Forum Home» Money Saving Polls

MONEY MORAL DILEMMA: Should Anne put the animals down? - Page 20

New Post Advanced Search
Important update! We have recently reviewed and updated our Forum Rules and FAQs. Please take the time to familiarise yourself with the latest version.

MONEY MORAL DILEMMA: Should Anne put the animals down?

edited 8 April 2010 at 8:22PM in Money Saving Polls
235 replies 31.8K views


  • BigMummaFBigMummaF Forumite
    4.3K posts
    Page 3 :o
    Saddened. Can't believe that the 'option' of killing animals is even being debated. This is meant to be a MONEY Moral Dilemma. I can't think of a single reason why any animal should need to be killed for financial reasons.

    I'm shocked that the owner of this thread would ever consider putting animals down as being an option in a situation like this.
    But it IS a money moral dilemma when it means you can no longer afford to take care of those animals AND yourself. How many times have parents gone hungry to ensure their children have a meal of some sort, so please don't throw the "would you do this to your children?" argument in my direction. If I were completely destitute with a young family then yes! I would seriously consider asking for them to go into care to ensure they had a roof over their heads & food in their bellies. I would loathe & detest every fibre in my being for allowing them to ever get that close to suffering & can fully appreciate why some poor souls consider taking their own lives because of it.
    IMO this is similar as the 'lady in question' obviously cares deeply for the animals she promised to protect, so please can we move from this lunar-high moral ground before I get a nose-bleed!
    Pippitypip wrote: »
    Wholeheartedly no, for all the reasons others have said.

    However I'd be really interested in knowing if any of the "Yes"s have ever had family pets?

    I truly believe those who aren't pet owners (and never have been) simply don't understand the concept of pets being part of the family.

    I also think this thread is bound to offend - prob not a wise choice to put up for friendly debate.

    Yes I do have pets & newly so too. I only ever had the occasional fairground goldfish as a child but am extremely protective of our 'babies', now 7 & 2 yrs old. That said, if I had known then that our family financial situation would end up as it is now, I would never have agreed to adopting the pets.
    Also I have already declared that when the time comes, I am NOT going to open my heart to another animal as I could not face the pain of having this kind of decision further down the line--more likely as the chances are the Offspring will have left home by then.
    Full time Carer for Mum; harassed mother of three;
    loving & loved by two 4-legged babies.

  • JayDJayD Forumite
    583 posts
    Part of the Furniture 500 Posts Combo Breaker
    It is not sufficient for the dilemma to say "Nobody wants to take them."

    As the responses to this week's problem shows, there will always be animal lovers somewhere who are willing to help - and even take on - unwanted/elderly/rescued animals.

    Anne needs to publicise her dilemma widely and appealingly. Local press/parish magazines/local radio stations would certainly give her coverage.

    She could also contact some of the many animal charities that exist and seek help and advice from them too.

    Noboby may 'want' to take them but I suggest there are some who would help her, financially and otherwise, to keep them and some who actually would take some of the animals from her aswell.

    Things in life are rarely black and white and I think this is not strictly a 'keep them and be homeless or have them put down' situtation at all.
  • BigMummaF wrote: »
    I've only read the first page but have to put an opposing thought to these particular statements. Apologies if I am repeating something already stated, but I am quite worked up about this one!

    *Agreed, but that is NOT the case here. There is no suggestion that the person is deliberately & wilfully disposing of a bundle of fur bought on a whim!
    **Again, agreed but read the story-line again--nobody will take them!

    Again I agree with [mostly] everything you say but please read the original post again.
    I can speak with a little authority on this as I have had many similar family discussions concerning decisions made, when money was not so much of an issue as it is now.
    The fact is, at the time, anyone can take on a commitment that is comfortable & manageable but NO-ONE can see into the future. It is a sad fact of adult life, that $H1t Happens for whatever reason & can destroy the very foundation of everything you treasure & hold dear.
    It is very fortunate indeed if you can still hold an opinion such as this * without ever having to consider the other side of the story. If nothing else, the recent reports on charity events such as Sport Relief are graphic records of just how some people's lives can change in the blink of an eye.

    "Walking a mile in another's shoes" seems a very appropriate saying for this one...

    Sorry, I've said it before and I'll say it again - where there's a will, there's a way.

    If you take on the responsibility of an animal's welfare, it's up to you to spend the time (and surely you have more time to spare anyway if you're unemployed?), to find out what you can do for your animals and what options are out there.

    Don't just give up because it's a bit hard doing some research and looking into organisations etc to see how they can help you. This doesn't cost ANY money (where Anne keeping them and making her financial situation worse, or putting them down even could).

    I've been in a (cough) bad financial position, and with animals so I do know these shoes well and had wonderful support from the PDSA with vet care for a pet with a medical condition.

    I think the issue is much more about taking responsibility seriously and animal welfare than it is a money moral dilemma.

    I know I'm in my own little world, but it's ok - they know me here! :D
  • BigMummaFBigMummaF Forumite
    4.3K posts
    Enchantica wrote: »
    ....This thread isn't easy for some to stomach and some of the responses were not easy to read.....
    ....This should not be proposed as a kill and not to kill question. It should be "which shelters will take my animals?"
    It is because this subject is so emotive that I haven't been able to let it drop. As has been mentioned, on the whole each opinion has some validation toward the matter being discussed, regardless of what your beliefs are.
    I haven't classed it as a simple 'either/or' kind of situation as I assumed that the 'lady in question' would have already considered the various shelters & re-homing centres, given the level & previous commitment to animal care.
    katehesk wrote: »
    There is obviously two sides to the debate, and there is a lot of sentimentality when it comes to animals, especially pet animals.

    Those who suggest that having the animals put to sleep is a viable solution I would postulate that they are simply not animal lovers (and that is not said in criticism, it is just my opinion). But I am an animal lover & simply recognise that "There by the Grace of...."

    Any one who has had pets AND loved them could simply not consider having their animals put to sleep and would go to any length to find an alternative solution. The bare fact remains that some HAVE no other option, when all other avenues are closed.

    To those people who simply own an animal, but do not particularly value animals or find value in owning animals....then maybe they could consider this. This is obviously not the case here, for the 'lady in question'.

    I am in the first camp, and could not consider having a healthy animal put to sleep, especially if it was one I had lived ALONGSIDE and LOVED for any period of time.

    I stated in the first post I made on this thread that I thought this dilemma was pretty disgusting. I have not read every post but have noticed that Martin has tried to defend the question, and I do appreciate people have different opinions, but at the very least this thread seems to promote irresponsible pet ownership i.e. If you lose your job and can't afford to keep your animals, just have them put to sleep, problem solved. In all fairness, I don't think people are saying that.Imo, that is simply not a moral solution.
    Your last paragraph or two surely high-lights exactly WHY this is a dilemma?
    katehesk wrote: »
    All I can say in response is that I whole heartedly disagree.

    I must admit I struggle to truly empathise with the situation (and that is from a position of having, in the past, lived in relative poverty and kept animals). But I simply cannot imagine having my animals put to sleep, regardless of my financial circumstances, and nor can I understand how anyone could do that.
    Like I said, a true definition of dilemma.

    For those who wish to pursue the child vs pet angle, have you actually read Mooloo's thread? There is one helluva lady who is fighting the entire Establishment & all in the name of her family. A sobering read, believe me!
    Full time Carer for Mum; harassed mother of three;
    loving & loved by two 4-legged babies.

  • Hokie97 wrote: »
    She made the choice to take them in, she needs to find a way to care for them. If that means working in any job that she can get, she needs to do it. She lost her job, but there are other jobs out there, even if it is scrubbing toilets or flipping burgers.

    If it was someone with children you wouldn't suggest they put them up for adoption or kill them, would you? I am so tired of people who think that it is okay to perform "convenience euthanasias." And no well respected Veterinarian would agree to do it anyway. Doing so goes against everything we as animal care professionals believe in.

    I can't even believe that this is a consideration, hypothetical or not.

    Well said.
    I agree with every thing you've said I wouldn't even think about crossing that bridge, even if it is the worst job in the world it's still better than nothing and not being able to look after those poor little animals.
    Don't forget you can donate 24 Felix tokens to help feed a cats protection cat/kitten that's in care
    their are loads of cats/kittens awaiting there forever home
    don't forget the the oldies who are just as much fun

    Dropping a brand going great :D thanks Martin and team
  • Important update! We have recently reviewed and updated our Forum Rules and FAQs. Please take the time to familiarise yourself with the latest version.
  • aliharrisaliharris Forumite
    30 posts
    She took them in, if they were healthy she should have them re-homed through the RSPCA or similar, however it's on the TV every day that healthy animals are put down because there aren't enough people re-homing. Don't anyone go thinking unwanted pets get 'snapped up' - I for one don't fancy taking on a pair of aging goats needing medication.

    Everyone is ignoring the fact that these animals aren't fit and healthy. When they get to a stage that they're in pain, they should be put down anyway, or allowed to go by natural causes if they're not suffering.

    Although most people love animals, putting animals down can't be compared to human euthanasia.
    £60,000 for a mortgage by 23 (Aug 2012) -
    [STRIKE]£28,766 (March '10)[/STRIKE] £31,112 (May '10) ;)

  • Myrtle77Myrtle77 Forumite
    217 posts
    What an utterly non-sensical question this is. There are always alternatives to euthanasia for these reasons, and drawing comparisons to farmers having to euthanase cattle just gets my back up even more.

    The RSPCA has often attended farms where large numbers of animals have been rescued from exactly these circumstances, and they've found somewhere for them. A woman with a handful of animals to rehome is easily achievable by comparison.

    All it takes is the time and effort to call around and find somewhere who can take them. Even at a time when animal charities are under incredible pressure, as they are now - they'll still do their best to help if they can. And eventually, she'd find someone that could.

    It's improbable to suggest that she would ever have 'no other option'.

  • No, I don't think it is right to put them to sleep, though I can understand why the thought is there. There are a lot of charities to take animals in and to rehome but most of the time they are full, especially since the recession, so I can give sympathy that the thought of putting to sleep is the only option as being such an animal lover I can imagine her thoughts are not wanting to allow them to not be looked after to the best of her ability.
    There are however, some parks/farms that may take the goat, horse and hamster. Speak to vets for local charities/shelters/foster homes or rspca, & local parks.

  • MSE_MartinMSE_Martin MoneySaving Expert
    8.3K posts
    David_Q-T wrote: »

    I am so deeply offended by this item that I am unsubscribing from your newsletter and will no longer visit your website.

    Very disappointed.

    I'm sorry you feel that way. Though I dont' intend to run a website that avoids real situations because the choice may offend some. THis is based on a real persons dilemma. I've actually been contacted by a TV company making a series about 'coping with pets during the recession' and how difficult an issue it has been for many

    This thread has been an education for me and many - lots of interesting view points (of course some reactionary ones or thoughtless ones) discussions over options and many thoughts and varied opinions. If you think that's bad content then I think perhaps it is best you stop getting the email.
    Martin Lewis, Money Saving Expert.
    Please note, answers don't constitute financial advice, it is based on generalised journalistic research. Always ensure any decision is made with regards to your own individual circumstance.
    Don't miss out on urgent MoneySaving, get my weekly e-mail at
    Debt-Free Wannabee Official Nerd Club: (Honorary) Members number 000
  • donal_fdonal_f Forumite
    92 posts
    Definitely put them down. No question.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Quick links

Essential Money | Who & Where are you? | Work & Benefits | Household and travel | Shopping & Freebies | About MSE | The MoneySavers Arms | Covid-19 & Coronavirus Support