MONEY MORAL DILEMMA: Should Anne put the animals down?
Comments
-
PhiltheBear wrote: »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.
Sorry, but this is a load of complete ***** !!!! :rotfl:
It's a MMD, not a piece of investigative journalism - Seriously, get some perspective, please !!
Are your animal/moral credentials screaming in your head, when you are at the meat counter in Tesco ? or when you have the Wasp spray out, or are laying the Ant Powder?0 -
I knew a woman at work that was in a similar position and I said in conversation to someone else that she should give her two dogs away as it wasn't likely to be a short period of finding money difficult and she herself wasn't eating properly. I got myself in so much trouble by my comment and I never even suggesting putting them to sleep!! People get very emotional on this subject but feeding a human being will ALWAYS be more important to me than feeding an animal. If you have to make the choice it has to be a no-brainer.0
-
I can't believe people's reaction to this thread, there is nothing immoral about asking this question. Euthanasia is far better than an uncertain future.
I believe firmly that putting these animals to sleep is the best thing to do, both for her own sake and for the sake of the animals given they are old and infirm. It is unrealistic to think that all unwanted animals can be accommodated in sanctuaries, and far better to take responsibility for them and guarantee they will not fall into the wrong hands or be treated badly in the future. Death is not the worst thing.
As a vet, I would provide support to rehome animals that were healthy if this was the owners wish, but if this was not appropriate and they were ill/old I would have no qualms about putting them down.
Completely agree with this poster.Why should it be taken out of her hands? They are her animals and she has cared for them well but is no longer able to.
For many people knowing an animal has been put to sleep offers far more peace of mind than wondering if it is being passed from pillar to post and cared for properly, and is in my opinion far more responsible than avoiding this difficult decision by palming animals with problems off on the nearest charity.
It would be wrong to effectively villify someone for considering this as a reasonable way out of very serious problems.
YupI 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.
and again....
Its a horrible decision to have to make at any stage of an animals life - but when you take an animal on, you are responsible for their welfare, to the best of your ability. If you cant keep the animals any more, and there are no rescue centres with room to keep them (bearing in mind you cant just rock up and drop them off, and most of the rescues put down animals on permanent medication!) then euthanasia becomes a viable option. Illness' or infirmities IMO just push things nearer euthanasia being the kindest thing for everyone.
BUT - as pointed out already, its not cheap to put animals down - horses are around the £200 - £300 mark, depending on how its done - or if you really cant afford things, then if you are lucky a local hunt will come and euthanase your large animal and take it away to use as feed. They get pretty full though, so you cant bank on that being an option.
In a perfect world - of course you wouldnt have to put any animal down unless it was ill or injured beyond help - in the real world,sometimes its best for everyone....Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup0 -
I seem to remember a documentary about the West Country a couple of years ago that featured an old boy with a pick-up who went from farm to farm "solving" the problem of the bull calves which we are not allowed to export any more (and as the offspring of dairy cows did not make very profitable veal anyway).
I cannot remember the exact costs involved (there was also a problem of not being able to feed all the carcases to the local hunt.); though he did strip the hides.
My memory is that there was less than 20 quid involved in the transaction.
I've just done a search and found a thread about farming realities - though it might be a bit out of date now that the subsidies have gone up because they are paid in Euros.
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=173395&highlight=bull+calves0 -
Sorry, but this is a load of complete ***** !!!! :rotfl:
It's a MMD, not a piece of investigative journalism - Seriously, get some perspective, please !!
It's on a website, posed as a 'dilemma' by an investigative journalist who has a considerable reputation. The simple fact is - it isn't a 'dilemma' at all. The 'dilemma', as posed, admits only two answers - put the animals down or starve. It does not admit ANY other possibility. It may have been the intention to start a debate. What' it has actually done is made the site, by association, less valuable than it ought to be.
I don't understand the relevance of that, at all. .Are your animal/moral credentials screaming in your head, when you are at the meat counter in Tesco ? or when you have the Wasp spray out, or are laying the Ant Powder?
The fact is - if the animals in this scenario need to be rehomed, no matter how sick they are, there are places which will take them, as amply demonstrated in previous posts. If they need putting down because they are sick, that may well be an outcome but that's not the question. The question is simply "to save money would you kill them?"
Martin has continually said that this is a 'real' scenario that people have introduced him to. As we have seen, one poster on this thread managed to list a number of places that would rehome the animals with very little effort. Yet Martin has claimed, effectively, that such an outcome wasn't viable - and that he knew of cases where the only option was euthanasia. I'll reiterate - as a journalist he should have been able, with very little effort to ascertain that it's not so. Indeed, he'd have the makings of a good 'human interest' story by doing so. (I can see the Sun or Mirror trumpeting "How we saved Annie's animals from death").
Therefore, the framing of the 'dilemma' was simply sloppy - and bound to lead to the sort of fight that's occurring.
It's all unnecessary. And, as it happens, pointless.0 -
I cannot help thinking that the geography has something to do with which charity shelters are available to take the larger animals, & would also affect how you could physically get them there. If you live for example, in Southampton & the closest donkey sanctuary is Sunderland, you're kind of stuck!
Also, presumably there is an awful lot of phoning around involved when trying to sort out places & the cost has to be considered. IF the land line &/or mobile have been disconnected at an earlier juncture in order to cut costs, that would also severely hamper 'Anne's' chances of finding help. Likewise domestic internet connection could also have been sacrificed, so the odd half hour in a public library wouldn't really give you a lot of time to research your options AND there are restrictions to what you can do from these terminals.
Given the state of things, there would also be a very good chance the poor woman is suffering some degree of depression. Even if she is on medication, she may not be thinking clearly.
To say this kind of situation is beyond belief, is a rather naive view-point given the recent & totally unexpected financial chaos the world has experienced in living memory. I do not know what is worse; the fact that this could be--& is--happening for real, or that some folk refuse to believe it is happening at all.
Full time Carer for Mum; harassed mother of three;loving & loved by two 4-legged babies.
0 -
PhiltheBear wrote: »What' it has actually done is made the site, by association, less valuable than it ought to be.
What a drama queen!!! Get a life.0 -
charge 1.50 per go for rides on the pony. or £10 per hour to take it out.
presumably there is a field so open a petting farm and charge the council for school trips out. request volunteers to help with management.:A0 -
In my opinion, the most obvious problem is the pony. It's hard to find somewhere to home this, if it is too old to be ridden, no-one will want it, and horse shelters are few and far between. It will be costing her a lot to keep, as I assume it is at livery, because it's cruel in itself to keep the pony on its own.
The RSPCA have a kill policy, for those of you who don't know that. Chances are, the end result would be the same, but with a lot more stress for the animals involved. In fact, finding a no kill shelter is quite difficult in some parts of the country! S/E cornwall has no dedicated animal rescue center, there is cats protection league, and a few kennels who will help with dogs (but there is a limit to their kindness) but nowhere that would take the other animals.
The goats would also be a problem, I don't know of a single animal shelter that takes goats- although I volunteered at one that had pigs, so they might have tried to help. However, sadly there was a limit to the number of animals they could house on their site- when they were full (and I do mean to the brim, which they really were in kitten season, every room was full of cats!) they had to say I'm sorry, there's no more room. Because it's just as cruel to keep animals in crowded conditions and unable to care for them properly.
If I was in Anne's position- here is what I would do, which I know some of you may not agree with.
1. The pony- if it's too old to be ridden I imagine it's into its thirties, and by this age will not be in the best of health and has presumably had a good life- If nowhere can be found for it then I would have it PTS. If it can be ridden, I would try and find a riding school who might want it free of charge. I would advertise it in the paper as a companion pony for as long as I could, if it could not- but this is the biggest financial drain sadly.
2. The goats- Can they be made to pay their way by producing cheese? It's a possibility. I would try every option to find somewhere for them to go, but again this may not be a possibility. If they have to be PTS I would accept this.
3. After this, I would hope to be able to downsize my property and use my money to keep the other animals.
I know this sounds heartless, but many ponies are put to sleep when they can no longer be ridden anyway in this country, or at least a few years into retirement, it's a sad fact, but not that many people want them. I wouldn't like to even try to rehome goats- I had a quick look online, and I can't find a single shelter in cornwall and devon with goats, although I may be wrong.
I have volunteered at an animal shelter, and worked at a kennels that also took rescue dogs. It is very hard to get someone to take an animal off your hands unless you physically abandon it, and sadly many chartities have a kill policy for animals that are not easily rehomed. I wish it was that easy to find somewhere, but in the recession, so many are full. And if I'm honest, I think the transition for an old-ill animal might be too much anyway.0 -
charge 1.50 per go for rides on the pony. or £10 per hour to take it out.
presumably there is a field so open a petting farm and charge the council for school trips out (**). request volunteers to help with management.
Unfortunately we don't live in fairy land - the self employment and local authority bureaucracy would cost money (and probably building changes) (*). If this was a potentially profitable enterprise; someone would finance it. It isn't, there is no money tree so it won't happen.
(*) The pony has run off and battered my child against a damaged barn door. My child is now in a wheel chair for the rest of its life - who pays?
(**) Teachers probably spend more time doing the "risk assessment" than they do on the "farm" these days - As a result I think you will find lots of kids have no idea about the countryside and school trips to such "dangerous" environments just don't happen in the numbers they used to.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.6K Spending & Discounts
- 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards