Log In Sign Up

Better off dead? Or in a not "ideal" home?


Forum: Heated Debates

Notices

Welcome to the JustMommies Message Boards.

We pride ourselves on having the friendliest and most welcoming forums for moms and moms to be! Please take a moment and register for free so you can be a part of our growing community of mothers. If you have any problems registering please drop an email to [email protected].

Our community is moderated by our moderation team so you won't see spam or offensive messages posted on our forums. Each of our message boards is hosted by JustMommies hosts, whose names are listed at the top each board. We hope you find our message boards friendly, helpful, and fun to be on!

Reply Post New Topic
  Subscribe To Heated Debates LinkBack Topic Tools Search this Topic Display Modes
  #1  
May 29th, 2007, 10:37 AM
Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,780
Say there is a dog at a shelter, your typical shelter where they will get put to sleep if not adopted within X number of days.

Do you think it is better for that dog to be adopted by a less than ideal family, or to be put to sleep?

By less than ideal, I could mean any of the following:
A family that has some money for routine vet care, but not thousands of dollars put away in savings for emergencies.
A family that MIGHT be forced to, say, move overseas in a few years and they might not be able to take the pet with them due to restrictive quarantine laws that some other countries have.
A family that will only hang out with the dog in the evenings, during the day the dog is in the yard.
__________________



Reply With Quote
  #2  
May 29th, 2007, 10:40 AM
Ms.Michelle
Guest
Posts: n/a
Put to sleep.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
May 29th, 2007, 10:42 AM
CJMOM209
Guest
Posts: n/a
If people would be more responsible to begin with we wouldn't be having this debate!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
May 29th, 2007, 10:44 AM
Ms.Michelle
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
If people would be more responsible to begin with we wouldn't be having this debate![/b]
No kidding! This isn't going to be much different than an abortion debate to me. I promise.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
May 29th, 2007, 10:48 AM
mommyKathyX3
Guest
Posts: n/a
wow
Reply With Quote
  #6  
May 29th, 2007, 10:50 AM
SusieQ2's Avatar Jersey Girl
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 39,051
I'd say they'd be better off with a family who will at least do the best they can. Most pets don't ever need those thousands of dollars of medical care so I think it would be sad to say that they'd be better off dead from the start rather than giving them the opportunity to live a good life.

It's really starting to tick me off how many people say you should make sure you have thousands of dollars to spare in case your pet gets sick or you shouldn't have a pet at all. That's all well and good to say at the beginning but there are unexpected things in life. What if you have the money and then someone in the family loses their job or gets very ill and racks up a lot of medical expenses therefore leaving you with no money to spare in case the dog because deathly ill. Would you then give your pet up because you were going through a tough time financially?
__________________





Reply With Quote
  #7  
May 29th, 2007, 10:50 AM
Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 4,213
Quote:
If people would be more responsible to begin with we wouldn't be having this debate![/b]
The world is not an ideal place! Yes, in an ideal world...every pet would be spayed and neutered (except for some, they do have repopulate of course and those animals would not be bred over and over again until their health suffers because of it) and we would have no homeless animals. But, we aren't living in that world, so we have to deal with "less than ideal" conditions for dogs and cats......a loving household without 10K to spend on them if they should fall gravely ill!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #8  
May 29th, 2007, 10:51 AM
tevinsangel
Guest
Posts: n/a
Obviously sine I'm one of the unfit homes I vote for having a dog in an unfit home as in

A family that has some money for routine vet care, but not thousands of dollars put away in savings for emergencies.
A family that MIGHT be forced to, say, move overseas in a few years and they might not be able to take the pet with them due to restrictive quarantine laws that some other countries have.

In reference to the second one, I'm iffy on that because of the whole bond with the animal and then suddenly it has to be broken. Yet, I don't think it's necessarily right to deprive a child or family the joy of owning a pet. My dh was not allowed to have animals growing up, in fact he had one puppy and his mother decided she couldn't deal with it. She took it back to the shelter, even though he had bonded with it already. As an adult, he says he will always have a dog and he wants his children to experience the joy of having one.
As for the 3rd option:
I don't think an animal should be left outside all day to deal with the elements.

Edited to add: all of my animals have been spayed/neutered, so I'm doing my part in that area. And 10k is an awful lot to have saved up for an animal. We don't have that in savings for us. And before I get cracked on that, some people genuinely cannot afford to put that much in savings, some have bills that eat up the entire paycheck.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
May 29th, 2007, 10:52 AM
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,429
With a less than ideal family.

I don't understand how some of you are so quick to say 'put to sleep' in this debate, yet in the other--'putting a very ill animal to sleep' is like treason.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
May 29th, 2007, 10:55 AM
CJMOM209
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Quote:
If people would be more responsible to begin with we wouldn't be having this debate![/b]
No kidding! This isn't going to be much different than an abortion debate to me. I promise.
[/b]

I love it when we are on the same side...lol!
Reply With Quote
  #11  
May 29th, 2007, 10:56 AM
tevinsangel
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
With a less than ideal family.

I don't understand how some of you are so quick to say 'put to sleep' in this debate, yet in the other--'putting a very ill animal to sleep' is like treason.[/b]
This definitely has the "smacking" of an abortion debate. The same attitude is there as well. If you can't do A, B, & C then just kill it.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
May 29th, 2007, 10:56 AM
Platinum Supermommy
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: *queen city* of North Carolina
Posts: 9,497
Quote:
If people would be more responsible to begin with we wouldn't be having this debate![/b]
That is true

If a family can afford the day to day expenses, and an occasional "sick" visit, and have a plan for if an emergency where to happen that was out of their budget, then fine. But if Rover where to break his leg and the family says "put to sleep" - sorry no. If you can't afford food, shelter, and routine medical care - again no.

It seems like some people have unrealistic expecations.

What do you do when the dog you just adopted is diagnosed with heart worms and is very severe case? Or the dog you've been using preventative for is diagnosed with heart worms [or a vaccine disease] and is very severe case with a not very good outlook?

What do you do, when you have a horse who is unable to eat, and can bairly breath, and you know the cause but not a single vet will preform the surgery to remove the tumor/growth?

What do you do when an animal gets hit by a car and will loss 2 legs, to the point where it will not be able to walk, if it survives a coma? It wouldn't be able to get to its food/water dish, it wouldn't be able to get to a litter box or outdoors and would need a diaper of some sort to stay sanitary.

What are you supposed to do? Sure I'll shell out money to a point - the point that keeping the animal alive is going to cause more pain and suffering to it. If we can't afford to, I'll enlist in family, friends and other outside resources that could help after we exhausted our financial ability. But where is the line drawn? I'm seeing it the same as some people who say, "pull the plug" or "you darn well better not pull that plug".
__________________
Proud Mommy To My Princess (5)
Watching over us -- August 2005, March 2010, October 2010, July 2011
Reply With Quote
  #13  
May 29th, 2007, 10:58 AM
Ms.Michelle
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
This definitely has the "smacking" of an abortion debate. The same attitude is there as well. If you can't do A, B, & C then just kill it. [/b]
Or leave it in a place to be abused and then we all cry boo-hoo because amazingly the animal/child goes crazy...
Reply With Quote
  #14  
May 29th, 2007, 11:02 AM
tevinsangel
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Quote:
This definitely has the "smacking" of an abortion debate. The same attitude is there as well. If you can't do A, B, & C then just kill it. [/b]
Or leave it in a place to be abused and then we all cry boo-hoo because amazingly the animal/child goes crazy...
[/b]
I'm not saying leave it in a shelter. I was saying, give it a loving home. I'm having an off day because I'm not sure what you are saying lol. Are you saying the "un-fit" home as described above is abusive and that the dog will go crazy? I'm not following lol obviously.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
May 29th, 2007, 11:02 AM
Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 4,213
I am against people buying animals if they know they are going to move and can't take the animal with them, that's ridiculous....."I want a dog for a year!"
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #16  
May 29th, 2007, 11:05 AM
Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,780
Military families typically know that they MIGHT move. But there is no guarantee that they will go to an area with restrictive pet laws. Maybe they will get sent somewhere like that. Then again maybe they won't.

So should they not have pets either?
__________________



Reply With Quote
  #17  
May 29th, 2007, 11:10 AM
CJMOM209
Guest
Posts: n/a
What would happen if putting an animal to sleep (unless they were in pain or suffering) wasn't allowed? And there was a law requiring spaying and neutering (I think I may have said this already). Wouldn't more people think about pet ownership more seriously? A pet is not a "need", it is a "want".
Reply With Quote
  #18  
May 29th, 2007, 11:10 AM
littleln's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,145
I absolutely think it is better to have a less than ideal family (as defined by you - not an abusive or neglectful family just one low on cash or time) adopt an animal rather than euthanize the animal for no reason. That it sort of how DH and I look at things. We have three cats (all fixed) and we can afford the basic vet visits, vaccinations, food etc.... However if something really bad ever happened to one of them, well we can't afford that, at least not right now. However, their life on the street or in a facility, woul dbe so poor that we still really feel like we are helping them and increasing their quality of life. We love them dearly, but if they ever got so sick that they needed $2000 for a surgery or something... I think that we would probably just have to deal with the consequences of being some what poor at the moment. It sucks, but honestly. What was the fate of those 3 cats going to be anyway? They have probably already lived longer than they would have if we didn't adopt them, and they're for sure a lot happier. They are well cared for, they always have food, water, and a clean litter tray. We keep their claws nice and trimmed and even give them a bath every two weeks. We keep them exclusively indoors to protect them from cars, dogs, other cats, and children. They are all happy and well adjusted... It kills me that some people would say I shouldn't have these cats because we can't afford any vet bills above the norm. I guess they were better off getting gassed, eh?
__________________

Thanks to pattiandthemoos for the great siggy!



<div align="center"></div>

<div align="center"></div>
Reply With Quote
  #19  
May 29th, 2007, 11:11 AM
Platinum Supermommy
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: *queen city* of North Carolina
Posts: 9,497
Oh and I should add....I know a few people who are moving overseas, the dog is older [13ish], and sickly already. The dog is to large to keep with them in the cabin, so it'd have to be under the plane. Even given an anesthesia for the trip over [I think its a 10 hour flight...so it'd probably wear off at some point as well], adjusting to a new country, a new house, etc at an old age, if rehoming doesn't work out, what are you supposed to do? Not move? Wait for the dog to die of natural causes then move?
__________________
Proud Mommy To My Princess (5)
Watching over us -- August 2005, March 2010, October 2010, July 2011
Reply With Quote
  #20  
May 29th, 2007, 11:11 AM
Ms.Michelle
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
This definitely has the "smacking" of an abortion debate. The same attitude is there as well. If you can't do A, B, & C then just kill it. [/b]
Or leave it in a place to be abused and then we all cry boo-hoo because amazingly the animal/child goes crazy...
[/b]
I'm not saying leave it in a shelter. I was saying, give it a loving home. I'm having an off day because I'm not sure what you are saying lol. Are you saying the "un-fit" home as described above is abusive and that the dog will go crazy? I'm not following lol obviously.
[/b]
Actually you said if you can't do A,B, & C then kill it. I feel that people who think "all life is holy, wonderful and precious" miss the bigger picture of how many suffer because of that way of thinking. That suffering could easily be avoided in many ways but because people refuse to go with any of those standards, suffering is the end result. Dogs get put down because they bit a child but no one looks at the way that dog was treated. Funny enough the same thing can be said about a human who does something we can't understand. That's what I was saying in that post.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Topic Tools Search this Topic
Search this Topic:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:51 AM.