Forum Home» Money Saving Polls

MONEY MORAL DILEMMA: Should Anne put the animals down? - Page 18

New Post Advanced Search

MONEY MORAL DILEMMA: Should Anne put the animals down?

edited 8 April 2010 at 9:22PM in Money Saving Polls
235 replies 31.7K views
1151618202124

Replies

  • I think this is a dilemma that a lot of people face though perhaps in less extreme circumstances/ with less extreme choices. For example do you get into debt to provide healthcare for pets? It also raises the issue of how I think we, in the rich West, relatively value human and animal life. There are a lot of animals living much better, even pampered, lives in our homes whilst children (and animals ) elsewhere starve. This does trouble me sometimes and I speak as someone who truly loves my cats and treats them like family.

    It is also a bit unrealistic to think that no rescue centre ever euthanises animals who are too sick or old if there is no-one who can take them in. The numbers available to adopt them must be very limited in proportion to the number of animals in this situation.
    My favourite subliminal message is;
  • cindytedcindyted Forumite
    11 posts
    I think this is a dilemma that a lot of people face though perhaps in less extreme circumstances/ with less extreme choices. For example do you get into debt to provide healthcare for pets? It also raises the issue of how I think we, in the rich West, relatively value human and animal life. There are a lot of animals living much better, even pampered, lives in our homes whilst children (and animals ) elsewhere starve. This does trouble me sometimes and I speak as someone who truly loves my cats and treats them like family.

    It is also a bit unrealistic to think that no rescue centre ever euthanises animals who are too sick or old if there is no-one who can take them in. The numbers available to adopt them must be very limited in proportion to the number of animals in this situation.
    I do not know if you are aware that not all rescue dogs awaiting rehoming are in rescue centres, in fact a lot are in foster homes awaiting rehoming. This is where a lot of the elderly dogs go. It is kinder for them to be in a home environment, and also most of the fosterers are of the opinion that if they dont get rehomed then they will stay with them. If fact there is a dogs 'oldies' site on the internet which lists a lot of the older dogs needing rehoming. Also Many Tears Rehoming centre in Wales, will accept any dog regardless of its condition. They take in dogs from the puppy farms and the pound, to save them being put to sleep.
  • Munkee2Munkee2 Forumite
    114 posts
    Hokie97 wrote: »
    But someone else also pointed out that you can get free medical care here in the UK. That's a luxury you don't get in the US. Anyone who puts their pet to sleep because they don't want it anymore is heartless. That's all there is to it. There are options out there, even if it is rehoming or a sanctuary.

    Unfortunately that's incorrect also. There's no such thing as free healthcare for animals in the UK.
  • Munkee2Munkee2 Forumite
    114 posts
    Before people over-ran this planet with technology, nature cared for itself! Please think more about about caring for some of the more endangered creatures that are being destroyed by people as a consequence of their wanton destruction of their habitat. Just because an organism is cuddly does not mean that it is important in the greater scheme of things. In the UK, frogs, toads, newts, red squirrels, bats, hedgehogs, many bird species and other animals are far more important than a few commonplace pets; and they all survive in the countryside despite our "help", or more directly, in spite of man's collective ignorance. Where are the butterflies, moths and other insects that I used to wonder at in the '60s as a kid? Pesticides, monocultural agriculture, hedgerow destruction, herbicides, concrete, tarmac, deforestation (half of this is health and safety rubbish in urban areas) etc. have all played their part in the death of our rich and diverse plantlife and wildlife.

    Have the cuddly animals put to sleep -and do something useful instead - their ancestors might thank you for it --- after the human population has outgrown its time and polished itself off the planet.....

    I just want to say that you're completely and utterly barking. And not in a good way either.
  • aliasojo wrote: »
    Lol, I offer my post count as a defence. I talk a lot under my one and only guise. :D

    You don't chat much in 3 years, do you? :D

    Edit: Or 2 and a half. :D

    no i'm the quiet one (... read them all tho);)

    joking aside - having seen your post count ....how the heck do you find so much time for all your posts???
  • cindyted wrote: »
    I do not know if you are aware that not all rescue dogs awaiting rehoming are in rescue centres, in fact a lot are in foster homes awaiting rehoming. This is where a lot of the elderly dogs go. It is kinder for them to be in a home environment, and also most of the fosterers are of the opinion that if they dont get rehomed then they will stay with them. If fact there is a dogs 'oldies' site on the internet which lists a lot of the older dogs needing rehoming. Also Many Tears Rehoming centre in Wales, will accept any dog regardless of its condition. They take in dogs from the puppy farms and the pound, to save them being put to sleep.

    It's good to know that at least some oldies are able to be so well looked after but I fear this is probably still not the majority.
    My favourite subliminal message is;
  • So here's a solution in part anyway. There are plenty of people out there who would happily allow Anne to keep her pony and goats on their land in return for doing chores, etc. Immediately saving money. May not solve the problem long term but will allow her a bit more time to find homes for these animals. The hamster has a short life span anyway and cost very little to keep so why put it down? What about approaching her local schools to see if they would like to take it on? I remember having a class hamster at school.
    As for the dogs and cats I'd suggest an open an honest conversation with her vet about quality of life and potential future complications before deciding to put any of them down. Some may be nearing the end of what could be considered a good quality of life.
    I know all about this as I have had to have my cat put down for what ultimately were financial reasons, having been made redundant last year. Before any animal lovers have a go. Believe me when I say it was not an easy decision to make and followed many tearful conversations with my long suffering vet! Having spent over £2000 trying to give him a decent quality of life when he developed an secondary complication, the money just wasn't there to try and manage both conditions with only a small chance of sucessfully stabilizing him and I had to decide between further debt or my cat suffering. I chose the third option, one I never thought I would or could take.
    As for my four ponies that I can't afford to keep and are what most people would consider not re-homable due to their age/behaviour/health issues? Guess what, with a little bit of help (a local rescue centre and my lovely vet again!) and they've found new homes...
    There are plenty of people out there who can help, if you know where to look. Your local vet practice is always a good place to start.

    On a separate note, euthanasia is bloomin' expensive especially for that number of animals not mention having them disposed of correctly, is it really financially more viable to put them down would be a question I'd ask myself.
  • lorne57 wrote: »
    Also please note from Martin's opening post

    She's got a pony, two goats, four dogs, three cats and a hamster - many getting on in years and with medical problems

    where in the opening post did it say the animals were healthy?

    Medical problems can be controlled.

    If you cannot keep them yourself, which I know sometimes you can't, you can always find homes (although it is hard), or someone could simply foster them.

    The PDSA are helpful in some situations.
    :D 2 daughters:
    :heart2::heart2: Cedi (9) and Petra (12)
  • aliasojoaliasojo Forumite
    23.1K posts
    no i'm the quiet one (... read them all tho);)

    joking aside - having seen your post count ....how the heck do you find so much time for all your posts???

    I have no life. :D Literally, unfortunately.
    Herman - MP for all! :)
  • MSE_Martin wrote: »
    No it doesn't its not multiple choice poll - it allows people to express their view, just as you have, without necessarily staying within the constraints of the dilemma.

    Many people have answered it with "find a shelter" what's had limited discussion is "is a shelter always available for all types of old sick animals".

    And the answer has been an emphatic 'Yes'.
    Yet by definition the aim here is to find views and opinions and hopefully learn from others view points.
    ??? The 'definition' of dilemma is "is a problem offering at least two solutions or possibilities, of which none are practically acceptable." You offered two solutions only - this wasn't a discussion of other solutions, it was a stark choice between two alternatives.
    You very obviously believe "it is not morally acceptible to put an animal down for financial reasons" - that's a valid view, but it is within the law of the land to do so - and it is a dilemma I have met people who have faced.

    Would it be different if it were a farmer who had landstock that couldn't sell and thus his choice was to cull them in order to cut costs?
    Actually, I can see all the points of view. My argument is that this was a sloppily researched question which didn't allow for any 3rd alternatives. If it had been posed as a question - e.g. "What should Anne do in this situation?" that would have been completely different. But it wasn't. It was simply a question which was always going to provoke an intense argument.

    Your reputation as an investigative journalist is now tarnished. If you couldn't be bothered to show that the question posed isn't restricted to one answer then that's just laziness. To cop out by saying 'it allows people to express their point of view' is just a weak excuse for that laziness.

    The result - there are a number of people who've posted real, viable alternatives (although they don't answer the yes or no question posed) and there are a number of people who have posted 'troll' type messages simply for the sake of being annoying.

    Judging from some of the responses this thread has upset a fair number of people - and it brings this whole forum into disrepute. That's sad.
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