MONEY MORAL DILEMMA: Should Anne put the animals down?

crin · 7 April 2010 at 2:42PM

I really don't think this type of question has a place on this website/forum.

Most people have pets because they love them or love animals in general. The thought of having one put to sleep is one that would torment someone who truly cared for their pet.

There are lots of rescue and shelters around who would either help with vets bills or find suitable homes that this 'dilemma' shouldn't even be given the time of day.
I am glad that some one has reported this thread as offensive and some of the replies are truly obnoxious.

PhiltheBear · 7 April 2010 at 2:44PM

MSE_Martin wrote: »

Being open to debate is important

This is a pure money moral dilemma - putting animals down is not illegal. Financially not having the animals adds up, yet is it morally acceptible. It's a moral v a money situation - exactly the type of MMD many people need face. <snip>

Hopefully anyone in a similar position will be able to learn from the tips, solutions and options given above.

Martin

No Martin, it isn't a pure money moral dilemma. Because it cuts off the very real alternative of being able to find homes for the animals. The question posed gave two alternatives and doesn't allow for any third way.

In this case the question posed is flawed (badly) and reflects that way on this forum.

MSE_Martin · 7 April 2010 at 2:47PM

PhiltheBear wrote: »

No Martin, it isn't a pure money moral dilemma. Because it cuts off the very real alternative of being able to find homes for the animals. The question posed gave two alternatives and doesn't allow for any third way.

In this case the question posed is flawed (badly) and reflects that way on this forum.

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".

Yet by definition the aim here is to find views and opinions and hopefully learn from others view points.

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?

Enchantica · 7 April 2010 at 2:55PM

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".

Yet by definition the aim here is to find views and opinions and hopefully learn from others view points.

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?

Sorry, back again, can't keep my mouth shut on this one. There are shelters who take in elderly and sick animals and if anyone needs to find one then I am the one to contact. Personally I take in elderly and sick rats and I can easily find people for other animals. I have many contacts and can help out where needed.

This thread isn't easy for some to stomach and some of the responses were not easy to read.

There is your answer. If someone is in this situation then call someone in the know ie. someone like me. If need be I will make up a list of appropriate shelters around the country. This should not be proposed as a kill and not to kill question. It should be "which shelters will take my animals?"

pippitypip_2 · 7 April 2010 at 2:59PM

imho, as a pet owner you are taking on the responsibility of that pet's welfare.

To put it/ them down needlessly would speak volumes about you as a person - when times are hard that responsibility you have chosen, doesn't just go away.

You should ensure all brilliant advice given here is followed - PDSA, RSPCA and other etc will help - you just need to put some time and effort into getting them re-homed.

I think the concerns about this thread are valid, in that the question itself is almost inviting abuse purely to offend (in some cases).

pippitypip

pippitypip_2 · 7 April 2010 at 3:01PM

Enchantica wrote: »

This should not be proposed as a kill and not to kill question. It should be "which shelters will take my animals?"

I completely agree, or maybe, "this is my situation - what should I do?"

pippitypip

Clive_Woody · 7 April 2010 at 3:04PM

Enchantica wrote: »

This should not be proposed as a kill and not to kill question. It should be "which shelters will take my animals?"

So yet again you are demanding that your way is the only way.

Both options (kill/no kill) proposed are viable and legal and it is an individuals choice which one they choose.

Enchantica · 7 April 2010 at 3:09PM

Clive_Woody wrote: »

So yet again you are demanding that your way is the only way.

Both options (kill/no kill) proposed are viable and legal and it is an individuals choice which one they choose.

Sigh.

I was going to just leave it and quit repeating myself but why should I? This thread isn't getting deleted so why bother.

I shall repeat: if you can choose to kill a healthy animal instead of giving it to a shelter, take a look at yourself in the mirror and decide if you like what you have become.

If you are in this situation then contact me and I will help.

aliasojo · 7 April 2010 at 3:15PM

Clive_Woody wrote: »

So yet again you are demanding that your way is the only way.

Both options (kill/no kill) proposed are viable and legal and it is an individuals choice which one they choose.

Sorry but I don't think you're being fair there. Kill or no kill was the crux of the original question. Other's have pointed out that a) those are not the only 2 options and b) the subject is too emotive for sensible discussion in the MSE Arms.

It's not a case of 'wanting things your own way', it's simply stating that the original question could have been put in a better way, if the intention really was to gain insight and tips on what best to do in a situation such as this.

A point I completely agree with.

siani70 · 7 April 2010 at 3:16PM

Better be careful what I say as my cat is sitting on my lap and reading what I type.

What I want to know is what on earth was Anne doing with all those animals in the first place? She took in all those strays with no thought as to their long-term future if she should get into financial difficulties! I'm sure she did it with the best intentions but you often see people on low incomes collecting large menageries which then become a burden to the RSPCA, PDSA, etc. I wish people would think before taking animals on.

Clearly, what Anne needs to do is get onto MSE and give herself a money makeover . Shame she didn't do it a year ago when she lost her job and the animals were a year younger.

MONEY MORAL DILEMMA: Should Anne put the animals down?

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free