Forum Home» Money Saving Polls

MONEY MORAL DILEMMA: Should Anne put the animals down? - Page 17

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
1141517192024

Replies

  • lemontartlemontart Forumite
    6K posts
    no no no - fine a sanctuary or other organisation than can help https://www.anihome.co.uk for just some listed by county if they cannot help they many know of others who can.
    I am responsible me, myself and I alone I am not the keeper others thoughts and words.
  • edited 7 April 2010 at 6:57PM
    RuthnJasperRuthnJasper Forumite
    4K posts
    Part of the Furniture Combo Breaker Debt-free and Proud!
    ✭✭✭✭
    edited 7 April 2010 at 6:57PM
    MSE_Martin wrote: »
    If you can post links of shelters which will take animals in regardless of health - i'll happily link to them in the first post - then hopefully some will gain from it.

    Dear Martin,

    http://www.stokenchurchdogrescue.co.uk/ is where Jasper (and his two late predecessors) came from. To my knowledge, they don't euthanise (unless, obviously, it is in the best interests of the dog). The story of Jasper's time in the shelter is currently ongoing on his blog (link when clicking my username).

    Thanks for all you do for Moneysavers.

    Ruth (and Jasper) x
  • tallgirldtallgirld Forumite
    484 posts
    Part of the Furniture
    ✭✭
    YES they should be put down.

    The dilemma is no one will take them in. The woman is skint and she is
    struggling to keep her home. Put the animals down. Some of them already have medical issues. The issues will get worse as she is not in a position to care for them. Get real people!!!
  • Clive_WoodyClive_Woody Forumite
    5.5K posts
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭
    cindyted wrote: »
    I do not thing the term 'chop them up' is particularly a nice term, and I am sure could have been put in a more sympathetic manner. I agree there a two sides to this discussion. You are are obviously passionate about your Rugby, I am passionate about animals. As for getting a grip, dont patronise me.

    A post in response to those comparing animal euthanasia to child murder.

    I was posting an equally ridiculous emotive response, but from the other side of the argument. Hopefully that is now clear.

    :D
    "We act as though comfort and luxury are the chief requirements of life, when all that we need to make us happy is something to be enthusiastic about” – Albert Einstein
  • Martin,

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

    Very disappointed.
  • Important update! We have recently reviewed and updated our Forum Rules and FAQs. Please take the time to familiarise yourself with the latest version.
  • Clive_WoodyClive_Woody Forumite
    5.5K posts
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭
    Enchantica wrote: »
    DOGS

    Founded in 1891, Dogs Trust (formerly the National Canine Defence League) is the largest dog welfare charity in the UK. Our mission is to bring about the day when all dogs can enjoy a happy life, free from the threat of unnecessary destruction.
    http://www.dogstrust.org.uk/rehoming/searchcentres/default.aspx

    From their website "We never destroy a healthy dog"

    So dogs with medical conditions as mentioned in the first post on this discussion would most likely be for the chop.

    :D
    "We act as though comfort and luxury are the chief requirements of life, when all that we need to make us happy is something to be enthusiastic about” – Albert Einstein
  • Clive_WoodyClive_Woody Forumite
    5.5K posts
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭
    David_Q-T wrote: »
    Martin,

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

    Very disappointed.

    Your loss, bye then.

    :money::wave:

    I guess the great art of debating has descended to throwing toys out of the pram and having a bit of a sulk.

    :D
    "We act as though comfort and luxury are the chief requirements of life, when all that we need to make us happy is something to be enthusiastic about” – Albert Einstein
  • edited 7 April 2010 at 8:16PM
    kateheskkatehesk Forumite
    246 posts
    edited 7 April 2010 at 8:16PM
    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).

    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.

    To those people who simply own an animal, but do not particularly value animals or find value in owning animals (and these people do exist, my grandma was a little like this and my mum once told me a story that when she saw a dog run over and killed - quite horrifically so - and was hysterically upset, she was told by my grandmother to shut up, get over it and that it was only a dog - yet my mum always had pets growing up) then maybe they could consider this.

    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. Imo, that is simply not a moral solution.
  • edited 7 April 2010 at 8:03PM
    st2000st2000 Forumite
    4 posts
    edited 7 April 2010 at 8:03PM
    I don't know why people are getting so offended by this very real dilemma.

    Surely euthanasia is a better end for a loved but elderly and sick pet than being dumped in a shelter?

    Katehesk, I would postulate that euthanasia is a very responsible thing to do if an animal is unlikely to be rehomed due to age/infirmity and cannot realistically be kept, and I don't think that is any reflection of how much you love animals.
  • kateheskkatehesk Forumite
    246 posts
    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.
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