Quote:
Originally Posted by gracielove  I think it is social snobbery to say that people who have little money should not be allowed to have a pet. Thankfully, there are still people who love animals and want to give one a home. I'm not talking about people who neglect and abuse animals. But there are people of limited income who still need to love a dog or cat and the animal needs someone to care for them. It is a shame that the cost of medical care for pets has skyrocketed so much. It use to be that most people could afford to take their pets to the vet and not face a bill starting at $100.00.
To me a person that loves their dog but is facing a couple of thousand dollars in vet bills to fix the liver shunt should be able to go to a humane organization and get help without having to turn the dog over. If the people love the dog and take care of it properly but have limited funds for a catastrophic medical condition why not let the people keep their pet but help them anyway? Dogs don't care what economic condition their owner is in. They don't care if they live in an expensive house or an old house. They care about their people and love them unconditionally.
Again, I am not talking about people who are irresponsible. There are so many people who do have a good income but keep their dogs locked up most of the time because they don't have the time to put into proper training. Money should not be the deciding factor on these issues. There are retired people who lost a major part of their income with the economic down turn. Would you want them to lose their beloved pet because of the situation? |
I could not agree MORE with this!
