Pets when someone dies

elsien

aardvaak said:

DB1904 said:

aardvaak said:

Thank you for your comments You do have to register with them and put in the will and put notices around the house otherwise the authorities will take them and end and in a pound on a knee jerk action the owner's views must be obeyed.

If someone dies at home it's not for the likes of the police to carry out the wishes of their will. It's not a knee jerk action putting an animal into a pound, dealing with the animal is down to the executor(s).

But the executor although might be very quick to start their process might not be there at the point of death or going to care, when the authorities police, ambulance etc., arrive would make knee-jerk decision allegally for the pets good or not so the pet might get dumped or put in a pound just to rid them of the property - if notices were placed around they would know (I hope) to leave alone or what to do. 

I would not expect anyone to leave a pet alone in a house in the hope someone may or may not turn up to rescue them. 

theoretica

I am surprised that 'the pound' in your area is such a bad place.  My area has a number of very active and good reputation rescue centres and going through one of them to a new home doesn't strike me as a particularly bad fate for a pet.  Of course it is good to take thought for your responsibilities, but I am pleased to say that I do not feel the downside you talk about is significant here.

Davesnave

aardvaak said:

Davesnave said:

canaldumidi said:

Surely in these days of shortages, food delivery problems, and environmental concerns we should be looking at alternatives for unwanted animals?

In some parts of the world there is no irrational aversion to eating dogs etc.

And as for valuing them above humans, as demonstrated by the evacuation of 150 pets from afghanistan when at-risk interpreters were abandoned, the mind boggles....

I think the Afghanistan airlift of animals was privately arranged, but you've made an excellent point there that human emotion often overrides good sense and morality.

As I see the future playing out, governments internationally may not have much time for emotion and sentiment. We already have a government in Australia, a supposedly civilised nation,  threatening it's citizens with loss of work and any kind of personal security if they fail to do as they're told, so what chance would a dog have?

Anyone who lives alongside the horsey brigade probably knows how much money it already costs the owners to meet the animals' finicky needs, how much useful land they occupy and the quantity of feed that must be used to sustain them in winter. And what do they do? Well, those next door to me fart a lot and occasionally the owner trots a mile or two down the road on one. The other one's just 'company.' I can see animals like that becoming an easy Thunberg target.

To return to the OP's post, whether it's a horse or a hamster, some (maybe most?) families won't do as you suggest. For example, younger members of my family have already decided among themselves who will be responsible for looking after whom in the event of certain older members' demise. However, where an older person is left unsupported and alone by their family, it's something to consider seriously, as in that instance the value of a pet in sustaining mental health can make them an asset rather than simply a liability.

Davesnave - Your family do seem to be ready to honour their duties

 I hope they won't need to any time soon(!) but it's a discussion all families ought to have, uncomfortable though it might be. On one side of my family it's more part of a cultural tradition, so the expectation and duty is virtually 'built-in.'

GDB2222

Davesnave said:

GDB2222 said:

Davesnave said:

canaldumidi said:

Surely in these days of shortages, food delivery problems, and environmental concerns we should be looking at alternatives for unwanted animals?

In some parts of the world there is no irrational aversion to eating dogs etc.

And as for valuing them above humans, as demonstrated by the evacuation of 150 pets from afghanistan when at-risk interpreters were abandoned, the mind boggles....

As I see the future playing out, governments internationally may not have much time for emotion and sentiment. We already have a government in Australia, a supposedly civilised nation,  threatening it's citizens with loss of work and any kind of personal security if they fail to do as they're told

ALL governments will remove your personal liberty if you fail to do as you are told. For example, as an individualist, I think it would be a fine thing to drive on the right hand side of the road in this country. Obviously, that would cause mayhem, and I'd be locked up if I tried. 

How about Typhoid Mary? She was incarcerated, even though she did nothing wrong at all.

Good argument. However, that was a very long time ago when people thought differently about many things. The case against Mary as a public danger was far more sound than that of the regional Aussie governments against a certain large group of people they legislate for. I also think a good case could be made that their proposed actions will prove illegal, but that's another can of worms.

You are being a bit oblique about what you are referring to in Australia. I doubt that you object to the government coming down pretty hard on murderers, arsonists, and rapists. Perhaps, I wasn’t too far off the mark with my example of Typhoid Mary?

 Governments have always been pretty draconian over public health issues. As soon as large numbers of people are gathered together in cities, the choices become tough, and freedom gets curtailed. 

What I would concentrate on is regaining those freedoms once the health emergency has ended. 

Davesnave

GDB2222 said:

Davesnave said:

GDB2222 said:

Davesnave said:

canaldumidi said:

Surely in these days of shortages, food delivery problems, and environmental concerns we should be looking at alternatives for unwanted animals?

In some parts of the world there is no irrational aversion to eating dogs etc.

And as for valuing them above humans, as demonstrated by the evacuation of 150 pets from afghanistan when at-risk interpreters were abandoned, the mind boggles....

As I see the future playing out, governments internationally may not have much time for emotion and sentiment. We already have a government in Australia, a supposedly civilised nation,  threatening it's citizens with loss of work and any kind of personal security if they fail to do as they're told

ALL governments will remove your personal liberty if you fail to do as you are told. For example, as an individualist, I think it would be a fine thing to drive on the right hand side of the road in this country. Obviously, that would cause mayhem, and I'd be locked up if I tried. 

How about Typhoid Mary? She was incarcerated, even though she did nothing wrong at all.

Good argument. However, that was a very long time ago when people thought differently about many things. The case against Mary as a public danger was far more sound than that of the regional Aussie governments against a certain large group of people they legislate for. I also think a good case could be made that their proposed actions will prove illegal, but that's another can of worms.

You are being a bit oblique about what you are referring to in Australia.

What I would concentrate on is regaining those freedoms once the health emergency has ended. 

I'm being deliberately oblique because of being on my final warning here, but you understood my meaning correctly, even if the mainstream media may not have shown you the most extreme words of Gladys and Dan. They're singing from exactly the same hymn sheet as many other leaders, just with slightly different emphasis.

The drift of my thinking is that the current situation will segue into a great concern for the climate and environment, with the populace already used to restrictions being asked to make further sacrifices to save the planet. As part of that, the spotlight will fall on the huge numbers of 'useless' pets leeching food and resources from a hungry world. I used horses as an obvious example, though of course there are working horses too. Even animals like cattle might be seen as no more than wasteful methane emitters.

Regaining freedom from tyrannical people? Always difficult. I'd rather not lose those freedoms in the first place!

aardvaak

aardvaak said:

DB1904 said:

aardvaak said:

Thank you for your comments You do have to register with them and put in the will and put notices around the house otherwise the authorities will take them and end and in a pound on a knee jerk action the owner's views must be obeyed.

If someone dies at home it's not for the likes of the police to carry out the wishes of their will. It's not a knee jerk action putting an animal into a pound, dealing with the animal is down to the executor(s).

But the executor although might be very quick to start their process might not be there at the point of death or going to care, when the authorities police, ambulance etc., arrive would make knee-jerk decision allegally for the pets good or not so the pet might get dumped or put in a pound just to rid them of the property - if notices were placed around they would know (I hope) to leave alone or what to do. 

If there are  notices left about they should be left in the property till someone responsible arrives and not removed by some uncaring emergency bods - if they go into a pound it would be very expensive for their return

elsien

And who is going to check that the someone responsible does arrive before the food and water runs out? What if the owner expires while the responsible person is off on holiday abroad somewhere?
And why the presumption that the emergency services are uncaring? 
Better safe and in a kennel for a day or two than home alone hungry and distressed. 

deannagone

I've already told the children (teens) that I won't be getting any more dogs as what happens to them when I pop my clogs. which I am a lot closer to than I was when I got these dogs.  Of course my sons said we'll take them but I have read far too many posts on the Houses, Selling and Renting board of how difficult it is to find a rental when you have pets.

Davesnave

elsien said:

And who is going to check that the someone responsible does arrive before the food and water runs out? What if the owner expires while the responsible person is off on holiday abroad somewhere?
And why the presumption that the emergency services are uncaring? 
Better safe and in a kennel for a day or two than home alone hungry and distressed. 

I think it's when the family lets the animal(s) down that most problems arise. Near me there's the usual charities which deal with household pets, a hedgehog rescue and even a Hen Welfare Trust. There are  dedicated people known to the emergency services and called-upon regularly.

Unfortunately, having worked with hundreds of children, I know we cannot legislate to make every family grouping populated by caring and responsible adults.

Davesnave

aardvaak said:

aardvaak said:

DB1904 said:

aardvaak said:

Thank you for your comments You do have to register with them and put in the will and put notices around the house otherwise the authorities will take them and end and in a pound on a knee jerk action the owner's views must be obeyed.

If someone dies at home it's not for the likes of the police to carry out the wishes of their will. It's not a knee jerk action putting an animal into a pound, dealing with the animal is down to the executor(s).

But the executor although might be very quick to start their process might not be there at the point of death or going to care, when the authorities police, ambulance etc., arrive would make knee-jerk decision allegally for the pets good or not so the pet might get dumped or put in a pound just to rid them of the property - if notices were placed around they would know (I hope) to leave alone or what to do. 

If there are  notices left about they should be left in the property till someone responsible arrives and not removed by some uncaring emergency bods - if they go into a pound it would be very expensive for their return

But you have covered that by suggesting that a donation to an appropriate animal charity is part of the will; an excellent idea.