out to be. This debate is interesting, and for a variety of reasons.
- First, it shows that different people value different things. If my family were in a rocky financial situation, the pets wouldn’t be the first to go, but they’d certainly be on the list of options.
- Second, when talking about spending on pets, we get to explore questions like “How much is too much?” When do you stop spending on pets? Do your pets take priority over your children? Over your home? Over your self? Again, different people have different answers.
- Third, this clearly demonstrates one of my mantras: Money is more about mind than it is about math. Everyday, all of us make financial decisions based on factors other than the numbers. Numbers are important, but they’re far from the only factor.
Last fall at MSN Money, my pal Donna Freedman — who will share her reader story here on Sunday, by the way — wrote about the financial implications of pet ownership:
When people say “I’d never give up my pet,” they’re usually speaking from a position of privilege. Sure, they may feel broke right now, but they’re still in a place where they can say what they would “never” do. If you were ever truly destitute, you’d know better than to make that kind of claim.
Or maybe I’m wrong. Maybe you lived in your sedan with four cats or out in a culvert with a husky-shepherd mix. Maybe all of you survived. But most of us aren’t cut out to take that kind of risk — and frankly, we shouldn’t. It’s too dangerous. A human life is worth more than the chance to nurture a corgi or a ferret for a few more years. Besides, Fido deserves better than car camping and eating old Wonder bread from the food bank.
As you might expect, her article received a lot of comments — over 1200 responses, in fact — many of which were nasty. But, you know what? I think Donna is right, and agreeing with her doesn’t make me a heartless bastard.
My best friend
I’ve had my cat Toto since she was a kitten. (In fact, I’ve known and loved her since the day she was born, 01 May 1994.) Aside from Kris, Toto is my best friend. When I’m home, she’s usually by my side, helping me write about personal finance. But Toto is getting old. Her body is failing, and it breaks my heart. She’s often in pain. The vet isn’t sure exactly what’s wrong with her, so we keep trying different things. With each vet visit, my costs mount. So far, I’m okay with that. I’ve maybe spent a thousand dollars in the past few months, and it’s bought me more time to cuddle with my cat.
But where do I draw the line? How much do I spend to keep Toto alive? (Especially when her quality of life is beginning to deteriorate?) Do I tap the money I have saved for our trip to France and Italy just to buy her a few more weeks? What if I were still in debt? How much would I spend then?
The calculus of pets is complex; there are no easy answers.
Bonus video: My two cats, Toto and Max, demonstrate “how to be bad”.
A vet’s voice
As I was finishing this article, my vet phoned. She was calling to give me Toto’s latest lab results: Her kidneys are beginning to fail and she may have thyroid problems (still waiting on a last set of tests).
After we finished talking about Toto, I told Dr. McDaneld about the discussion at Get Rich Slowly. It turns out she volunteers with the Humane Society to provide veterinary care in low-income areas throughout the country. She shared her thoughts about folks who find themselves unable to afford their pets.
“I don’t like to see pets neglected just because their owners are in financial distress, but it happens,” she told me. “When somebody’s not financially able to care for their pets — even the bare minimum — then that pet really is best off in another situation.”
But Dr. McDaneld also noted that for some, pets really are members of the family. Sometimes, an animal can be a person’s closest companion. “People’s relationships with their pets can run a wide gamut,” she said. “Some people would lose their house and health before they’d give up their pets.”
Fortunately, there are programs to help pet owners in need. “There are a lot of groups out there trying to help people who want to be responsible pet owners but are in financial trouble,” Dr. McDaneld said. She gave me three examples in the Portland area:
- The PAW Team (Portland Animal Welfare Team) provides free vet care to the pets of people who are homeless or in extreme poverty.
- FIDO (Friends Involved in Dog Outreach) offers a number of programs to assist dog owners, including Animeals (meals-on-wheels for cats and dogs) and a Dog Food Bank (for dog owners in financial need).
- Cat Adoption Team, which provides a cat food bank.
There are sure to be similar programs in most major cities. The bottom line: If my friend Michael gets into a situation where he can’t afford to keep his dogs, there are organizations that can help.
Pets aren’t people
That said, animals aren’t people. Somewhere — and where, I do not know — there’s a line between what you do for your children and what you do for Fido or Fluffy. I believe that it’s this line that bothered so many people in Wednesday’s article; I was suggesting that Michael give up his dogs much earlier than some readers would consider such an option.
So, where is this line for you? How long do you keep a pet, even when you can’t really afford it? Do you sacrifice your family’s well-being for that of the animal? How do you prioritize when you have to make a sacrifice? Is it ever better to give up an animal than to fail at other obligations?
This article is about Ask the Readers, Choices, Relationships Friday, 4th June 2010 (by J.D. Roth)
I would move with my pets in a van, down by the river. Eating nothing but a steady diet of government cheese! Just kidding, but I bet that’s what Chris Farley would say.
First I find it ironic that the blog post you felt compelled to write is in response a previous post this week, “Juding (or not judging) Others.” When frankly people who responded were judging how a person might choose to deal with the financial consequences of owning a pet.
It all depends on how you were raised and what you have grown accustomed to. In some parts of the world animals are sacred and are not treated as family members, but as gods. In others any animal as big as a rat is fair game (so to speak) for a meal. Who are we to judge? Each persons situation is different, as are their financial resources and emotional connection to their pets. Seriously can someones comments on a blog post comments section be eloquent and provoking enough to completely change the mindset that it has taken someone an entire lifetime of experiences and cultural influence to develop?
I was miffed by your observation the other day too, but I decided not to comment then, because in general I agreed with that post. It’s very frustrating to watch someone you care about who is in debt and struggling financially buy themselves and all their family members iPhones (and the plans to go with them), to give up a cheap rental in favor of a much more expensive one, etc.
And I agree with pretty much everything you’ve said today - I adore my dog, and my husband and I don’t have kids so he’s the closest thing we have to that right now. But we’re not in debt. We have maxed out our 401K contributions, we’re saving in IRAs on top of that, our emergency fund is full and flush, and we’re taking a trip (to Portland!) later this month for a short vacation that we’ve saved up enough money to pay for. So - position of privilege, check. If I’m honest with myself, if it came down to the dog’s vet and food bills or our house, I would reluctantly try to find someone else who could take the dog, even if it was just one of our parents to keep him until we got back on our feet.
For the record, I think I was more upset the other day because of the implication that the options were A) take this $500/month rental and give up the dogs, or B) keep them but get a $1300/month rental. There HAVE to be in-betweens. There have to be places that allow dogs that cost less money, especially in Portland, which is a very animal-friendly town. I think the question maybe should have been about making the commitment to give the dogs exercise in a place WITHOUT a big yard to run and play. Anyway. Thanks for all you do - I am a big fan of the site!
These are really tough questions. I asked myself similar questions after that last article. Just where is my “stop loss point”? Do I drain my emergency fund for the cats? It gets even more complicated since it really was my girlfriend who decided to get cats, not me, so you could make a case that it’s mainly her responsibility. And what happens if we break up?
These are really things you should think about BEFORE you get any kind of pet.
No matter how you slice it, pets cost money. You can argue all you want about how they are (or aren’t) the same as a human being but the reality is that society in general does not view animals to be on the same “level”. Even if someone is old and the relatives cannot afford health care, society will not let that person die. An old dog, that’s another matter. It doesn’t really matter where YOU draw the line, the line is already drawn FOR you. Society says animals are different, inferior to humans. The playing field is not level so naturally you need to think accordingly when it comes to paying for that pet.
Meh. Your justifications and explanations of why someone who is having financial problems should give up their pets is overly dramatic. Very few truly middle class Americans go from owning a home, having a job, etc to living in a van down by the river unless they have other issues besides being out of work or not handling their finances properly (like a drug or alcohol problem).
I wouldn’t put my kids in an orphanage if I was having financial difficulties, so I wouldn’t take my pets to the shelter either in the same circumstances. End of discussion.
And given this is your position, I will take every other suggestion in your blog with a giant grain of salt. Actually, more than likely, I’ll just delete you from my Google reader list and be done.
You “own” four cats? Where did you get that impression?
As I recall, one of the planning failures associated with the Hurricane Katrina evacuation was that, while there were some provisions for public (non-car) evacuation, it was only for people, not for pets. Many people chose to stay in their homes to face the storm with their pets, rather than evacuate to safety but abandon their pets.
Thanks for providing the resources for poor and unemployed pet owners. I’m sure they’ll be useful to many suddenly finding themselves in dire straits.
Personally I’ve been faced with being temporarily homeless with animals. I could live out of a car for a week or so with my cat, not so much with the young dog I also had at the time. Fortunately a friend let me stay until the pet-friendly apartment I’d applied to was available. I did end up adopting my young dog out about a year later - he wasn’t thriving in the apartment, and his quality of life came before my emotional attachment to him.
Here’s something interesting: when I rehomed him, I had several people write asking me to reduce or waive the $75 rehoming fee (purebred puppy - I was deliberately taking a loss to make sure my decision was based on the best home, not on a bidding war) because they’d just lost their jobs or otherwise couldn’t afford it. Clearly those emails were deleted… if $75 would break them and they were unemployed, caring for a young dog would probably not help their situation.
I would have (and have) kept my older cat with me no matter what, firstly because she’s a little clingy and codependent, secondly because of her age and minor health issues… if she went to a pound she’d be euthanized, and if she went to a new home they’d take her to the pound, because she’s one of those cats that’s not for everyone, but she’s devoted to the core. She’s the cat that would *want* to be in the car with me rather than in a new home, weird as that sounds.
I feel guilty and like a bad pet parent when my cat’s ear infection recurs because I had to wait too long to take her back to the vet. On the other end I’ve done the kidney failure vet bills thing with my (deceased) rescue cat. It’s hard. I have nothing but the utmost respect for those who do the best for their animals, whether they’re making difficult choices to keep them or making the difficult choice to rehome them.
I was homeless for the longest time (yes, on the street homeless) because my mother refused to give up her dog. I guess we know what her priority was.
I often feel smug I’ve avoided smoking, or expensive cars, or even having kids too young on my route to wealth - but pets are my own crack cocaine.
In particular, tropical marine fish and corals. There’s a way to lose money fast on expensive equipment (think $1000s) to avoid your expensive animals (think dozens costing $100s) dying, plus getting to feel guilty about the carbon the expensive lighting is throwing off into the bargain.
Love that cat on the windowsill. I’d struggle no reign back spending on a cat like that, too.
JD, I’m sorry to hear about Toto. I’ve actually been going through something similar myself — two months ago my 11 year old tortie was diagnosed with kidney disease. Fortunately, I don’t have to worry about homelessness or financial ruin in caring for her ($1300 in May and we have a vet appt this morning), but I have still been faced with how far to go for her (we opted not to do the $3000-4000 kidney stone surgery, for quality of life reasons). I love my cat, and it’s not easy to make these kind of decisions. Good luck with Toto.
I’m getting tired of the comparisons between pets and kids (from the commenters here and at Simple Dollar) about whether pets should be re-homed, but kids should never be. Does everyone forget about how many people give up their kids? Either by their choice or because their are forced to. It is perfectly legal to give one’s baby up for adoption and also legal to abort in certain areas. Should people not have the same rights with their pets?
Now, I’m not passing judgment on any of these situations. I think it really is a personal choice that most of us never have to make, having never been pregnant at 14, or in some other horrible living situation.
I just think that there are more similarities than people realize. Some people just should not have kids in their care and we have agencies to seize the kids and place them in a hopefully better environment (again, no need to get into that debate) the same way as we have agencies to seize animals.
Whether right or wrong our society is set-up so that both people and animals are considered transferable or disposable in numerous situations.
Great article JD! I have a 17 year old poodle which I’ve had since he was 8 weeks old. Received Charlie when I was 10 and I’m 27 now, my first dog. He came into our family when my sister was a few months old and my brother was 1 1/2 years. He has been with me longer than he has not, and my siblings can’t remember live without him. He is almost totally blind and hard of hearing. I question when will it be Charlie’s time almost every day. I feel he still has a good life, with more ups than downs, but know his time is soon. I also have a rescued cat that is 20 years old, taken in 5 years ago when her owner past. She is slowing down and getting quite demanding (and like to scratch you if you walk by and don’t pet her). I just hope I know when their time has come. I also know that money in vet bills does not always mean quality time.
Personally about vegetarian diet: I just moved to a vegan diet yesterday. I was a vegatarian for 6 years, then ate meat again. My sister and aunt have been vegans for 3-4 years. They have both asked me to do vegan for 30 days, because its only 30 days they say, then see how I feel. Plus I spend so much of my free time and money on animals it really does make sense.
My order of importance is as follows:
1. Wife
2. Daughter
3. Cats (I have 6 of them)
4. Myself
I would go hungry before my cats will, but my wife and daughter definitely take top priority.
Part of the reason I’ve cleaned up my financial mess is so that my cats will have a better life. I never want to be in a position where I would have to give them up. And when they get older, there are going to be significant vet bills. Knowing that, I’ve actually created an entirely seperate savings account just for the cats.
This may mean that I don’t get to go to Ireland or Greece as quickly as I’d want to, but it’s worth it. After my wife and daughter, my 6 cats are my best friends in the entire world.
I’ve been following this thread with interest, because I’m a 20 year veteran of the animal welfare movement and the executive director of a large humane society. Over the course of my career, I’ve seen people relinquish animals for the lamest of reasons (he’s not a puppy anymore so he’s no longer cute) and for the most heartbreaking of reasons (going into a nursing home).
As the economy crumbles, animal shelters around the country find themselves facing a choice: do we take in every animal displaced by human tragedy (often at the risk of the animal’s life) or do we put programs in place that try to bridge the gap and keep animals with their families?
What we have discovered is that we are able to help at least 50% of the people who come to us thinking that relinquishment of their animal is their only option when faced with foreclosure, job loss, or other financial crisis. When they discover our pet food bank, our low-cost spay/neuter services, our foster program for pets of people who are temporarily homeless, etc, they are able to re-think their strategy. For the other 50%, there may be no option and we’ll take their animals and do our best. But, thanks to being ready to meet people where they are, we can take in fewer homeless animals and keep families intact.
If anyone is faced with a crisis and believes the only alternative is re-homing your pet, start planning ahead. Uncover the resources available in your area. Work with family and friends to find temporary or permanent placement. Learn how to responsibly re-home your animal on your own. And then, as a last resort, call your local animal adoption center to inquire about relinquishing the animal. Waiting until the sheriff’s notice is on the door and the moving van is idling out front is NOT the time to decide how to deal with your pets.
It remains a paradox that pets are considered consumer items by most Americans (how else to explain the flourishing puppy mill trade), but most Americans with pets consider them “members of the family.”
Thanks, JD, for giving some time to this subject.
my precious kitty is 12 years old, and hasn’t seen a vet in 11.75 of those years. how the hell are people fucking up their pets enough that they need regular visits to the veterinarian?
I have an inside cat and an outside dog (and a small house in the middle of a big property where the dog can run). I deeply love my pets, and I’ve already spent a lot of money on them. I especially had 3 cats before that one, that died for various reason (2 of accidents, one of disease). I each time paid the vet without one split second of hesitation, without even asking beforehand how much it would cost, but only because I COULD. Having a pet is a “luxury” (as it’s not a basic need to live), but since it’s one I can afford and something that makes my life extraordinarily better, it’s all good.
I would never EVER be happy to give away my pets, but I could consider this option if it was really my last one before losing my house or getting in deep debt.
I agree with you that no matter how much we love them, animals are not human, and even though we are responsible of them, we also are responsible of humans, ourselves at first place and our family too, if we have one. I make that kind of distinction with charities: I give at every food collect, but I give about 5 times more for human food than for pet food… It’s not much every time, but it’s a balance that fit my values and my budget!
Portland is lucky to have all those options for people who can’t afford their pets. In my state, when the foreclosure crisis started, a large grocery chain got together with the Humane Society and was offering free dog and cat food to people in foreclosure. That lasted about 1 week, until the NRA planned a boycott of this store because they don’t like the Humane Society because it is against hunting. That was the last place I heard of doing this kind of work, and it is truly sad how it all went down.
In your friend’s case, I think people were upset that you suggested he “get rid” of the dogs so soon because he was clearly wasting some much cash on needless toys. It seems crazy that he would “need” $800 more house for 2 dogs. They must be Huskys or Great Danes!
I think for me, I would have to be on the brink of starvation myself before I gave my cats away. I also wouldn’t let them suffer in squalid conditions either. Maybe I would try to find a foster home until I got back on my feet. Right now, they are the only thing that brings joy to my life, so it would be excruciating to give that up.
One more thing- if you give your pet up to a shelter (not Humane Society) you should know that shelter has the right to sell your pet to a laboratory testing facility to make money for the city/county. Seems unfair, but it’s true.
I’ve never commented here before, but I just wanted to express my sympathy for your cat, Toto. I know how hard that is.
Thanks for this extremely well-written post.
We have several friends who I know would take in our dog if we were ever in a situation where we could not properly care for him. It would be extremely difficult to give him up nevertheless.
My “pain point” for spending too much money on my cat is pretty low compared to other animal lovers. I got him as a Humane Society kitten, got pet insurance, and then he suffered some kind of respiratory problem soon afterwards. The pet insurance covered the minimal cost for the medicine and that was it.
Fast forward about 8 years and suddenly my cat starts leaking blood out of one eye and has temporary blindness. I took him to the vet and after extensive tests costing several thousand dollars, they had no definitive answer. They think it may be feline herpes. They gave him all sorts of medication that did nothing at all. Over the course of the testing the blindness recovered in one eye and then transferred to the other. It has now settled in his left eye, which leaks blood. After several months of treating him with different medications that the vets were not sure could help (and which didn’t) I stopped all treatment. Pet insurance claims this is linked to the original respiratoy disease and will not pay for any further claims related to it.
So my thought process is this: He is a cat. He doesn’t seem to be in pain. I feed him, love him, and he has a leaky defective eye that will receive no further tests or medication. If he dies, then he dies. That’s kind of what happens to sick pets. I hope he is around for a good long time, but I will not spend any more money trying to diagnose and treat something that no one seems to know how to fix.
I would never consider putting myself in financial trouble for a pet. In the end, I think humans have more worth than animals do.
Frankly, it’s making decisions like that, the hardly insignificant costs of pet maintenance, an looming huge expenditures (hello, grad school!) that have kept me from getting a pet. Instead, I spend at least an hour a week volunteering at the local (no-kill) humane society. I get my pet fix, without the expenses, the cats are happier, and the shelter gets more socialized and therefore adoptable animals.
Most shelters also offer foster programs, which allow you to take on an animal only when the timing works for you, and then give them back when they’re ready for adoption. Generally the shelter covers all medical expenses and can help with food if necessary.
It’s kitten season most places now- if you can help foster (or even adopt), please consider doing so!
Your post on Wednesday prompted a discussion for my husband and me. I’m finally employed and now he’s been laid off so this isn’t a mental exercise for us.
The discussion was really good because it turns out we are at the same place — if we can’t eat, that means they probably can’t eat either and that’s the point for us to look for other options.
Here’s hoping these replies stay civil.
I’m really glad you wrote this! I think people get way too touchy about the issue of giving up a pet and don’t understand how heartbreaking it could be.
My neighbor’s family had a rotten 2009 - she went through chemo for an aggressive cancer, her daughter’s seizure disorder got worse, and her husband got into a motorcycle accident causing hefty brain damage. Eventually she had to rehome her beloved beagle and her husband had to leave because she couldn’t take care of her own cancer and his brain injury and their aging dog and the daughter.
In the last couple of months - she’s gotten better, is back at work, and both the husband and dog have been back at the house. Since her beagle had been rehomed to someone she knew, she didn’t have to say good bye forever.
There are some people who give up dogs because they were too irresponsible in the first place, but the majority of people who give away a pet in hard times are just trying to do the best by their animal. The act of giving up a dog that you cannot take care of is ABSOLUTELY the BEST and MOST RESPONSIBLE thing a person can do, and no one should be judged for it.
You can’t possibly fathom the heartbreak and torment a person goes through having to make a decision like that… and FYI: while some services are listed here, there really isn’t such a thing as doggy food stamps or kitty WIC or parrot welfare checks or free ferret medical insurance. People don’t give up their kids in times of financial distress (well some do, but they’re not rehoming them on Craigslist with a small fee) because there are specially designed, federally funded programs to keep kids happy and healthy even when their parents are at rock bottom. There are so many resources to help families stay together (which barely work most of the time, but another issue for another day) - and not enough to keep a pet a member of the family in hard times.
If I remember clearly you did a post a while back about how you have pets but not children and that’s partially a financial decision. My husband and I are on the opposite side of things and value people way over pets. In fact, we won’t get pets. Why? They cost money and require time that can go to things we value more. Add to that, my husbands nervousness around dogs (he was attacked by a dog as a child) and one of my best friend’s allergic reaction to cats and I’ll choose my husband and friends over the animals any day. That’s our decision and we’re pretty firm on that. However - I can understand that it would be very difficult for a family who is already in distress (losing everything, needing to move) etc.) to need to get rid of pets. I remember needing to get rid of a cat I loved due to a move as a child, and it was pretty traumatic. It would be a tough decision and honestly, if your friend doesn’t have the sense to not get two iPhones and an iPhone touch when in financial stress then getting rid of dogs is definitely not in the category of hard decisions he’s able to make as a man trying to clean up the mess he’s gotten his family into.
This is an issue of responsibility. People who give up a pet without much thought are probably are not really taking responsibility in other areas of their life. Giving up your pet should be one of the hardest decisions you ever make. Having a pet means that you may have to make that decision or the decision to euthanize. It is part of the responsibility you accept when you choose to share your life with a pet. My issue in this case is that suggesting someone who is making bad choices get rid of their pets seems to be feeding in to their irresponsibility. The dogs are not the problem. In a case like this too often they become the victim of a human’s irresponsibility. That is why so many of us reacted to the suggestion.
I really, really, really, hate it when people compare pets and kids. They are not, and never will be, on the same level. I would personally end the life of every pet I have ever owned to save the life of one person that I don’t even know.
On the subject of pets and money, I’m sure I would give up any pets I have long before most people would. I don’t own a pet currently, since I want the independence.
Moogie (#9), your language is unnecessary and inappropriate.
Also, in response to your comment: I don’t have a cat, so I cannot say what vet care is appropriate for cats, but dogs should see a vet at least once a year for a regular checkup, as most dog owners do not have the education and experience that vets do, and therefore cannot determine the state of their pet’s health the way the vet can. People who incur regular costs from vet visits are not doing anything horrible to their pets; they are providing basic care.
My pets are part of our family. I currently have three dogs and would not give them up for anything. If I was in that horrible of a financial situation I still would not give them up as it would make a bad situation way worse. They can make me smile and laugh when nothing else can.
Wow, we have certainly fallen far from the common sense tree. Dogs & Cats as kids, ummm no they are a luxury, not a need (except for the blind, etc). My family loves our dog, but if things get so bad that we can’t pay our bills, guess what will be first to go. People are more important (although less lovable at times). Men need to be men in these kind of situations, not soft hearted fools.
My concern is when people love their animals so much they keep adopting more, then don’t have the money to keep them well fed and healthy.
My cousins’s last girlfriend (anecdotal I know) had 4 or 5 large german shephards, but was regularly unemployed and had very little money. 4 or 5 large dogs take a lot of money to feed and keep healthy! But she “loved” them too much to get rid of them, and so they had worms and were malnourished and becoming vicious. Eventually animal control was called by the neighbours and took them away.
Like others, for me pets would be the last thing to go if I was in dire finacial straights. I just have a giant soft spot for animals.
I’d much rather (and do) donate and volunteer for an animal shelter than a homeless shelter. That makes me a bad human being I guess but its the truth.
Sometimes, as you said, the best thing for the pet is to be given up. We adopted a Golden named Niles last year (our previous golden died in July). Niles was an owner surrender to the rescue group we went through. His story was that he’d been owned by the the same person since he was a puppy and there had been life changes - a new baby, job loss, downsizing due to the economy. Niles was living in an apartment with no yard and near a busy city street. I can’t imagine having to give him to a rescue group, but that’s what happened.
It was certainly the best for Niles. He’s now in a large home with a nice big yard - gets twice daily walks and has a very healthy diet. He looks great.
I used to think I could never get rid of my pets, but experiencing this has made me realize that good choices can be made from very difficult decisions. To surrender this dog was the best thing for him. It also has to be much easier on the family now that they don’t have to foot the health and food bills for a 100 lb dog.
First off, moogie(#9), you’re lucky, and apparently stupid.
And second, I would say a big yes to drawing from your emergency fund for your pet. What else is it there for, if not for an emergency such as this?
I would even go so far as to say that if you do NOT want to dip into your e-fund, then don’t get a pet in the first place. Pets have risks of illness.
JD- You should totally go veg, you’ll love it! And also, I think Donna Freedman’s comment about how “Fido deserves better” was total BS. People that give up their pets ARE NOT giving them a better life. They’re ensuring the animal’s death in a cold, concrete shelter. How is that better? I would seriously live in my car before I’d give up my dogs because I’m a good person who stands by my commitments.
@Cole Brodine- You’re making yourself sound pretty heartless- you may want to think about that next time.
These domesticated animals use to serve a purpose… Hunting dog, a Foxer, a cat mouser, a shepard dog, a sled dog, etc…. “Pets” were created to be used as a tool for a specific function.
However these days you buy a $2000 dog and put $50 sweaters on them… or the other extreme is you save a pet from a kill shelter and then spend thousands on medical care down the road when it developes problems.
It would be much better for you to put the animal down and save the money or donate the money you would have spent to a animal shelter.
With some pet problems your just delaying the suffering for your own personal gain which is to keep them alive so you can be happy at the expense of the animals suffering. There is a point in time that you just need to make the decision to let them go, at times for the animals well being.
I find it revolting that people spend thousands of dollars on a pet when so many children starve or have no shoes, or can’t afford the great gift of books. There are so many better things to spend money on.
Just recently lost my 14 year old husky that our family loved. The last four weeks we gave him “hospice” type care and he truly enjoyed his life. Mostly because he got to eat all he wanted, don’t we all wish we could go out that way? I just wanted to add that during the last couple years he was on medication for hip issues. My vet was the one that told me one prescription could be filled under the four dollar plan at Wal-mart. It was much higher at her clinic and I would never have thought of that. I also found 1-800petmeds was much cheaper for his higher cost medication. They were great and if you researched and found the drug cheaper at another internet site, they would match that price. I saved a lot this way and its a good tip for others who like me loved our family member but needed to save too. Lastly we truly believe you must let them go when they loose quality of life and not keep them around just because you will miss them!
Maybe the reaction to the last post was based on the assumption that people who get rid of their animals due to financial stress send them straight to be euthanized.
As others have said - there’s probably an in-between solution. One of my best friends just adopted a dog from a family that loved him but could no longer keep him. Win-win for everyone, including Stanley the dog. Similarly, my husband, who works in the juvenile courts system, knows many families where the financial (and psychological) condition of the parents prevents them from keeping their *human children* - and relatives step in to fill the gap. Sometimes the loving thing to do for our pets (or our children) is to let someone else care for them. Giving up our pets can be a responsible AND loving way to handle our lives. For some families, keeping the pet might actually be the selfish choice.
We each have to make our own choices and live with them.
There is a line, but most people don’t want to think about it, and don’t, until they are forced to cross it.
When I lost my job several years ago, (and had to report my former employer for non-payment of wages for my last month’s salary), I was BROKE. Worse than broke. I had only been out of college for a few months, and had only a few hundred saved up, which was gone in 6 weeks. I had to borrow money from my parents to pay one month’s rent, and my boyfriend’s parents to pay another month’s. It was 3 months before I found work and another month before I got paid at that job. I went from April to August without a paycheck. In July, I finally broke down and called the rescue to take back my cat. One woman seemed sympathetic, but another wrote me a nasty email that put me in tears for a long time whenever I thought about it. She told me I was a horrible person who should never own another pet.
I now have a dog, who I love dearly, and would go to great lengths to keep him, and keep him in good health. But the other day I heard a woman say to another person about how she had spent $9,000 in the last few months on vet bills. NINE THOUSAND DOLLARS. I was aghast. As much as I love my dog, I wouldn’t go into that kind of debt to keep him alive. If that makes me a horrible person, well I guess I am.
I wish that I were tougher on this, and could say that ‘I won’t spend more than $xx’ to keep the cats well, etc. But the truth is, we have already accepted that they will shed hair all over our life, wake us up way too early, and scratch our couch. We love having their life presence in the house, and the difference it makes in our lives.
I honestly have no idea how we will decide how much medical care is too much. But in response to those who feel pet care expenses are lavish or outrageous, well, we’ve saved the money and will spend it how we damn well please.
Let’s say you adopt a dog who turns out cannot adapt to apartment living. What do you do? Move to a house, or try to find a better home for the dog?
As Ari Gold famously quipped - “Even broccoli screams when you rip it out of the ground.” Pets = animals pure and simple.
Sometimes even if you love animals, having a pet is just stupid and cruel to the animal. Having a pet is expensive! Anyone who isn’t in a very secure financial situation should never even get a pet in the first place. way too many people who are unemployed or just out of college get pets, IMO. They should pay more attention to what the pet needs and if they can actually afford it before taking on the responsibility.
Although I agree that pets are not equivalent to children, I think they should be treated very well if you do have them.
In my part of the country (rural midwest), too many people own big dogs like labs or goldens but just keep them shut up in their garage all day & night (in the winter) or staked on a chain in their small yard (in the short summer).
The animals typically aren’t trained or socialized or taken for regular walks or given any vet care–and they bark all the time from boredom. And I’m sorry to say that some people when they have their first baby, realize they can’t afford the dog or they worry it’s going to bite the baby, so they just take it out to the quarry and shoot it in the head.
It’s the lack of money that leads to this kind of bad treatment of animals (especially the lack of vet care)–yet, all these people would say they “love” their dog(s). I think they should just realize they can’t affort to treat the dog right and forego being pet owners.
Even though I can afford it, I refuse to get
a pet at this point in my life because I know I can’t take care of it properly. I live in a suburban neighborhood (so the pet would have to be kept indoors all day), I have 2 small children and I work full+ time at a demanding job. What kind of a life would a dog have? I don’t have any time to spend with a dog–my available time is spent with my kids–, and I’d have to keep it penned up in my garage or yard most of the time.
I think what miffed a lot of pet lovers is that this family still has a *lot* more they can cut before turning to something like giving up their dogs. If you can’t afford to care for an animal or if it comes to feeding the animal or your kids, that’s one thing, but in the case of Michael, his dogs are an excuse to rent the house they want to rent, not the reason or the real problem. I’m sure he has an excuse for why his whole family needed their iGadgets, why he needs a new car. He wasn’t even willing to LOOK at the $500/mo place you found. He’s not trying to change his situation at all, so really, what do the two dogs matter in comparison with the hundreds, if not thousands, they are spending on wants?
I know JD is a pet-lover, and I think if the comment about getting rid of the dogs had been made about a family who had already tried everything and couldn’t afford them, most readers would have understood. In this case, though, it seemed premature, even though I know it was just a passing comment. They are living beyond their means, and the dogs are small costs in comparison to the big gains that could be made by cutting back on wants. I don’t own an iPhone, and you can bet if I did that I’d cut that before I ever considered giving away my cat.
As for me, I’d pay a lot for my cat…I don’t have a set point, though. But if she was in pain and I would only be prolonging it, I’d let her go. I’ll always put her well-being ahead of my sadness in losing her. Yes, animals are not people, but I will still treat mine with love and respect, and consider her needs because she’s basically helpless, and her quality of life matters to me.
Jenny (#25) I think hit it right on the money.
I have a dog, whom I love, and hey, I might not have a huge yard and tons of money to dote on her, but she has a good life. I know that if things got really rough, she has a place to go that isn’t a shelter (where she’d most likely be put down because she isn’t a puppy, see http://blogs.catster.com/the-cats-meow-a-cat-and-kitten-blog/shelter-rant/2009/01/29/ and http://www.princeofpetworth.com/2010/05/dear-pop-washington-humane-society-issues/). And I thought about all of these things before I adopted her. Growing up with pets, and taking an active role in their care, I understood that pets are a huge responsibility and I was willing to accept that. If you don’t, that is fine. Just don’t get a pet.
I definitely had a reaction to your earlier post. And it’s because of what Jenny talked about, so many irresponsible people get pets and think of them as a luxury in the way they think of a car or a piece of art. When things get rough they can just give them to the animal shelter cause thats what they are there for right? They have this idea that the dog will end up with a caring family with a huge yard (see the link above about what happens to most pets in shelters). Or, in the case of cats and reptiles, they just set them loose in the neighborhood or a local park. Pets aren’t people, but they are living, breathing things that rely on us to live. And there are pet owners who understand this, but several do not. It’s not responsibly rehoming a pet after you’ve exhausted all other options that is the issue, it’s the idea that “well, get rid of your dogs” is a legitimate suggestion, when clearly these people with their iphones are not in completely dire straits. It legitimizes this attitude that pets are as disposable as a comic book collection or a car. It’s an attitude that allows puppy mills and irresponsible breeders to exist, which necessitates squalid, overcrowded shelters.
Obviously, JD, you don’t feel that way. I think that’s just how it came off to people.
I agree with you. I LOVE animals, but I do believe there is a BIG difference between animals and humans.
I also don’t believe that spending such a huge amount extra just to keep a pet is right when you are having a hard time to make ends meet, it SHOULD be an option to let them go. It would not be easy at all. My little dog sleeps by my side any time she can, when I’d sitting, I don’t know where I end and she begins, she sits so tight;)
I’m with #43, April.
i guess i should clarify my position on my “stupid and lucky” cat that is quite happy and purr-y since his neutering.
i grew up on a farm. i’ve personally slaughtered >1,000 chickens, and helped to butcher dozens of cows and pigs. i’ve also had a career as an emt, and seen people die, seen people die due to complications of neglect or accident. sorry, i just can’t get as worked up about domesticated, non-food animals like you can. (oh, and my farm experience turned me into a vegetarian about 30 years ago). lulu says meow, and cries a bit to know that people are sacrificing their own well-being and happiness for the sake of… well, i’ll just stop now.
kitty says meow, and still has several years left in him, despite all of the heartbreaking stories of the billions of dollars that pets cost.
don’t believe me? then refute this:
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/pf/06/peteconomics.asp?viewed=1
The APPMA estimates that, in total, Americans spent $43.2 billion on their pets in 2008. That’s money that’s not going into savings accounts, money that isn’t feeding hungry children, money that isn’t going into education or providing healthcare to humans or… oh, crap, i said i was going to stop, didn’t i?
kitty is budgeted $400/year for food and litter, and there’s enough left over for toys and catnip. hasn’t needed a vet, and is perfectly healthy despite all admonishments that vet visits are a ritual.
deciding to let go of a pet can be a financial issue, or an emotional issue. good luck trying to balance the two (as comments here seem to indicate, it’s a polarizing issue).
The problem is often people in poverty take public assistance AND keep pets. So essentially, I’m working hard to pay extra taxes so this guy can have two dogs, when I, myself, decided I should not get another dog because of the expense. I don’t mind paying taxes to keep children fed, but dogs? No. The dogs ARE better off elsewhere where someone can take care of them without using taxpayers’ money.
JD,
I’ve never posted before, but this post really resonanted with me. It is evident that you love your pets very much and they are lucky to have you and Chris to take care of them. When the time comes to make the decision with Toto, I hope you are at peace with whatever that may be. As for the line–I think the it is different for everyone–it really ties into how you view your pets and what your current financial situation is. I didn’t hesistate to spend several thousand dollars to treat my cat when he was sick, because I thought he had a lot of quality time left. When it came time to make the decision to have him put to sleep, I did that too. I volunteer for a no-kill cat shelter and we get animals all the time from owners that couldn’t afford or couldn’t keep their animals. It happens. I would just encourage people to explore all their options before surrending their pet.
On one hand I have seen many instances of people who really shouldn’t have had pets, ranging from people neglecting their pets, leaving them without food or not bringing them to the vet (too expensive) to hoarder types. So I don’t agree that having a pet is “forever” because it encourages people to hold onto animals they simply cannot take care of (not saying his friend is at that point yet). In the same way, people can lose custody of their children if they cannot provide for them.
On the other hand, I have known a homeless vet who had two dogs; he lived in his car with his dogs. He was offered transitional housing but turned it down because he would have to give up his dogs to do that, who were like family to him and the only continuity and support he had in his life for many years. Some people can understand his position, others will not. I personally wished they were able to work with this vet so that they could accomodate housing with his special circumstances.
JD: This sentence couldn’t be more wrong, and it’s part of the problem with both of your posts: “I mentioned that although my friend Michael is in dire financial straits, he’s still making life decisions based around the fact that his family has two dogs.”
Michael is not really making financial decisions around his dogs. It’s an excuse. It’s a crutch. It’s like saying he’s making financial decisions around his child’s “need” for technology, when he just wants to buy her Apple gadgets and avoid a possible tantrum. Michael got a fancier house than he needed because that’s what he wanted to do. His family is used to living as they want, regardless of finances. They are used to having luxuries, regardless of financial practicality. They are used to thinking short-term. They don’t want to change their ways.
The dogs would have been just as happy in the $500 place. It would have been temporary. Animals don’t care (much). Millions of people have animals in very small spaces in urban centers, and they make adjustments that allow them to care ethically for their animals. My friend has a big dog in a her studio apartment. She takes it on a couple of walks and a run daily.
Michael could have found a way to keep the dogs even if he and his family were living out of a van. Don’t use the dogs as a scape goat for Michael’s endless, stupid financial decisions. The dogs just want love and good care - they don’t care that they are living in a $1300 place.
People choose to acquire animals. Once that choice is made, they should do everything within reason to ensure that the animal has a high-quality life. If I ever had to give up my animals (which I would never do; I’d be homeless with them first, and I’m not saying that out of naivete), I’d at least find them a good home. Don’t take your animals to shelters, people! The vast majority of all animals that go to shelters are killed. Some shelters, especially those in the South and in poor areas, have kill rates of over 93%.
A lot of my choices have been dictated by my need to provide for my pets. I’ve made several cross-country moves with cats and dogs. I’ve bought houses when I might have been better served by renting until I knew the area because I couldn’t find a rental that would take pets. 3 years ago I had to live in a 1977 travel trailer parked in the driveway of a friend for 2 months and it was not fun. I was in between selling one house and moving to another. Once in 2005 I paid around $1400 to diagnose and try to save one of my furry family. Yes, the costs of pets adds up and I give mine better food than most people do. Regular vet care is a necessity not a luxury.
The need to provide for the animals has actually been one of the driving forces in getting financially healthy. The lower your credit score, the less likely you are to be able to borrow, and the less you have in savings, the more vulnerable you are. Having money will dictate your choices on what care you can afford. If you lose your income you might be faced with having to give up your family.
I don’t buy expensive clothes, have only been to Spain and that was to visit a friend, I don’t collect anything, I don’t have expensive hobbies anymore, I use the library a lot. My car is over 10 years old. I still have a mortgage but I bought far less house and even when I loved I went to a house in the country with less amenities and lower value. I live much more frugally than any of my friends.
If I lost it all I am not sure exactly at what point I would face giving up my furry family members. I would try to place my animals well but in case people don’t realize it there are still upwards of 3 million pets killed in this country ever single year in shelters/pounds/animal control facilities, because there are simply too many of them. Actually, this is a hot-button for me and so I am not going to be as logical as I would like, as I volunteer at my local humane society. People who don’t regard their pets as having worth dump them into their backyards and ignore them. Then when the going gets tough they bring them to us and dump them. Those animals don’t trust people and don’t know how to coexist with other animals. It is hard to see perfectly nice animals treated as poorly as we have seen. And as hard as we try there are still animals euthanized because there are too many of them and they don’t do well in the stress of living in close quarters with other animals.
I admire and commend the homeless people I see travelling or panhandling with their pets because they are far stronger and better human beings in my mind than the people who drive away from the animal shelter in their over-priced new model cars to their houses they can’t afford. I would fight tooth and nail to keep my animals.
I currently have 3 dogs, no cats, and one of the dogs was supposed to be a foster dog that turned out to be too shy to adopt to just anyone. They are an inspiration to keep getting more money into savings.
It always restores my faith in mankind whenever people defend dogs and cats on their behalf, such as many commenters have here, and yet I understand the pecking order of animals in dire financial straits too.
I can’t help but recall the choice that an elderly man made on behalf of his 3 miniature dachshunds. He was walking them in a park on leashes and we struck up a conversation about how endearing that breed was. He agreed with me and told me that he recently was divorced and that he told his ex that she could keep the house if he could keep the dogs! She agreed, and so he bought a trailer and said that he was a happy camper. Clearly he was. He had a smile from ear to ear and was absolutely beaming of his good fortune to get full custody of the dogs!
I’m only sharing our story, because we’ve put a lot of thought into this at our house. Unlike many commenters, we’ve had pets before and during kids. We don’t have any pets now, because we can barely keep up with ourselves and the kids.
We had cats before kids, and our cats were our “kids.” One of the reasons (no, NOT the only reason) we bought a house when we did was to accommodate our cats. In fact, when the younger cat had sudden kidney failure, we invested a lot of money at the emergency vet, only to have her immediately die.
Then, we actually had kids. Given the demands of our our average, normal, healthy kids, the cat was definitely not an actual child. We simply didn’t have the quiet time in our lives to enjoy her as much, and our financial resources and goals dramatically changed. We decided that financial security of our family was more important than very expensive medical treatments for pets. We went into every vet appointment with an idea of what we were willing to invest in our pets’ health.
In the end, the remaining cat became very ill, and we weren’t willing to spend a lot of money to keep her alive and suffering. We were sad, but had her put down.
And now, we’re not willing to invest our affections, energy, or money in a pet.
When the kids are older, I think DH and I will want a pet or two again, and be willing to invest what it takes to keep them happy and healthy. I don’t see that being for several more years, though!
Over the last year I had to move 4 times for various reasons. The hardest part was finding a place that allowed cats that was very cheap and within my budget. My cat amazingly dealt with the moving pretty well, though I had to miss out on renting a few nice and cheap places since they were not pet friendly. For a while I had a friend look after my cat while I stayed with other friends.
While moving around a lot, a major option I had to consider was giving him up. He was my cuddly friend that was with me for years and was like my own child, but I also had to figure out what was best for both of us. Fortunately, I never had to give him up and he is probably lounging at the top of the stairs, while I’m at work, being a cute giant ball of fuzz.
I agree with this article. There are options, but when the situation isn’t best for you or the pet (especially the pet) then you need to make the hard decisions.
95% of people I know who say their pets are like kids don’t have kids, and the rest are very vulnerable (elderly, sick, etc). My cat was my baby until I became a parent for real.
My cat is 20 now and has outlasted about a half dozen other pets (most due to death). She has been my companion since I was seven. I have paid plenty of pet deposits and vet bills in that time. She has been going through kidney failure for six years. She has bad arthritis and sleeps most of the time. I can’t give her most meds due to her kidneys.
My German Shepherd is four and he has already cost more than my cat in his life because he rushes in where others fear to tread and I think he feels no pain. He has hurt himself pretty severely and the hardest part of treating him is getting him to stop playing (”Titan, no more fetch! There’s blood all over the deck and I’m pretty sure it’s yours.”) We have spent more than one night in the E-vet office waiting for him to be stitched up.
This leads me to my vet philosophy. I will pay what it takes to stitch up wounds. Chronic health problems, however, will likely result in euthanasia. This is due to expense as well as comfort of the animal (getting repeated treatments/medication) and myself (giving repeated treatments/medication). I might feel differently if I lived in a world where animals weren’t euthanized simply because there are too many souls and not enough homes, but I don’t and doubt I ever will simply because of how quickly they can reproduce. Why would I spend thousands of dollars treating feline leukemia when I can instead rescue another cat and donate the money to provide care to how many cats for how long? Is my current cat’s life worth more because it happens to hold my affection? Most people aren’t paying for the care of the cat because it is their responsibility, but because THEY want the cat to live longer.
And for those of you that think pets and people have a moral equivalent: Many people choose to die rather than undergo treatments. My grandmother accepted death rather than undergo invasive surgery. I think in health cases we need to think of animals as more like the elderly than kids. Our animals will likely die before us, that’s the nature of the system. So even if there WERE a moral equivalent I would do more for my kid than my pet. I would also do more for my kid than my parent or grandparent, and any and all of them would expect that and make the same choices. I would also do more for a young animal than an older animal. Resources are limited. It’s always a balance.
Regarding if/when I would give up my pets if I hit the financial skids, I would do what I could to find new homes for my dogs when I was on the verge of losing my home. If I couldn’t find homes, I would turn them over to the humane society when it became a matter of survival (having food and shelter) for myself and my family.
And you know what? If I didn’t have food and shelter for my daughter I would rehome her as well. With family and friends if possible, with the state as a last resort. Just until I got my feet back under me and could provide basic necessities of life. The separation is traumatic, but so is homelessness and not knowing if there will be food at the next meal. We offered to take a family member’s kids last year. She’s a user and a loser, taking drugs while nursing, and exposing her little ones to all sorts of bad things. She refused because SHE would miss THEM (we convinced her to stop nursing and we left the issue to the authorities).
And I think that’s what it comes down to with a lot of pet owners as well as parents. They wrap their need in noble words, but it’s not about responsible pet ownership or parenting, but about meeting their own needs to be depended on and loved.
As much as I love my cats, there is no way I would jeopardize my family’s financial future for them. If our circumstances deteriorated to the point where we could no longer support them it would be in their best interests to find them new homes. Both were rescues, and they have already lived far longer, healthier, happier lives with us than they would have as feral cats. We have limits on what we’re willing to spend on vets and treatments, and they include palliative care in the event of severe illness but nothing major or radical. They cats, and they are not going to live for ever.
And I agree with others that say Michael was not making financial decisions with the dogs in mind. Like everything else, they were an excuse to continue putting off dealing with his financial problems.
Ole!!
Dee
Pets are like children in one way - you have to consider the decision in advance and prepare for all outcomes. Part and parcel of my cat decision is “do I have several alternate homes where people will take him in should I be temporarily or permanently unable to take care of him, for whatever reason.”
Mind you, part of the outrage at the original post (mine, at least!) was the language choice. For a lot of irresponsible pet owners, “get rid of” doesn’t mean finding a new caring home for the pet - it means either putting them down at the vet’s, throwing them out of a moving car, or in extreme cases killing the pet with their own hands. It’s important to make this distinction and make clear which course of action you’re recommending.
I will grant that the language choice in the original post (my use of “get rid of”) was unfortunate. At no time did I mean putting the animals down. It was just me being lazy with my vocabulary skills…
@moogie
Does your municipality not require vaccinations, or do you not count that? I take my pets in on a regular basis for that reason. When I had no money I took my cat to shot clinics instead, but even then they did a cursory exam of ears, eyes, etc. When my cat was ~15 the vet told me not to bother anymore because her risk was so low, but I was faithful before that if only to cover my own butt legally.
There have been times in the past where I was out of groceries for a few days because I spent the last of the grocery money on cat food. (I had two cats that I adopted when I was 19).
But now I have a child, and he comes before the cats.
The other issue for me is the balance of suffering for the animal. When elderly people in my family have gotten sick enough that they refused care, they were allowed hospice care -just painkillers and help with bathing/bathroom/movement. That’s what we did with our elderly cat, except when he got to the point he couldn’t breathe and seemed afraid all the time, I had the option of euthanasia.
With younger animals it’s a lot harder decision. We did spend $1700 on bladder surgery for a young cat - I don’t think I would, on my own, I kept thinking “I could donate this to Partners in Health and provide health care for poor children” but my partner really wanted to. The vet we’d been going to wanted $4000 for the surgery,but I shopped around and found a much cheaper vet.
Incidentally, I just plain like the cheaper vet a lot more. (I prefer country vets, their attitude is a lot more pragmatic generally. But the hour drive isn’t worth it to me anymore.)
The expensive vet seemed to always be implying that we were bad people because we had cost concerns about veterinary care - not only was it irritating to feel judged by the vets, but it made me distrust their advice because I always felt like they were upselling me.
Like many people on this site, my wife and I were rather financially stressed after having purchased our first home. One of the reasons I wanted a home in the first place was to have the freedom to adopt and care for a dog. Like many decisions, you convince yourself what you’re doing is best or at least okay, so who knows if I made the “right” decision. However, the decision to adopt a dog was based in part knowing how the dog would affect our already tight finances. Rather than just looking at the basic food costs and the possibility of an emergency we couldn’t afford, we also looked at the dog as a way to change our habits. Instead of having 2 $20/month memberships to gyms, we committed to walk, jog, or otherwise play with the dog everyday, which seemed to make up for the $40 in food he would consume -on a side note, I wonder if I could get my grocery bill down to $40 per month. Since my wife and I are away during the day, wanting/needing to spend time with the dog at night would give us gentle incentive to not go out to dinner on weeknights (something we did too often and spent too much money on). Owning a dog does not help us completely cut out every “unnecessary” expense, but it has certainly changed our priorities and altered several bad spending habits.
RE animal intelligence, this article blew me away and I thought you might like it:
http://www.oprah.com/relationships/What-Pets-and-Wild-Animals-Are-Thinking-Animals-and-Emotions
@ Shara #61, Lulu is indoors only, and hasn’t had his license renewed since his first year. I live in a >1M urban area, and if animal control really wants to check in on him, well, I hope they have a warrant to enter my house!¹ lol. He’s not exposed to any other animals than myself, so I’m not too worried about tics, fleas, worms, or rabies. He’s 12 and has never had a booster shot, so I’m not about to start now.
¹ funny story, a friend of mine has 3 cats and was adopting his 2nd dog from the pound. his girlfriend filled out the paperwork, and there were 4 spaces for existing pets. she filled in all of the blanks. whoops, adopting this dog would put you over the limit of “4 pets per household.” i still tease her about it to this day (4 years later). TMI, and just because there are spaces to write all of your pets’ names in doesn’t mean that you have to fill up all of the empty lines.
@Mindy (#64)
Yes, that sort of stuff is exactly what I’m talking about. The author of that article (Eugene Linden) has written some great books about animal intelligence. Like him, I believe that anyone who takes the time to slow down and observe and interact with animals cannot help but see these creatures do have rich emotional and intellectual lives. No, there are no dolphin cities (Rush Limbaugh’s common but stupid complain that animals are dumb), but there are plenty of other examples of ways in which animals are intelligent — much more intelligent than we credit them.
Thanks for sharing that article.
My pets are my family. Period. They were the only companionship I had for about 3 years of grad school, they are the only company I have on Easter/Thanksgiving/Christmas, and during a really rotten stretch last year they were often the only reason I got out of bed because I had to take care of them. Yes they can be brats or disgusting or destructive and sometimes they make me nuts. But they are my family.
I chose to have surgery on a guinea pig, even though it meant sacrifices in my budget (he lived another year). I choose to take my cats to the vet yearly and to figure out how to make emergency trips work financially after I take them. I know they aren’t people but they deserve the best care I can give them, especially since 2 of them were abused before I got them. I chose to adopt them, it is my responsibility to care for them for the rest of their lives.
Several people have pointed out I could probably afford driving lessons/a car if I didn’t have 3 cats. I’d rather take public transit forever than give up my cats.
From the article Mindy (#64) linked to:
Animal intelligence and personal finance all in one! Now, if only there were some comic books involved in the story, it would be perfect….
Beth @ 48: What a petty attitude! Perhaps we should ban people on benefits from going to the movies, owning a mobile, buying books and paying for their child’s piano lessons too, while we’re at it? All of these things are clearly a luxury on taxpayer’s expense!
I would think of it in another way: a person depending on welfare benefits is in a real danger of dropping out of employment and social life entirely. Having a dog gives immense health and social benefits: it forces people to go out and exercise, provides social contacts and essentially makes them feel needed. Such therapy would be much more expensive if provided via our public healthcare system or social services.
Another thing to keep in mind is that the amount of benefit money per person is not increased because they have a pet. Essentially, these people make do with less for thrmselves to support a pet. I for one would not want to start telling people what to do with the money they are legally entitled to - that would be extreme nanny statism.
Thanks for addressing this. Like at least one other reader, your wording in Wednesday’s article bugged me a little, but I knew the place you were coming from, and your overall advice (and subsequent realizations regarding judging or not) were sound. Rehoming (either temporarily or permanently) a pet would definitely fall into the “desperate times call for desperate measures” category, but those times do happen.
I’m very sorry to hear about Toto.
Hi JD:
So sorry about Toto. I know, firsthand, how hard it is. Some people “have” pets, others love them to the point of craziness. I fall into the latter group. My pets mean everything to me. I have four dogs and two kitties, and a son. Yes, he is woefully outnumbered here by our 4-legged babies. No matter how much I love and NEED my pets, of course, my son always comes first. If it was a choice between being homeless and being petless, the hard choice would be to be petless. However, I would work twice as hard and eat PB&J everday to keep my pets, while feeding my son healthy foods. If I didn’t have my son, I would probably live homeless just to keep my pets, but I couldn’t put my son in that situation, for ANY reason. Having children in the equation definitely changes your priorities, no matter how deeply you love your pets. And I do truly love love love my pets, and spoil them rotten while denying myself luxuries I might be able to afford, if it weren’t for my pets. A trade I feel is well-worth it.
Päivi, please allow me to make a few edits to what you said.
Having a dog can gives immense health and social benefits: it can forces people to go out and exercise, can provides social contacts and essentially makes them feel needed. Such therapy can would be much more expensive if provided via our public healthcare system or social services.
So, where is this line for you? My line is when the costs of our pets start effecting our actual living expenses. I will spend/have spent a few thousand on my dogs for a removeable tumor, teeth extractions/cleanings, and allergy issues. I wouldn’t pay for treatments that might not work though. If my 12 year old dachshund-mutt gets cancer, I’ll pay for meds to keep her feeling good as long as possible, but I won’t spend thousands on a treatment that may not work.
How long do you keep a pet, even when you can’t really afford it? We wouldn’t have gotten our dogs if we couldn’t afford them. We even waited until our emergency fund was at least 3 months and included pet expenses.
Do you sacrifice your family’s well-being for that of the animal? No.
How do you prioritize when you have to make a sacrifice? Our dogs are prioritized right after the basics - shelter, food, utilities, cars (we live in a Houston suburb and there is no bus to our jobs), internet (I’m a blogger and that’s how we would job hunt anyway), then the dogs. We’d give up all other entertainment and extras before we’d give up the dogs.
Is it ever better to give up an animal than to fail at other obligations? I’d give up my dogs before living on the streets (my in-laws could take them for a while)…I can’t believe Steve’s mom (#8 above) did that to her kid. My heart goes out to Steve.
People have to relize that pets are animals, yes animals. When we decide to get a pet we are making a decision dedicate our rescources to let beast live better then the majority of fellow man. and more selfishly just thinke of how much the average parent spends on a pet and that could go to a childs education.
Some times Pets can be a great asset.
-Cat’s catch mice(most other types of mouse traps are much cheaper).
-Some Dog’s protect family & personal property.
-you can teach some animals to perform very small chores my old dog would go get the sews paper from the end of my 200 ft drive way and my current dog gets me a beer out of the fridge then closes the door.
-an animal can be a great companion(this is a hard thhing to put a value on)
Pets can be liabilities to
-Emergancy vet bills can really add up.
-dogs can be fairly destructive chewing things up, damaging land scaping.
-increase in home owners insurance
- animals bring in bugs and diesas such as ticks flees (last night my pregnat wife )
-if you want to go away you have to find someone to care for a pet
-neighbor issues
-Pet odors can really hurt the resale value of a home.
- and many more
I am a guilty pet owner, My dog is a great friend and gives me a lot of companionship I really care for for my dog but I do believe that my resources probally could have been better spent.
-If you are thinking about getting a pet watch “Marly and Me” and add up all of the added cost the family went through and ask yourself can you afford this , would your rescourse be better used somplace else and are you prepared to make this commitment.
“If you’ve already got dogs when the financial hard times hit, well then too bad, they’re still your responsibility. You can’t get rid of the kids, can’t get rid of the dogs. ”
A generation ago, my husband was adopted at birth. His birth parents were financially troubled, young, some what dysfunctional, and they did not believe in abortion. Of their eight children over fifteen years, they gave up three babies to be adopted at birth. They were not evil people; they just seemed unable to care for all their babies, and I am blessed that my husband lived and was cared for by good people. I am not slamming anyone, as we dearly love our pets, and I still grieve more for some of my deceased pets than I do for some people that have passed through my life. We have been privileged and honored to care for our pets, but we also recognize that good homes may be found for people and pets when societal, religious, financial, or personal reasons happen in a life that make it impossible to be good, responsible parents of kids or pets. It was not a frivolous reason for letting go of someone, nor was it easy (emotional, legal and state reviews, financial, family and church criticism) and I try not to judge. Some people have to make difficult decisions at some points in their lives, and try to be responsible in whatever action they make - keeping or adopting.
I think it’s an interesting subject.
I was one of the vocal people on that article, but I’d like to point out that what really got to me was that your friends had bought 3 iPhones and an iPod, was planning on getting a new car, etc.
In a situation like that, doing all of that and yet getting rid of pets for “financial reasons” just wouldn’t sit with me. As for renting a bigger place, I don’t think having dog would be his only reason for that. While I don’t know him and could be very wrong, the article in question led me to believe that he cares a lot about his comfort.
Anyway, all of that and, as pointed out, your unfortunate choice of words, led me to make my comment. It is simply not something I would suggest to someone in his situation (and I do realise that you didn’t suggest it to him, either).
I wrote a testimony about my case of over-saving a little while back. I would skip meals to save, I didn’t buy anything but the basic needs, and so on. But my cat? I still bought her the good food, the one I trusted wouldn’t be unhealthy for her. I was lucky enough that she was perfectly healthy, but if she had shown the first sign of not being so, I would have brought her to the vet.
I think it’s the dependency thing. I could inflict things on myself - and, to some extent, my husband - because we’re responsible adults who could sacrifice things for long-term reasons, and knew why we were doing it. If I had made my cat go through this, in my mind it would have just been abuse.
There is also the kind of cat she is. I have been gone for weekends before, and people who took care of her - my husband, my in-laws - told me she would just lie on something that smelled like me (my bed, my clothes) and stay there all day, not eat, not do anything. I don’t trust in her survival if she was away from me, so yes, in her case, I would keep her if I was homeless.
I think it has a lot to do with the fact I rescued her as she was still a kitten who would normally still be breastfeeding. From her point of view, I am probably the closest thing she has to a mother. And she is just that dependent. Cats tend to be territorial, they get attached to the place they live in, but the vet told me that basically, I am her territory. She didn’t care at all when she moved from France to Canada, but if she’s away from me, she’ll suffer from it.
This being said, we now have a second cat, who found us in October. He had two hernias, and was a stray. We took him in, he is the most affectionate cat I have even known. I love him just as much, but in his case, I could see how having a different owner who could take proper care of him would be more humane than having him stay with us. He loves us too, but not in the same way.
So I think it also depends from one animal to the next.
As for keeping animals alive, it really depends on the whole context, but I think in many cases, for the pet’s sake it’s not worth it. Might as well let them go when their life is still worth living. I think at some point, keeping them alive becomes selfish more than selfless, if I’m making sense. Of course it depends on their condition too.
I don’t have children, so I can only try and guess, but the way I see it, I would try and act the way I would if the pets were a child. That is, if I had one child, I’d try and think of how I would act if I had two children. Obviously, I wouldn’t neglect one for the other. If I had two, I’d wonder how I’d act if I had three, etc.
In that case, all pets would be grouped as “one child” rather than each count as one. The point wouldn’t be to consider them human, because they’re not, it would be to remind myself that it’s not necessarily a choice between the two, since if the pets were a child I definitely wouldn’t consider neglecting one child in favour of another one.
If the choice was slightly different, that is, if for instance I wanted a child but had a pet I knew wouldn’t be compatible (either that the child would be bad for the pet or the pet for the child), I wouldn’t have a child. I would take care of the being that is already there. Possibly consider delaying my plans until the pets are dead, but not in a “I’m waiting for you to die” way, if I’m making sense. It just wouldn’t make sense for me to “get rid” of an existing being who trusts me in favour of an hypothetical being who doesn’t even exist yet.
I have two cats that I adore. The last one we took in as a stray and spent $1300 getting her rotten teeth pulled out, tests to confirm she didn’t have any communicable diseases she could pass on to our other cat and so forth. Not to mention the fact that she has a missing paw.
I did have pet insurance on our other cat but became paranoid reading about pet insurance companies not honoring their end of the deal. Instead I setup a savings account for my two cats for future pet bills and their annual check ups.
That being said, I don’t believe I would be willing to drain all of my savings in vet bills if one or both of the cats become sick. I did have a previous cat that I had to put to sleep because the treatments for kidney failure were not guaranteed nor would they provide a better quality of life. I was not earning much in those days and the vet bills would have been around $5,000 for just the initial treatment.
I do think if I had an unending supply of money then I would absolutely try everything it takes to get them better. That comes with the privilege of wealth to afford these vet treatments that *might* work.
Basically what I am saying is you won’t really know what to do once that hard decision is placed in front of you. You have to weigh what is ultimately best for your pet and yourself.
@Avistew (#76)
What a lot of people seem to be missing, however, is the timeline of that conversation. I didn’t know about the possible car purchase and the definite phone purchase when I made the comment about the dogs. That occurred early in the conversation, before all of this other stuff was revealed to me.
But the unfortunate word choice? Yeah, that was my fault.
Hi JD
The original post struck such a cord because the suggestion that your friend get rid of the dogs seemed to be a quick financial fix - your friend isn’t homeless or struggling to feed himself or his family.
Sue may be right to a point. If you are in dire straits, the best option for your pet may be to relinquish it, and sure people draw their lines in different places, but if ditching a pet is one of the first things you consider to cut costs, I question your ethics and your right to have a life in your care.
I work with an animal rescue agency here in Australia, and we can maybe take 10% of the domestic pets in our area that need to be rehomed. The other 90% are euthanised because too many people are lazy/selfish/greedy/don’t care/whatever. It’s disgraceful.
A few years ago I adopted a pair of kittens with the intent that they’d help control the mice in my mountain home, and also keep each other company while I was at work. I have a conservation ethic and told my housemate that I didn’t want them going outside where they would kill local wildlife and take food away from native predators. I’ve witnessed a pair of cats that could each kill 3-5 small animals every day- mice, voles, rabbits, birds, snakes etc. Songbirds are declining around the world and domesticated cats are right next to habitat destruction as a cause.
My housemate didn’t share my ethic. The first cat disappeared after being let out and was likely eaten by a coyote or cougar (at least we fed the local wildlife… maybe I’m wrong about my ethic?).
My housemate again let the other cat out. We found her late on a Saturday night, wounded but alive. She’d clearly been attacked and had bite wounds on both sides of her abdomen. It was easy to imagine her in a coyote’s mouth, based on the pattern.
I admired her tenacity fighting off something so much larger and took her to the vet (she seemed to be in shock though not bleeding too badly). We started with X-rays, then exploratory surgery and then the real operation to repair torn intestines and a punctured kidney. Before it was over I was in $1700.
I realized I couldn’t prevent this from happening again and ended up moving (extreme but it was time to find less expensive housing anyway).
I sometimes call her my golden cat. I’ve been in some rough spots where I didn’t have much will to live, and I can say she helped me through them and has repaid the favor well.
If I had outdoor pets, I’d definitely have insurance for them. I probably would be wise to get it anyway for her, just in case she ever escapes.
moogie: Indeed, but I notice you didn’t address the real issue of my post: having a pet does not affect the amount of welfare people are entitled to, and it doesn’t even affect whether they are entitled to benefits or not. Benefits, if I’m not mistaken, are means-tested in the US: therefore a person who is entitled to them would be entitled to them whether they have a pet or not.
Unless we’re dealing with idealistic (and unattainable) stuff like “I wish they’d spend their benefits on education and hearty gruel”, I don’t see how an umployed person having a cat or a dog is a waste of taxpayer’s money as Beth seems to suggest. As a matter of fact, it rather seems to suggest that benefits in general are a waste of taxpayer’s money.
jac, #75, you said:
I still grieve more for some of my deceased pets than I do for some people that have passed through my life.
Do pets deserve equal (or more) respect than humans? If you really think so, then maybe you should take that up with your city/county/state legislators, and if you ever get it to the SCOTUS, then I’ll buy you a beer.
Sure, some pets are wonderful and some people are scumbag assholes, but even the worst scumbag asshole murdering rapist on death row is afforded more societal benefits than a pet. It’s wrong, I know, but that’s just the way it will be until you change the law.
Dr. Gurney outside of Evergreen Colorado. A bit of a mad scientist but brilliant. Invented his own “serums” that made my friends lame cat like a kitten again. He is also dirt cheap because he wants to help animals. The cost of a plane ticket and rental car would get you many more weeks if not years with your cat.
My pets were my kids who I couldn’t imagine giving up. Then…I became a Mom to real kids, the kind with two legs. That caused my priorities to shift in a big way. Now, if I ever found myself in dire financial straits, my four legged kids would go to a different home long before I put my children through any kind of homelessness. Also, there is no way I would sacrifice my kids’ college fund, my retirement fund, or even my children’s healthy, organic food budget to pay for excessive vet bills for an animal. We budget to feed our pets well, pay for yearly shots, worming, etc.. But a $9,000 dollar vet bill? Not going to happen. Sorry.
Päivi #81, you’re correct in the issue of governmentally-supplied assistance, an issue which i explicitly avoided.
i don’t care to look it up right now, but i am positive that some percentage of state and federal monies are being misused to support pets beyond the intended support of the human whose name is on the benefit check. this is an untenable argument for me to make.
i have to retreat to my statement #47, deciding to let go of a pet can be a financial issue, or an emotional issue. good luck trying to balance the two (as comments here seem to indicate, it’s a polarizing issue), but would add that even having a pet should be considered long before having to make a decision about letting go of a pet.
i apologize for being a jerk.
Interesting post. My family has always had pets, and my brothers and I always considered our dog as an extra sibling. No questions asked. At the same time, our current dog has had a series of extremely expensive health problems requiring medication, surgery, and restricted diets. My parents sat down with us and made it clear that there was a cost-benefit analysis to be made here - if our puppy was not responding well, and if things kept getting more expensive, the humane option would be to put her to sleep instead of simply pour money into her. So far, we’ve been lucky in that we can afford the treatments and that she’s responding well.
I myself own a horse. Fellow horse-owners and I often joke that there is no way to be financially responsible and own a horse. Take every problem and expense you’ve ever had with a cat or dog, and multiply it by at least ten. So I count every single penny. Every dollar I’ve ever transferred to a savings account has been accomplished through blood, sweat, or tears - frequently all three. I routinely write checks totalling thousands of dollars without a qualm for him, and agonize over spending $1 on a meal for myself. I have friends who basically want nothing to do with me because I can’t afford to go out drinking with them; I’ve had other acquaintances who have lectured me angrily about my poor choices, though it’s none of their business. As above, it’s really a cost-benefit analysis. I feel, quite deeply, that I would have no reason to get out of bed in the morning if I didn’t own my horse. He is my best friend, the love of my life, and my #1 financial rule is that he gets whatever he needs, no matter what. He’s not exactly marketable; were I to give him up, he’d go to slaughter sooner or later. That’s unacceptable. So I structure my life - and my finances - in a way that most people would never want to bear. That’s my decision.
I know this will upset some people, but I don’t believe human life is any more important than animal life. I think that we tend to value the lives and welfare of our own species over that of other species because we find it easiest to relate to other humans. Human intelligence is often brought up in discussions like this; but in all honesty, our ways of measuring intelligence are just arbitrary.
I’d still choose the life of my children over my pets (though I’d try and protect both!), but I understand that I would make this decision based on my individual preferences rather than some unwritten universal law. We only have our own experiences and feelings to guide us; do what feels right.
JD Wrote:
Actually, that statement shows a level of sophistication ahead of most people in our culture.
Especially since you like to make your own food, converting over should be easy. Each month, just pick one (more) day to be meatless.
The nutrition is actually easy, if you can get pointed to a good source and bypass the BS out there.
I’d like to suggest this BRIEF page in that regard:
http://beforewisdom.com/blog/?page_id=462
I agree that the people who say they would NEVER give up a pet are speaking for a position of privilege. Most of us would never dream of giving up our kids, but after my grandmother died, my mom’s five brothers were sent to an orphanage because her father simply couldn’t care for all the kids. Once her dad got on his feet again, the boys came back, but it was a hard choice. It was also the most loving thing he could do.
Why would a person do less than the most loving thing for a pet? I saw a homeless man on the street in the winter with a dog so thin it’s ribs poked out and it was shaking violently. There was NO REASON for that dog to be suffering like that. I understand the homeless person wanted a companion, but the dog had no choice in this matter.
I like my dogs better than I like most people - most of the time, they’re better “people” than people are. They are more loving, more joyful, more adaptable and forgiving than humans generally. They are also completely helpless and dependent, even more so than children, who have many more advocates and safety nets than animals do. Yes they cost money, but everything costs money and some things add more value than others. (Isn’t that why people have kids?) Not to mention there is more to life than money; I don’t imagine Scrooge would have pets but I don’t aspire to be Scrooge myself.
That said, I would not have adopted them if I couldn’t afford them; that’s no more responsible than giving up a dog cuz he’s not a cute puppy anymore. Now my job is to remain in a position to afford them, whatever comes. There is probably a limit to how much I would spend on them, but it’s closely linked to quality of life. Why buy them a miserable few weeks? Why subject them to unpleasant treatments and tests they can never understand? (In a similar vein, why spend $$$ on cutesy accessories they won’t appreciate?) The same could be considered by a pet owner in dire financial straits; when the pet’s quality of life begins to deteriorate, you look for other solutions. There are better and worse other solutions; abandonment equals death, even at a shelter most of the time, while it is possible to rehome an animal into a decent situation. Personally I would have to be in pretty bad shape. My dogs were shelter dogs, and they’ve already been traumatized enough; the situation would have to be pretty awful before I’d consider doing that to them again.
I agree that dogs are not children. That’s why I have dogs.
Päivi @69, I actually think Beth is right on! And her point does and should expand to other luxury items. That’s the problem with transfer payments. Responsible taxpayers have money taken from them and given to others with few or no strings attached. Then, that money can be used on luxury items (pets, piano lessons, movies, etc.). If you buy into the idea of the social safety net, transfer payments should be used ONLY for necessities such as food, shelter, basic clothing, etc.
Everyone of us has limits. I’m an animal lover, PETA supporter, and a vegetarian … but I gave up 2 cats last year. I adopted them 5 years ago and, despite being healthy, neutered and extremely well cared-for (their litter boxes were kept very clean), the cats continually sprayed the walls and floor. I tried every single suggestion I could find to train them but nothing worked. It broke my heart to give them up, but it broke my wallet to replace the drywall, floors and carpeting. The decision was very difficult but I know I did the right thing.
Amanda (#86), you simply are prioritizing your horse much higher than most people prioritize their pets (mine are below the basics plus internet). As long as that prioritization is a conscious decision and you’re not neglecting children or anything, more power to you! I can’t believe anyone would chide you for it…if you’re ever in Houston, come on over for a movie night and I’ll provide the girly drinks!
My cat just cost us $3000+ and took me from being able to spend a leisurely few months looking for a job while getting used to my new city to having to find a bridge job immediately. We had to compromise our apartment hunting due to practically no one in this area allowing pets. Without her, we could have gotten a much nicer apartment for much cheaper. I wouldn’t have it any other way.
The only time I would rehome my cat would be if it was in her best interest, and even then, she would go to one of my sisters who have the same pet philosophy that I do. High quality food, yearly vet visits, etc.
““I don’t like to see pets neglected just because their owners are in financial distress, but it happens,” she told me. “When somebody’s not financially able to care for their pets — even the bare minimum — then that pet really is best off in another situation.”” –
I think what was missing from the first post and this statement is the reality that there isn’t always a “no-kill” solution available. I ran a rescue/TNR group for 5 years where I got direct calls from the public about rehoming their animals and the lack of options and the alarming euthanasia rate in our city was - and is - a horrible reality that plays out in many other locales.
I think there needs to be a comment/mention of the fact that sometimes you’re not going to have that perfect “better home” option — you’ll either be on the wait-list for a “no-kill” rescue (and finding a responsible one is a whole OTHER topic - some of the smaller ones are, frankly, just hoarders where the animals waste away). Sometimes you’re just going to be between a rock and a hard place and the animal might have to go to an open-admissions shelter and risk euthanasia. That’s just something that’s crappy to not mention. YES, definitely try otherwise. But I’ve seen that trying not pan out many many times and horrible guilt associated with that.
I do think that anyone who says they NEVER will give up their pets is in denial about reality/circumstance and are speaking from either privilege or naivete — never say never. I hope to hell I am never put in that position because it would emotionally break me — but, as I mentioned in my earlier comment, having my pets have actually encouraged me to become more fiscally responsible. I have a savings account for their vetting that I contribute $180/mo into, they’re part of my trust draft and I’ve already established someone with house keys who can be their primary adoption agent and they even know about my managed feral cat colony. Guilt over no savings/credit for my cats’ emergency vetting, if needed, was one of my driving forces in getting my financial house in order.
Re vetting - I also don’t believe in heroic measure propped up against quality of life. I DO believe in diagnostic vetting, pain management medications and a SEDATED AND HUMANE EUTHANASIA as a final service to your pet if the decision needs to be made. I have gone through that process with many rescued cats who were just too far along to bring back without thousands of dollars of care and even so with a poor prognosis (probably people’s pets who were dumped outside and quickly deteriorated - I live near a cemetery where people “thoughtfully” dump their pets to “live out their lives” - really responsible).
I would definitely keep my pets over any real estate or personal items (tv, laptop, etc.).
@Tod - RE: Wow, we have certainly fallen far from the common sense tree. Dogs & Cats as kids, ummm no they are a luxury, not a need (except for the blind, etc). — I don’t really consider saving cats from the street a “luxury” as they’re already there and will likely die on the streets or be put to sleep if no one takes them. I do consider consciously having human kids a luxury though!
@ Ely #90 “I agree that dogs are not children. That’s why I have dogs.” Right on, my brother (or sister)! This is why I have cats!!
Re: pet healthcare, because the rest of the discussion is far too wide-ranging to cover everything, just my personal experience.
Ten years ago my cat, then about eight years old, began to have health troubles - primarily digestive, with some unpleasant, unhygienic consequences. I took him to the vet multiple times and they could only tell me it was an “idiopathic” condition (meaning, no one knew what was causing it). He had no parasites, he had no allergies, he had no traceable metabolic problems; he just couldn’t always hold his … you know.
BUT he didn’t appear to be in pain: wasn’t crying, was still playing, was affectionate, wasn’t losing weight.
After about six months though, his condition started to go downhill a little. He got quieter, less playful, started having trouble jumping up. More vet visits: still inconclusive.
Then, right before we were to go out of town for a week, I found him one morning with one pupil hugely, and unevenly, dilated. I knew this was a sign of a stroke, so instead of taking him to the boarding facility I took him to the vet. They determined he had a detached retina.
While we were out of town, the cat went to an opthalmologist, underwent a battery of tests, and I was told that he very likely had a brain tumor. I spent the rest of our trip knowing that I was probably going to have to euthanize him. It was awful.
Got home and after a week apart could really see just how sick and miserable he was. He was still happy to see us, but - and especially after the fact, looking at photos - he was just sick and hurting, and there was nothing we could do to fix it. So we took him to the vet, he was given the injection, and we held him till he died, peacefully.
Now, I know some people who would have spent countless dollars going through surgeries or whatever, trying to squeeze another few months of life. But would that have been a kindness? I believe not. It would not have cured him, only made his remaining time MORE painful and MORE miserable.
So yes. There are limits. And I trust that if I’m ever similarly in need, someone will be humane enough to pull the plug.
I just wanted to say that, in general, I agree with keeping animals despite economic hardships. I adopted my (now 4 year old) bull mastiff puppy from craigslist when I was in college. I had just gotten out of an emotionally abusive relationship and didn’t have a place to live. I needed her so that I would have a reason to wake up every day, so that I could have someone in my life who would not judge me, and so I could find value in myself.
My decision to get a dog was the best decision I have ever made. I have lived in houses with her, apartments and more recently a 30 foot travel trailer. So technically, we are homeless. YEs, I will give up the luxury of a private bathroom, a dishwasher, space for hobbies and decent plumbing in order to remain united with a dog who has loved me without judgement for four years.
I have received offers of several hundred dollars(equating to 2 months rent) to purchase her. Although it is tempting, I can’t just sell my dog. I would rather live off of rice and beans than not have the money to take her to the vet when she is due for her checkup. She’s the best anti-depression pill that money can buy. I can relate to people who consider their pet a ‘need’ rather than a luxury item.
BTW, I recently graduated from the University of Oregon with no student loan or credit card debt. It’s just difficult to find a job right now so we’re P’oH.
@69) Pavii, I know a person on welfare that has pets and actually the opposite is true. They prefer to stay home and care for their pets vs go outside and be with other human beings. And yes, I have an issue paying for someone’s pet when I choose not to take on that expense myself.
I’m amazed that no one has brought up the crazy cat lady from the simpsons. Some pet people are just socially awkward. The unconditional love they get from pets is just way easier than the work it takes to develop a relationship with a judgemental, opinionated human being.
I think ultimately this is an impossible question to answer in advance. You can have some preconceived notion of how much you imagine you would spend, or if you would put your pet in better hands if you had what you felt was no other option, but in my experience those scenario-based daydreams become pretty flexible in the intensity of a bad situation.
In my case, our exceptionally healthy, spry young dog was very suddenly ill - we discovered that she had a tumor on her heart that was shortening her life by the hour. _Before_ this, in my mind I always thought that I would limit the money I would spend to save a pet to something like $1000 for emergencies (seems low in retrospect). In this case, as our dog was dying quickly, and my wife was completely distraught, sitting on the floor with her, hugging her and talking softly to her to sooth her, I didn’t think twice about signing that credit application that conveniently appeared at the vet’s office to try to save our dog (for a lot more than $1000 I might add). The vet made it very clear that we were in “heroic” territory, meaning that in all likelihood the procedure would not work, but in those moments, all of my preconceived ideas of how I would act in this situation were thrown out the window when I looked into my dog’s eyes.
In the end, the procedure didn’t work; and we were saddled with a hefty credit bill (which we paid off in 6 months before the interest kicked in).
But I learned that as much as I thought I knew about my limits with pets, they all vanished under the strain of losing her.
Thank you J.D. for standing by your statement! At the beginning of the post it seemed as if you were gonna back down to these overly sensitive pet people. I understand the bond that owners share with their pets, but when it comes down to survival ANIMALS ARE NOT HUMAN! It would be more irresponsible for you to keep a pet you can’t take care of. Thanks J.D.