"If you can't afford a vet, you can't afford a pet"

[Britster]

I've seen this mentioned before in different places and wondered your opinions on it.

I think that a lot of times people (on dog forums etc) can be too harsh on people who say they can't afford certain treatments or procedures etc, and are often told that they then need to give the dog up to a rescue who is willing to help, if they can't take care of it, etc.

To me, a family or person who truly CAN'T afford vet care but loves the animal regardless and does their best by it is different from someone who claims they can't afford a vet while they are buying designer clothes, or bar hopping every weekend, or have the latest technologies. Obviously I am not talking about the latter... I think that if you love your pet, you would be willing to part with some of those things in order to take care of it. But sometimes... people just go through hard times! And I don't believe it should automatically be: "well if you can't afford your pet, you need to relinquish it to the rescue" or give it up.

I know that honestly, Jackson would be better off being put to sleep than having to go through the stress of being put into a rescue-type situation, with new people, medical procedures, and all that stuff. He is very very attached to me and I truly don't believe he would be the kind of dog who would do very well in a new situation. I know a lot of people could probably say that, but really, he's sometimes unhealthily attached... but never in a million years would I ever give him up in the first place. I am very lucky that I have the privilege of having the proper money stashed aside for medical emergencies, and if I personally didn't, I have lots of family members who love Jackson too that are willing to help when possible. I am also the kind of owner who will do anything to help him, even if it's a small issue, I don't mind paying money to get him to the vet and get it looked at. I am willing to spend big bucks to make sure he's okay and healthy!

I have seen abandoned animals living on the streets.... starving... looking for their humans. Maybe they won't have the best vet care, or the best food, or an ideal living situation- but I do believe if the animal had a choice, they'd want to stay with their human.

Obviously, I think it's silly to add a NEW pet if you are already in a very tight financial situation. I am waiting to add a second dog until I am a bit more secure financially - while I could swing it right this moment, I am not sure I want to be THAT tight with money yet. So I think if you buy a new puppy, and then claim you can't afford such basic things for it, such as a vet visit, initial vaccines, food, etc... that's just dumb. But I think if you have a 7yr old dog, for example, and have hit unexpected hard times... you shouldn't be judged if you can't take your dog to the vet immediately, etc.

I saw a Dateline show or something a few months ago, where a family who had once lived the high life, was now completely broke and living out of their van with 3 kids AND the family dog. Ideal?? Of course not!! But just because you may be having a year or two slump, doesn't mean you should have to give your dog up forever, when things have the chance to get better again. And I am sure the dog is much happier living that way than in a shelter. There are so many dogs that have NO health care, or food, and live on the streets, or are sitting in cages for years at a shelter or rescue... I think they are better off even with a family who may be underprivileged.

Some of the best kept and well loved dogs I've seen have been from "poor" people and some of the worst treated dogs I've seen have been from "rich" people... so I just don't think automatically being poor makes you a poor choice for an animal, or a bad owner, just as being rich doesn't automatically make you a good choice for a pet.

Just a ramble... opinions welcome.

[jeane]

i agree with you

[gemy]

Actually I agree with most everything you have said.

There is also a limit financially on what most owners can and or is willing to spend on extraordinary medical expenses.

For most of us (at least here on YT), we find it very hard to understand those new puppy owners that haven't seem to investigate and determine if they have at least the financial wherewithall to handle regular annual care. And unless some sort of financial mishap is shared we are left to shake our heads and wonder why they don't take their puppy in for regular vet check ups, etc.

[Carmeow]

I would have to agree with youu, Brit. I'm 20 years old, I work 40 hours a week, pay my own rent and electricity, plus student loans. I wanted a yorkie when I was 17 and still living with my parents, but I waited until I knew I had my own money to support the dog and provide vetting. People on YT told me that I need to think this decision out.


What if my bf and I broke up? They asked. Well, my bf isn't paying Luma's vet bills, and I don't expect him to. I know I made the right decision for myself. Do I have $10,000 set aside incase of emergency? No...but does that mean anyone who doesnt have $10k set aside shouldnt own a pet? No. It does show how very important it is to buy from a reputable breeder, to limit the chance of these kind of situations arising in the first place. But accidents do still happen.

I'm fortunate in that Luma will always have someone who could take care of her. However, I've been wanting to add a second to our family. I've held off because I dont, at this time, have an emergency vet fund saved up like I did before I got Luma, and I dont want the responsibility to fall onto someone else.

Accidents can happen at any time. You cant always prepare for them. I dont think that makes you a bad parent. It has made me think twice about getting another puppy though.

[Nancy1999]

I agree with the title. The thought that a dog is suffering because someone can't afford treatment makes me sick. A member here, while visiting her vet overheard a couple telling the receptionist to put their healthy lab to sleep because they could not afford several hundred dollars to fix his broken leg. I really think animals adapt to new situations and people have a harder time adjusting than the animal does. I think it's a very unselfish act to give a dog up, but in my opinion, someone who puts a dog to sleep because they can't afford standard medical treatments doesn't deserve to ever have a dog again. I know everyone has a limit on what they could afford, but I'm talking about basic care and treatment for injuries. I wouldn't fault someone for choosing to end the life of a dog suffering from cancer. I think that's why its good to study the breed before you buy and be aware of the genetic conditions that afflict the breed. Also, people should be aware that even healthy dogs tend to rack up more vet bills as they grow older and either have insurance or a savings for their pets.

[ironmike86]

Yup I agree with if "A person" is in a slump you may want to keep your dog and hope for the better. But to add one when they are tight with $$ I don't think is wise. If I really need a pet I would try to foster. Or look into what it was.I assume you just give your time and care? But then it's hard to judge. Someone could have picked up a stray and now the 2 homeless have each other?

[chachi]

I agree with you completely and I dont judge people because of hardships and think no one else should because just because they are able to afford expensive vet proceedures doesnt mean that person can everyone is living in the same financial situation. I also dont judge if someone cant afford an expensive procedure like liver shunt surgery and they choose euthanasia. When we have those situations on here I tell people to consider rescue but I dont feel like it is my right to push rescue on someone. I have seen situations where people have been bullied on here into sending there dog to rescue and made to feel they were neglectful owners and I just dont think anyone has tHE right to do that to a person. Lately I have seen a whole lot less judgements on these type of issues so I do think the forum is going in the right direction.

[Britster]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

I agree with the title. The thought that a dog is suffering because someone can't afford treatment makes me sick. A member here, while visiting her vet overheard a couple telling the receptionist to put their healthy lab to sleep because they could not afford several hundred dollars to fix his broken leg. I really think animals adapt to new situations and people have a harder time adjusting than the animal does. I think it's a very unselfish act to give a dog up, but in my opinion, someone who puts a dog to sleep because they can't afford standard medical treatments doesn't deserve to ever have a dog again. I know everyone has a limit on what they could afford, but I'm talking about basic care and treatment for injuries. I wouldn't fault someone for choosing to end the life of a dog suffering from cancer. I think that's why its good to study the breed before you buy and be aware of the genetic conditions that afflict the breed. Also, people should be aware that even healthy dogs tend to rack up more vet bills as they grow older and either have insurance or a savings for their pets.

I do agree that is a dog is suffering, it's very cruel. I do see what you're saying, and don't completely disagree with the statement either. I guess a better statement I would agree with is : "if you can't afford the vet, you can't afford to BUY A NEW pet" lol. I do not think it's fair to say all dogs will adapt to new situations -- yes dogs in general are very adaptable creatures, but I will not fault someone for choosing to put to sleep if it came down to it. While there are a lot of very happy dogs in rescues and shelters, there are also a lot of miserable dogs who, I think if they could talk, would want to stay with their people if they had the choice. Something like a broken leg seems silly to PTS over, but do you know the severity of it? I do think dogs are PTS far too often for stupid things... but a lot of dogs are needlessly living in shelters too, and I'm not sure that is a whole lot better.

I know someone who had a Great Dane who had a freak accident and caused a freak injury. The chance of the bone dislocating again and again was very high. There was no chance for it to mend without surgery. And with his sheer size, the surgery most likely wouldn't have been successful. Sure, it could have been, and she could have given it a shot, but she didn't want to put him through months of miserable surgery after surgery when he was a very active dog who probably wouldn't have done well nor had the same quality of life.

As I said, I'm the type that would most likely try everything that I possibly could, that's just me. But I won't judge those who choose to NOT go to the top specialists, and maybe just provide basic minimal care. It may not be ideal. But I think most of us here on YT are unfortunately a small percentage of most dog owners who are willing to go above and beyond for their beloved family members. I also will not judge though who DO decide to re-home for the sake of the dog either.

[horsnaround]

Great post and discussion We all have limits and what we consider suffering.

[chachi]

My neighbor who is poor just had an unfortunate situation with a pet that applys to this situation. She had $1200 saved. Her cat blew out his rectum and she had to take him to an emergerncy vet. It cost like $800 TO FIX. Then he pulled his stitches out that cost her more money then she found out he had an abscss and she had to take care of that. It wiped out the savings and she only had $300 left for utilities,gas and groceries. Now who is anyone to tell someone they have to live like that. These are real live people with real life bills and real life situations

[IsabelleOllie]

I believe that if you can't afford basic vet care, such as vaccines, yearly well checks, routine dentals, and heartworm preventative, then you should not get a pet. I try not to judge people who can't afford expensive treatments or surgeries, but some people think nothing of spending thousands to repair their motor vehicles and won't pay a vet a few hundred dollars to save their pets life. That boggles my mind!
Last November, one of my cats developed a blocked urethra the weekend after thanksgiving and had to be hospitalized for 5 days - he was a few hours from death when I rushed him to the vet. I told my children that Christmas would be a little lean, but Monster would still be with us. I would beg, borrow, and juggle whatever I needed to to save any one of my pets, my sister told me that she would have put him to sleep if he was her cat. I just don't understand that mindset.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by chachi

My neighbor who is poor just had an unfortunate situation with a pet that applys to this situation. She had $1200 saved. Her cat blew out his rectum and she had to take him to an emergerncy vet. It cost like $800 TO FIX. Then he pulled his stitches out that cost her more money then she found out he had an abscss and she had to take care of that. It wiped out the savings and she only had $300 left for utilities,gas and groceries. Now who is anyone to tell someone they have to live like that. These are real live people with real life bills and real life situations

I would say if a cat blew out his rectum that there may be other problems. If I blow out my rectum, I hope they put me to sleep! Seriously, the recovery from that must be horribly painful. That's why it's important to have a vet who you trust and one who can advise you on quality of life. My guess also, is your neighbor didn't buy the cat, but got it from a shelter, pound, or maybe she found it, so any extra time she has given the cat has been beneficial. I'm talking about all the people who write in here saying that they can't afford routine vet visits when their dog is sick.

[chachi]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

I would say if a cat blew out his rectum that there may be other problems. If I blow out my rectum, I hope they put me to sleep! Seriously, the recovery from that must be horribly painful. That's why it's important to have a vet who you trust and one who can advise you on quality of life. My guess also, is your neighbor didn't buy the cat, but got it from a shelter, pound, or maybe she found it, so any extra time she has given the cat has been beneficial. I'm talking about all the people who write in here saying that they can't afford routine vet visits when their dog is sick.

Well I do agree with you it does seem like everyone should be able to afford routine visits if they are going to have a pet.

[gemy]

Thinking about this some more. And taking a break from washing the big boy.

I feel as a "short statement of axiomatic truth" If you can't afford the VET you can't afford the PET. It is a good one. On the plus side it is short and succinct and is a good statement for potential new dog owners. I believe it was constructed way back when, to create a sharp jolt to the system, so that the person would stop and consider do I really have the funds to care for my animal?

I also feel that as time goes on in a dog's life, that not only quality of life is important, but just how much life is left! Many large breeds - Great Dane is one, Irish Wolfhound is another, have an average life expectancy of 7 yrs. My breed is 10 yrs. So that also comes into the equation when considering extraordinary vet care - of course not normal vet care. And large breed dogs do NOT do well with limb surgery and recovery. Just too much weight on the limbs, and it is very hard to try to ameliorate weight borne when the dog needs to go out to eliminate.

With my experience with cancer in my gal, I will be getting insurance for my next new pup. I have until this point in time always self insured. But situations can change. We are looking to retire in the next few years and insurance seems to be a safety stop - financially speaking.

[KazzyK810]

I agree with that statement, "If you can't afford a vet, you can't afford a pet."
BEFORE you get any pet, you should be aware of the costs of basic care. A woman at work has two little girls that would love to have a dog, so she's been thinking about getting one for the past year. Her girls must really have been working on her lately, because she asked me last week, about how much is costs me per month/year for ZoE, so she has a rough idea about what she's thinking of getting herself into. I think everyone should do that...figure out the basic costs BEFORE looking for a pet and falling in love with a sweet face.

Originally Posted by Britster

To me, a family or person who truly CAN'T afford vet care but loves the animal regardless and does their best by it is different from someone who claims they can't afford a vet while they are buying designer clothes, or bar hopping every weekend, or have the latest technologies. Obviously I am not talking about the latter... I think that if you love your pet, you would be willing to part with some of those things in order to take care of it. But sometimes... people just go through hard times! And I don't believe it should automatically be: "well if you can't afford your pet, you need to relinquish it to the rescue" or give it up.

That's my biggest issue with people that claim they "just can't afford it"..when it comes to taking care of their pet(s). If you're buying a cappuccino on the way to work every other day and you've just bought yourself the newest iphone, and you've booked your next vacation...you can't claim you "just can't afford" the care your pet needs. If you can't afford to care for your pet, you shouldn't be able to afford ANY extras for yourself.....or you just need to admit your a selfish &*%$# and surrender your pet to someone who values life above stuff.