Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    Former MSE Lawrence
    MONEY MORAL DILEMMA: Should Anne put the animals down?
    • #1
    • 6th Apr 10, 7:24 PM
    MONEY MORAL DILEMMA: Should Anne put the animals down? 6th Apr 10 at 7:24 PM
    Here's this week's hypothetical situation for you to cogitate on:

    Should Anne put the animals down?

    Anne's always been an animal lover and over the years has acquired many strays. She's got a pony, two goats, four dogs, three cats and a hamster - many getting on in years and with medical problems. A year ago she lost her job - her savings have gone, and she's struggling to keep her home. Her biggest cost is the animals' welfare & food. Nobody wants to take them.

    Click reply to have your say

    Previous MMDs: View All



    Update Note From Martin

    A quick response on the "this shouldn't be discussed its not appropriate" notes a few have listed.

    This is a more common situation than you think it originates from a similar (though no identical) question posed to me about what the options were for pets when the money had run out.

    In the past I once did a money makeover on a woman who's was massively overspending due to her animals and causing financial problems. As some in the thread have said they have been put in severe debt due to animal costs.

    Just because the consequences of this aren't nice - doesn't mean we don't need think how to deal with it.

    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.

    We live in a meat eating society - animals are killed for food all the time - the moral difference between that and putting an animal down so someone can afford to eat - is a relatively fine line. Different people draw conclusions on both sides of it. It's also worth noting at some point if she loses her home and is declared bankrupt the animals may be homesless and without food too.

    Of course its to be hoped sancturies and animal welfare charities would take the animals - indeed she is very obviously an animal lover as are many - and no one wants to think of animals suffering - and it will cause great emotion to get rid of them. Yet I've heard reports that especially old and sick animals can't always be catered for (though have no empirical evidence).

    Would it be different if it were a farmer who had livestock that couldn't sell and thus his choice was to cull them in order to cut costs?

    Why debate it?

    The point of the MMD is to make people think - to come up with a situation where different people will have opposing views and learn from each other.

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

    Please lets try and have a sensible rational debate about what some people face as a real economic and ethical reality.

    Martin

    PS Some animal shelters to help anyone in this position provided by people in this thread.

    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...s/default.aspx

    CATS

    Helping the Harder to Home Cats ('Top Cats' section) - Most rescues find they have a few cats that always seem to be overlooked, and often stay in care for months or even years. They may be elderly, have a medical condition, be very shy, or are simply passed by in favour of prettier or younger cats. Rescues can feature any 'harder to home' cats on our Top Cats section. This section has been very successful in finding new homes for many cats, some of whom had almost given up hope.
    http://www.catchat.org/adoption/index.html

    RODENTS

    Special notice should be given to Paws Here in Edinburgh - I support and regularly donate to this shelter and I take in their elderly rats when I can.
    http://www.animalrescuers.co.uk/html/rabferr.html

    FARM ANIMALS

    I am less familiar with farm animals but I have these links which may help:

    http://www.farmanimalrescue.org.uk/f...ry-history.htm
    Middlesex

    http://www.thefarmanimalsanctuary.co.uk/
    Worcestershire

    http://www.animalrescuers.co.uk/html/farm.html
    UK

    This site in general is really good for around the country shelters:
    http://www.animalrescuers.co.uk/





    This Forum Tip was included in MoneySavingExpert's weekly email

    Don't miss out on new deals, loopholes, and vouchers

    Last edited by MSE Martin; 08-04-2010 at 9:22 PM.
Page 11
    • donal_f
    • By donal_f 8th Apr 10, 9:59 PM
    • 92 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    donal_f
    Definitely put them down. No question.
    • zoelikesjam
    • By zoelikesjam 8th Apr 10, 11:39 PM
    • 405 Posts
    • 5,523 Thanks
    zoelikesjam
    NO;Bloody well not! How can you pose a problem like this? People should think of any outcome before they ever take on an animal, even if it is a trivial problem! I'm sorry, but being a vet nurse no self respecting vet will put down animals just 'because' and if they do they need bloody well reporting. Any vet will repsond with animal sanct's, rescue centres and a referal to another vet if this is really what anne wants. Any decent vet/vet nurse/vet surgery(if asked)/animal lover will take the time and energy to find a suitable new home or shelter. It is not hard to find a shelter. Even at the very least the RSPCA will take in all the animals. Write to your local newspaper, call the local radio station. Put up posters in shop windows, 'hire' out the ponies to young children wanting to learn about horse's(If they are well enough to take this) Call the PDSA who will treat three of the animals, anne would need to decied which three need the most medical care. This isnt as black and white as people are making it seem, 'do it/dont do it'
    There are plenty of other options. For heavens sake, if the ponies arent that ill, i am sure there will be a little girl somewhere who would love to care for the animal and learn about it, I am sure mummy and daddy would pay anne some money to please their child!
    I am shocked at Martin tho, you have given a couple of 'lighthearted lectures' lol but you havent given us YOUR opinion. I for one am curious to know if you would put any of your pets to sleep because you couldnt afford them. I am interested in this program you are doing however, and i do hope to see you giving lots of our colective advice before euthenasia is put forward as an option.

    My solution? Obviously she has a large house, with large land to house pony's, dogs cats.....rehouse the pony who is taking up the land, sell the HUGE house with LARGE ammount of land....rent somewhere substantially cheaper. Use the money to look after the other animals. If on benefits use the PDSA as others have sugested.

    Sorry if others dont agree but this is so wrong
    Last edited by zoelikesjam; 09-04-2010 at 12:38 PM.
    May the force of the flyladies be with you
    Zoelikesjam Is loud...Obnoxious and completely inappropriate for all ages!
    Viewer discretion is strongly advised!
    I am pretty sure you DONT want to know whats on my mind!
    • BigMummaF
    • By BigMummaF 9th Apr 10, 8:51 AM
    • 4,269 Posts
    • 32,002 Thanks
    BigMummaF
    Here's this week's hypothetical situation for you to cogitate on:

    Should Anne put the animals down?

    1. Anne's always been an animal lover and 2.over the years has acquired many strays. She's got a pony, two goats, four dogs, three cats and a hamster - 3. many getting on in years and with medical problems. 4. A year ago she lost her job - her savings have gone, and she's struggling to keep her home. 5. Her biggest cost is the animals' welfare & food. 6. Nobody wants to take them. ....
    Originally posted by MSE Lawrence
    1. An animal lover, so very likely already knows a thing or two about available charities, sanctuaries etc.
    2. Presumably with that kind of menagerie & no 3, already has some dealings with a veterinary surgery.
    4. A year is a flippin' long time when you're struggling to make ends meet. A pet hate of mine are those ridiculous "celebrity" shows where they presume to tell folk how to survive after just a week on benefits themselves And there is no mention of 'Anne' being on any benefit here.
    When my amazing BIL passed away, his wife was also in the middle of being made redundant & had already been off work for three months to look after him at home. When it came time to assess her possible benefit, she was told that Pet Insurance was NOT a priority & did not count as an essential payment. When she asked what she was supposed to do if the pooch ever needed treatment, she was told--quite callously--if she couldn't afford it, then The Injection would have to sort it for her!
    5. She is trying hard not to neglect her animals, so please credit 'Anne' with a little more compassion than is being bandied about. The way I have interpreted some posts--& totally agree it is difficult to put inflection where intended when writing it down!--folk have put the poor woman in the same class as a staffie-toting chav dealer! And before you say anything!!! Our pooch is a staffie/english bull X & no! We don't deal, [unless it's cards for a game of Snap!] but that is another discussion topic all together...
    6. NO BOD-DEE WANTS THEM!

    There are so many grey areas in this scenario that have been thrown up in the discussion, but I do feel that becoming so heated without having access to ALL the facts is part of the reason folk end up in exactly this kind of situation. How frightening it is, to want to ask for help but terrified of the accusations & vilifying if you do.

    Tolerance People, please & just a smidge less of the self-righteousness?
    Full time Carer for Mum; harassed mother of three;
    loving & loved by two 4-legged babies.

    • Clive Woody
    • By Clive Woody 9th Apr 10, 10:03 AM
    • 4,909 Posts
    • 5,487 Thanks
    Clive Woody
    NO;Bloody well not! How can you pose a problem like this? People should think of any outcome before they ever take on an animal, even if it is a trivial problem! I'm sorry, but being a vet nurse no self respecting vet will put down animals just 'because' and if they do they need bloody well reporting.
    Originally posted by zoelikesjam
    Who do you suggest they are reported to? This is not illegal.

    My hypothetical scenario....
    you are in a loving realtionship, you find yourself happily pregnant. you have a wonderful baby. you are happy. Partner leaves, pays no maintenence, you lose your job. you have to put your child to sleep because you cant eat yourself.
    Sorry, replace that paragraph with pet. you find yourself adopting a puppy.
    We are talking about euthanasing animals here not killing children. Maybe you should start a new thread if you wish to discuss killing children as that is not the topic for discussion here. To compare the two is hysterical nonsense IMHO.

    "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
  • debtdesperado
    The PDSA etc make a charge to put animals down - it's about £50 for a cat, so I imagine it would be more for goats and ponies etc. So even that is not a straightforward solution.

    I am taking the scenario exactly as described OBVIOUSLY if there is wriggle room to find someone to take these animals then you wouldn't put them down.

    But assuming no one wants them... she is obviously the priority here; if she is homeless then they are going to be put down anyway. I like the poster above's scenario that if she has a pony and goats she has some land/large house which could be sold... so maybe the thing to do is to work out which animals cost the most, and where cuts can be made?

    So any animal which requires expensive vetinary care to keep it alive, (which personally I think is not very kind anyway - unlike a human who can say, enough, I don't want to be treated, let me die, an animal can't) I would suggest should be put down, regardless of its age. If the animal doesn't really have any quality of life, humans shouldn't be allowed to extend it just because they want the animal there.

    Then I would look at those animals which are my real favourites and which give most comfort... I guess this would probably be a cat/dog rather than a hamster or goat. I would keep that animal (maximum two, preferably one!), subject to the proviso above about vets bills. When you are going through a horrible trauma, a loving pet is a great help.

    Then I think, depending on how desperate the situation was and whether I had sold everything else possible to scrape some money together/could move etc, I think I would have the other animals put down.
    • aliasojo
    • By aliasojo 9th Apr 10, 10:49 AM
    • 22,264 Posts
    • 48,387 Thanks
    aliasojo
    We are talking about euthanasing animals here not killing children. Maybe you should start a new thread if you wish to discuss killing children as that is not the topic for discussion here. To compare the two is hysterical nonsense IMHO.

    Originally posted by Clive Woody
    I really don't want to start a fight....honest , but you don't seem able to take on board that other people may view a life as a life and indeed do feel their animals are like children to them. You may feel this is ridiculous to compare the two, but it clearly isn't to others and you need to respect other people's views too without dismissing them as 'hysterical nonsense', that's just not fair. < obligatory grin.

    1. An animal lover, so very likely already knows a thing or two about available charities, sanctuaries etc.
    Originally posted by BigMummaF
    Sorry but I don't agree with this point. I'm an animal lover complete with pets and the most I know about is where my vet is. I think many people wont know about what facilities are out there unless they've had cause to need them in the past.
    Herman - MP for all!
    • Clive Woody
    • By Clive Woody 9th Apr 10, 11:14 AM
    • 4,909 Posts
    • 5,487 Thanks
    Clive Woody
    I really don't want to start a fight....honest , but you don't seem able to take on board that other people may view a life as a life and indeed do feel their animals are like children to them. You may feel this is ridiculous to compare the two, but it clearly isn't to others and you need to respect other people's views too without dismissing them as 'hysterical nonsense', that's just not fair. < obligatory grin.
    Originally posted by aliasojo
    I appreciate some people think the life of a hamster is comparable with that of a child, but this does not stop me thinking this is utter nonsense and nothing but an hysterical outburst.

    My feelings on this subject are as strong as theirs and I find it hard to respect their views when so few of them will conceed that people who do not agree with their opinions are not necessarily wrong.

    "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
  • meher
    It is our instinctive response to sense another person's or animal's pain or suffering, not a moral one. For the same reason we cannot feel selectively. So it shouldn't be suppressed, otherwise the ability to empathise would gradually diminish in us. So, no, inflicting any form of cruelyt shouldn't be allowed as suggested in the OP. The starting point probably is to find animal life and rights the same as humans - to challenge and address any prejudice against them like we would consider all other prejudices. Returning to the dilemma, I liked that solution suggested about setting up a charity to feed and care for these animals so that they don't have to leave the environment they must have grown fond of.
    • Clive Woody
    • By Clive Woody 9th Apr 10, 12:45 PM
    • 4,909 Posts
    • 5,487 Thanks
    Clive Woody
    It is our instinctive response to sense another person's or animal's pain or suffering, not a moral one. For the same reason we cannot feel selectively. So it shouldn't be suppressed, otherwise the ability to empathise would gradually diminish in us. So, no, inflicting any form of cruelyt shouldn't be allowed as suggested in the OP.
    Originally posted by meher
    Many people are very poor at empathy which does not support your suggestion that it is an instinctive response, rather a learned one. People cannot feel selectively, but many people view things quite differently and therefore have widely differing opinions on solutions and how they feel about them.

    No form of curelty was suggested in the OP, the question was whether the animals should be put down.

    "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
  • harryhound
    I have just set the rat trap out in the "barn" - what alternative would you suggest?
    I know it our fault: "have bird feeder get rats".
    • zoelikesjam
    • By zoelikesjam 9th Apr 10, 1:12 PM
    • 405 Posts
    • 5,523 Thanks
    zoelikesjam
    Who do you suggest they are reported to? This is not illegal.
    I know its not illegal, it was MY OPINION which you seem so keen to point out is everyones right to have. It was and still is my opinion any vet willing to put an animal to sleep just because the owner has no money should not be a vet! The whole purpose of our job is to help animals and care for them, not put them down like they are a bloody inconvience. Any self respecting vet, and one who cares about his/her job description would sit down and discuss several options with the owner. If the owner still insisted on having the animal put down I know my vet would refer her to another vets surgery for a second opinion. She would do everything in her power to keep those animals alive, providing they arent in any pain/

    We are talking about euthanasing animals here not killing children. Maybe you should start a new thread if you wish to discuss killing children as that is not the topic for discussion here. To compare the two is hysterical nonsense IMHO.
    As much as i LOATH agreeing with you here it was in part an angry outburst, and i have subsequently changed my post. HOWEVER I dont think it is hysterical nonsense to compare the two. I love my animals like i love my children, and the thought of having them put down makes me feel slightly ill. However I would have to figure out what the heck to do if my husband lost his job and we found ourselves in a situation where we had no money.
    What would I do? I have three children. If hubby lost his job and I had to go on benefits I would be in a bit of a pickle. I would, however gladly eat a slice of bread a day to see my children fed. I would cut back everything, move into a smaller property, use less heat, sell as many of my things to generate a bit of money, work in macdonalds if i had to. But, say that didnt generate enough money to feed my three beautiful children. Say i literally had no food in the cuboards. Would I phone social services and put them up for adoption so they would be fed and warm? No, I would do everything posible in my power to look after my charges. Exactly the same for my cats and rabbits. If i couldnt cope i would have to do SOMETHING!
    I can honestly say if a lady came into our surgery with this dilema by the end of the day several of the animals would have been rehomed by the staff. I for one would end up taking the hampster and a cat home

    I know this is an emotive situation, and I feel for anyone who is ever put in this situation, I would love to think all responsible animal owners think of every eventuality, but they dont, noone can predict what will happen further down the line.
    I really don't want to start a fight....honest , but you don't seem able to take on board that other people may view a life as a life and indeed do feel their animals are like children to them. You may feel this is ridiculous to compare the two, but it clearly isn't to others and you need to respect other people's views too without dismissing them as 'hysterical nonsense', that's just not fair. < obligatory grin.
    Thanks Aliasojo, I didnt want to upset anyone with my comment, because it was just that, MY comment. However after reading some of the posts clive has put I am not suprised he dived on my post to pull apart my opinion. Everyone has then and just because I dont agree with his, is it his right to tell me I am being hysterical? Hm
    On the note of feeling animals are like our children, I personally do have a cat who is for all intents and purpose's my baby. She was brought up by me, fed by me, raised by me long before i had children, so she is effectivly my first born...opened my eyes to two hourly night feeds...and i still went on to have three children!!!

    I like the poster above's scenario that if she has a pony and goats she has some land/large house which could be sold... so maybe the thing to do is to work out which animals cost the most, and where cuts can be made?
    It is curious. If she has all those animals one would asume she is living in a large house with a fair ammount of land, or the rspca would already have removed some of the animals! She would have several options. If te house is rented Anne needs to give it up, rehome the pony's, goats and posibly some of the dogs if not all through an animal sanc' and rent a far cheaper property. As Anne is not working this would be the better option, I am prety sure she would be getting benefits and they would pay the rent? If Anne is living in a large property they will not pay all of that rent. So straight away thats a major problem solved as she isnt having to top up her rent AND it would qualifie her for PDSA treatment for three of her animals. You are only intitled to it if you claim housing benefit...or it used to be!
    If the house is brought, and anne is not working how is she still living there? Benefits(again i think) will only cover interest? Sell the house, move into a poxy little ground floor flat(I presume it is anne alone) if she is keeping some of the animals make sure she has a small garden(plenty of space for walkies!) I am prety sure the sale on a large house would cover the cost of a little flat, or better still, use the sale money, get rid of some of her debts and rent, then get the rent paid by housing benefit? Surely this is some sort of solution?

    Oh, and just for the record,
    Nobody wants to take them.
    Originally posted by MSE Lawrence
    The RSPCA will ALWAYS take in animals
    May the force of the flyladies be with you
    Zoelikesjam Is loud...Obnoxious and completely inappropriate for all ages!
    Viewer discretion is strongly advised!
    I am pretty sure you DONT want to know whats on my mind!
  • tinktinktinkerbell
    no dont put them down, i have 4 hamsters and i would rather go without myself to make sure they have what they need
    • Clive Woody
    • By Clive Woody 9th Apr 10, 1:53 PM
    • 4,909 Posts
    • 5,487 Thanks
    Clive Woody
    I know its not illegal, it was MY OPINION which you seem so keen to point out is everyones right to have. It was and still is my opinion any vet willing to put an animal to sleep just because the owner has no money should not be a vet! The whole purpose of our job is to help animals and care for them, not put them down like they are a bloody inconvience. Any self respecting vet, and one who cares about his/her job description would sit down and discuss several options with the owner. If the owner still insisted on having the animal put down I know my vet would refer her to another vets surgery for a second opinion. She would do everything in her power to keep those animals alive, providing they arent in any pain/
    Originally posted by zoelikesjam
    I was well aware it was just your opinion, I was just curious who you thought they should be reported to. I guess you don't have an answer to that.

    As much as i LOATH agreeing with you here it was in part an angry outburst, and i have subsequently changed my post. HOWEVER I dont think it is hysterical nonsense to compare the two. I love my animals like i love my children, and the thought of having them put down makes me feel slightly ill. However I would have to figure out what the heck to do if my husband lost his job and we found ourselves in a situation where we had no money.
    On this we shall have to disagree. I have two gorgeous children who I dearly love, I have had many pets over the years who have been great. The two simply do not compare IMHO

    Thanks Aliasojo, I didnt want to upset anyone with my comment, because it was just that, MY comment. However after reading some of the posts clive has put I am not suprised he dived on my post to pull apart my opinion. Everyone has then and just because I dont agree with his, is it his right to tell me I am being hysterical? Hm
    By your own admission it was an 'angry outburst' I apologise for using the incorrect terminology.

    From the very start of this thread I have defended everybodies right to post their opinion, I was horrified when many people posted stating their opinion was the only one and demanding that the thread be closed or deleted.

    "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
    • PhiltheBear
    • By PhiltheBear 9th Apr 10, 3:11 PM
    • 270 Posts
    • 310 Thanks
    PhiltheBear
    II was horrified when many people posted stating their opinion was the only one and demanding that the thread be closed or deleted.

    Originally posted by Clive Woody
    Oh dear. Sorry to upset you.

    I was one of the movers for this thread to be deleted because the dilemma is nonsensical. There are, as we've seen posted, a number of places that will take the animals. Therefore the 'nobody will take them' is a proposition that simply doesn't occur.

    Added to that it was always going to be a battleground between animal lovers and non-animal lovers. As in fact has happened. Not to mention the trolls.

    Martin's latest posting is a weak cop-out once again. He's an experienced journalist. I'm a card carrying journalist too. It would take the work of under half an hour to ascertain that there were animal charities who would take these animals. But rather than pose a reasoned question it was posed as a 'dilemma' which doesn't exist. That simply led to the flame wars. It has served no purpose.

    And, BTW,I don't believe anyone has claimed that their opinion was the 'only one'. Perhaps you are thinking about yourself?
    • Clive Woody
    • By Clive Woody 9th Apr 10, 4:25 PM
    • 4,909 Posts
    • 5,487 Thanks
    Clive Woody
    Oh dear. Sorry to upset you.
    Originally posted by PhiltheBear
    Not upset at all Phil, merely disappointed that a bunch of grown ups couldn't manage a reasoned debate without petty foot stamping and toys flying out of prams.

    I was one of the movers for this thread to be deleted because the dilemma is nonsensical. There are, as we've seen posted, a number of places that will take the animals. Therefore the 'nobody will take them' is a proposition that simply doesn't occur.

    Added to that it was always going to be a battleground between animal lovers and non-animal lovers. As in fact has happened. Not to mention the trolls.

    Martin's latest posting is a weak cop-out once again. He's an experienced journalist. I'm a card carrying journalist too. It would take the work of under half an hour to ascertain that there were animal charities who would take these animals. But rather than pose a reasoned question it was posed as a 'dilemma' which doesn't exist. That simply led to the flame wars. It has served no purpose.
    As many others have posted, from personal experience, rehoming sick and elderly, large animals is often not an option and therefore the dilema posted is valid.

    I have no issue with Martin's justifications for keeping this thread open and not bowing to the demands of those ill-prepared to enter into reasoned debate. I believe the original post contains a quite valid point for discussion.

    And, BTW,I don't believe anyone has claimed that their opinion was the 'only one'. Perhaps you are thinking about yourself?
    I would be keen for you to point out where I claimed my opinion was the only one?

    Quite possibly this is your journalistic instincts coming through here and only reading what you want to hear. Perhaps you should go back and read the thread again and take note of those who claimed there was only one option.

    "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
    • relaxtwotribes
    • By relaxtwotribes 9th Apr 10, 7:02 PM
    • 280 Posts
    • 125 Thanks
    relaxtwotribes
    Thank you, MSE. This week's MMD has been very entertaining. Keep it up.
  • Hobotalk

    So - if I was Anne; no, I wouldn't put them to sleep. That's my conscience though, which is more important to me than money. Not necessarily wise - but the right answer for me, personally.
    Originally posted by RuthnJasper
    Well I've read through the majority of the replys and this is the only post I consider reasonable from people arguing that the animal's shouldn't be put down. It is a personal decision.

    Some people are very passionate about their pets but they don't realise that it isn't their place to sit up on high and tell Anne that she's a terrible human being by putting her needs before her pets. Certainly I believe that people comparing humanely putting an animal down to brutal child murder (of which there is no excuse for) should be given a psychoanalysis. Yes, if Anne could find a shelter or charity to take the pets or support her then that would be the best option.

    The fact is I would only hope that no matter how much Anne loves her pets, she would see sense and not go hungry and cold (which is what several people on this forum would have her do) while attempting to care for her pets.
    Last edited by Hobotalk; 09-04-2010 at 9:32 PM.
  • Hobotalk
    Say i literally had no food in the cuboards. Would I phone social services and put them up for adoption so they would be fed and warm? No, I would do everything posible in my power to look after my charges. Exactly the same for my cats and rabbits. If i couldnt cope i would have to do SOMETHING!
    Originally posted by zoelikesjam
    Also, it wouldn't be your decision to phone social work if there was no food in the cupboards. Social work would (rightly) rescue any child who is starving and I don't think a defence of having to pay for your pets would stand up in court.
    Last edited by Hobotalk; 10-04-2010 at 3:03 AM.
    • Munkee2
    • By Munkee2 10th Apr 10, 4:20 PM
    • 114 Posts
    • 35 Thanks
    Munkee2
    I would'nt be without mine, I don't drink/smoke so my pets are my hobby. Currently have 2 dogs, 1 rabbit, 3 g.pigs, 6 hamsters, 5 rats, and fish. Costs about 7 quid a week for all of them. Thats a few pence more than a packet of cig's to many.
    Originally posted by get me out
    I dread to think what you're feeding them. You CANNOT feed two dogs as well as 15 smaller animals AND fish for £7 a week. I bet they're all suffering from malnutrition.

    JMO of course. I have one dog, one rabbit and one hamster and can't feed those three nutritious meals for £7 a week.

    I ought to add that you didn't even say you spend £7 on FOOD - you implied it was for their upkeep - does this include bedding materials and hay for your rabbit, g. pig & hamster? Worming for your dogs... vaccinations for your dogs and rabbit?

    Your post has worried me.
  • tinktinktinkerbell
    I dread to think what you're feeding them. You CANNOT feed two dogs as well as 15 smaller animals AND fish for £7 a week. I bet they're all suffering from malnutrition.

    JMO of course. I have one dog, one rabbit and one hamster and can't feed those three nutritious meals for £7 a week.

    I ought to add that you didn't even say you spend £7 on FOOD - you implied it was for their upkeep - does this include bedding materials and hay for your rabbit, g. pig & hamster? Worming for your dogs... vaccinations for your dogs and rabbit?

    Your post has worried me.
    Originally posted by Munkee2

    ive got 4 hamsters and a bag of harry hamster is only £1.85, not sure about things like dog food but i know hamster food isnt that expensive
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

299Posts Today

3,201Users online

Martin's Twitter