| Click here to go to the original topic View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Leon Czolgosz
Joined: 05 Apr 2006
Posts: 190
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:56 pm Post subject: what comes first, family or pets |
|
|
quick scenario.
you're average middle class, money doesn't grow on trees kind of family...
Your 8 y.o. dog (or cat) needs surgery to remove doggie cancer or he'll die. The surgery is $3000
How many would drop $3k when mortgage, car payment, kid's future college are all demanding payments monthly.
Would you pay for an animal that will live, at most, another 10 -12 years instead of investing in your kid's college fund?
Now this dog isn't anything more than your run of the mill pet. Not one that can earn money from dogshows, famous movie dog (lassie), ect. Just Rover.
I would put my dog down by the cheapest means possible. Put it to sleep at a vet, or most likely, a bullet in the head. |
|
| Back to top |
|
grim
Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 1366
Location: Ottawa
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:02 pm Post subject: Re: what comes first, family or pets |
|
|
Leon Czolgosz wrote: I would put my dog down by the cheapest means possible. Put it to sleep at a vet, or most likely, a bullet in the head.
Hmmm. Thank you Dr. Mengela, DVM. :shock: |
|
| Back to top |
|
OneZero
Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Posts: 3413
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:10 pm Post subject: Re: what comes first, family or pets |
|
|
Leon Czolgosz wrote: quick scenario.
you're average middle class, money doesn't grow on trees kind of family...
Your 8 y.o. dog (or cat) needs surgery to remove doggie cancer or he'll die. The surgery is $3000
How many would drop $3k when mortgage, car payment, kid's future college are all demanding payments monthly.
Would you pay for an animal that will live, at most, another 10 -12 years instead of investing in your kid's college fund?
Now this dog isn't anything more than your run of the mill pet. Not one that can earn money from dogshows, famous movie dog (lassie), ect. Just Rover.
I would put my dog down by the cheapest means possible. Put it to sleep at a vet, or most likely, a bullet in the head.
Yeah, much as I like dogs et al I would put the dog down. |
|
| Back to top |
|
perdidochas
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 15319
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:13 pm Post subject: Re: what comes first, family or pets |
|
|
Leon Czolgosz wrote: quick scenario.
you're average middle class, money doesn't grow on trees kind of family...
Your 8 y.o. dog (or cat) needs surgery to remove doggie cancer or he'll die. The surgery is $3000
How many would drop $3k when mortgage, car payment, kid's future college are all demanding payments monthly.
Would you pay for an animal that will live, at most, another 10 -12 years instead of investing in your kid's college fund?
Now this dog isn't anything more than your run of the mill pet. Not one that can earn money from dogshows, famous movie dog (lassie), ect. Just Rover.
I would put my dog down by the cheapest means possible. Put it to sleep at a vet, or most likely, a bullet in the head.
I couldn't do the bullet, I don't have the balls for it. I'd put him to sleep, though. I like my dog, but not $3k worth. $500, maybe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Leon Czolgosz
Joined: 05 Apr 2006
Posts: 190
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yeah, $500 is my limit on pets. I had a very sick dog once that almost died. I dropped about $300 bucks on an outside shot (the vet said) and it worked. Much more than that, I would have said "Give it the $25 injection dr. doolittle" |
|
| Back to top |
|
Stygma
Joined: 28 Sep 2005
Posts: 1346
Location: Boulder, Colorado
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I value money more than animals. I'd probably be willing to pay $250 to keep it alive. And that's only if I really liked it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Wolverine
Joined: 15 Jul 2005
Posts: 10835
Location: Podunk, Colorado
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 7:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Let the dog die, no animal is worth 3K. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Winchester
Joined: 23 Aug 2005
Posts: 6354
Location: Montana
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 8:18 pm Post subject: Re: what comes first, family or pets |
|
|
Leon Czolgosz wrote: quick scenario.
you're average middle class, money doesn't grow on trees kind of family...
Your 8 y.o. dog (or cat) needs surgery to remove doggie cancer or he'll die. The surgery is $3000
As much as I love my pooch, he gets cancer, he's a gonner, wouldn't shoot him but would have the vet put him down.
A friend of mine's dog though goes through daily insulin shots for its diabetes, not sure what it costs her, but a lot, and this has been going on for a couple of years now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
George W Bush
Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 3770
Location: Divided States Of America
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 8:25 pm Post subject: Re: what comes first, family or pets |
|
|
Leon Czolgosz wrote: quick scenario.
you're average middle class, money doesn't grow on trees kind of family...
Your 8 y.o. dog (or cat) needs surgery to remove doggie cancer or he'll die. The surgery is $3000
How many would drop $3k when mortgage, car payment, kid's future college are all demanding payments monthly.
Would you pay for an animal that will live, at most, another 10 -12 years instead of investing in your kid's college fund?
Now this dog isn't anything more than your run of the mill pet. Not one that can earn money from dogshows, famous movie dog (lassie), ect. Just Rover.
I would put my dog down by the cheapest means possible. Put it to sleep at a vet, or most likely, a bullet in the head.
Money is liquid. It can be replaced. A special animal cant.
of course, if you simply think of it as just an expendable piece of family furniture, nothing will convince you of that. But, thats what makes you one of the most hated personality types in America according to my own personal research (no offense to you personally, of course).
But, I also would base this on animal suffering. What would it cost in terms of the animal suffering? to keep them alive? No matter if it was 10 cents, I wouldnt keep a pet alive if I knew it would mean they would suffer.
If you have a relationship with your pets, which I assume you dont, how can you respect my opinion? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Demonic Spoon
Joined: 20 Sep 2004
Posts: 6788
Location: Ohio
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 9:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What George said. Probably should not have bought the pet and agreed to feed them every day for the rest of their lives if you did not like them enough to keep 'em alive... |
|
| Back to top |
|
Leon Czolgosz
Joined: 05 Apr 2006
Posts: 190
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 8:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
I like dogs fine. I actually love having dogs as pets. But they are replaceable. I don't want anything bad to happen and will do what I can to prevent bad things from happening, but, within reason. When you can go down to the pound and get a replacement pooch for the cost of spay or nuetering, why drop a small fortune for a dog.
We had a dog that needed surgery as a kid. Dixie had cataracts. Nothing life threatening, but it was problematic for her. The surgery was to cost around $1000 an eye. She was 8 when she started going blind and died when she was 13. But my parents felt, with 2 kids about to enter college (both had entered by the time Dixie died), they would rather the money be applied to their kids' education first, rather than a dog who will die within a few years. Heck, my college edu has gone further than eye surgery for a now dead dog. And it will continue to serve me for , hopefully, about 60 more years.
investing in humans > investing in dogs |
|
| Back to top |
|
perdidochas
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 15319
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 9:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Leon Czolgosz wrote: I like dogs fine. I actually love having dogs as pets. But they are replaceable. I don't want anything bad to happen and will do what I can to prevent bad things from happening, but, within reason. When you can go down to the pound and get a replacement pooch for the cost of spay or nuetering, why drop a small fortune for a dog.
We had a dog that needed surgery as a kid. Dixie had cataracts. Nothing life threatening, but it was problematic for her. The surgery was to cost around $1000 an eye. She was 8 when she started going blind and died when she was 13. But my parents felt, with 2 kids about to enter college (both had entered by the time Dixie died), they would rather the money be applied to their kids' education first, rather than a dog who will die within a few years. Heck, my college edu has gone further than eye surgery for a now dead dog. And it will continue to serve me for , hopefully, about 60 more years.
investing in humans > investing in dogs
I'm with you. I care for my pets, but not above my kids wellbeing. $3k would effect their quality of life. |
|
| Back to top |
|
TNBiologist
Joined: 31 Jan 2006
Posts: 962
Location: Tennessee
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 11:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I love my dog but there is a limit that I will go financially on treating it. The dog has plenty of food and a clean place to live and I would spend several hundred on vet bills to keep it alive but spending several thousand on something that may or may not save and the animal suffuring the whole, no way. Put the dog down. We had an old cocker spanial that was part of the family. He got to be 12 years old and had a tumor on his spine, we tried a minor surgery but it did not work. The vet said we could try another surgery but even if it worked the dog would not be able to walk again and we would have to give it pain pills. We considered and had a part of the family put to sleep. It is the only humane thing to do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
perdidochas
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 15319
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 12:35 pm Post subject: Re: what comes first, family or pets |
|
|
grim wrote: Leon Czolgosz wrote: I would put my dog down by the cheapest means possible. Put it to sleep at a vet, or most likely, a bullet in the head.
Hmmm. Thank you Dr. Mengela, DVM. :shock:
Not a good comparison. Dr. Mengele, the Nazi scientist, did reprehensible actual experiments on living human subjects. A better metaphor to use would be Dr. Kevorkian, or the Dr. that pulled the plug on Terry Schiavo.
(Dr. Mengele would be good to use to insult a doctor that did experiments on animals, such as the doctor who used dogs to test artificial hearts on. If you're gonna insult, you've got to do it correctly. With lame incorrect responses like the above, you just show the low intellectual level of the animal rights side) |
|
| Back to top |
|
grim
Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 1366
Location: Ottawa
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 12:48 pm Post subject: Re: what comes first, family or pets |
|
|
George W Bush wrote: Money is liquid. It can be replaced. A special animal cant. of course, if you simply think of it as just an expendable piece of family furniture, nothing will convince you of that.
Are you saying Petxidermy is bad? Snowball hasn't moved in three years. Except when we get drunk and slide her around.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
connermt
Joined: 27 Feb 2006
Posts: 1526
Location: CMH OHIO
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 1:20 pm Post subject: Re: what comes first, family or pets |
|
|
Leon Czolgosz wrote: quick scenario.
you're average middle class, money doesn't grow on trees kind of family...
Your 8 y.o. dog (or cat) needs surgery to remove doggie cancer or he'll die. The surgery is $3000
How many would drop $3k when mortgage, car payment, kid's future college are all demanding payments monthly.
Would you pay for an animal that will live, at most, another 10 -12 years instead of investing in your kid's college fund?
Now this dog isn't anything more than your run of the mill pet. Not one that can earn money from dogshows, famous movie dog (lassie), ect. Just Rover.
I would put my dog down by the cheapest means possible. Put it to sleep at a vet, or most likely, a bullet in the head.
This appears to be a loaded question.
It depends on:
your financial situation
your pets physical condition (if it would continue to suffer)
your connection to your pet
your kid's connection to your pet (assuming you have kids)
your pet's connection to you family
among other things.
If I had the $, the time to care for the sick pet afterwards & the pet was going to be better afterwards (or at least a good possibility of) then of course I would do it
Pets (dogs in general) not only give you companionship, but also health benefits. I imagine you could put a price on that, but not me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Leon Czolgosz
Joined: 05 Apr 2006
Posts: 190
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 1:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
yeah, I tried to make the scenario a run of the mil, middle class family that have tight budgets.
I could see times in dropping the money for surgery. If it's a show dog (earns money for you) specifically trained dog where training or acquiring a new one would be more than the surgery of the old one, ect.
However, the health benifits you claim you get from dogs doesn't matter what dog you have. Just replace first dog with a second dog and the same benifits are achieved.
I have done the replace-a-dog tactic before. I had the one that broke it's back that we killed, it was actually the replacement brother of another dog that got into rat poison and died. We even named him Shadow #2.
We didn't get a shadow 3.
My latest dog is Dixie #2 |
|
| Back to top |
|
Wolfman
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 11
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 8:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
When I took my dog into my home, it was with the implicit promise that I would care for him, not just as a pet but a member of my family; for in domesticating him, I have made him completely dependent upon me. In this respect, the rule is simple: I will do without everything, before my dog wants for anything.
When I took responsibility for my dog, the first thing I did was to obtain insurance with VPI (Veterinary Pet Insurance). The policy costs approximately $700.00 per year, including coverage for cancer. Happily, in the eight years that I have had my dog, I have never had to use it; and I shall have no regret for the expense, for my dog is priceless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Leon Czolgosz
Joined: 05 Apr 2006
Posts: 190
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 9:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
wow, I didn't realize there was pet insurance.
I don't know if you have kids or not, but pets do not outrank kids needs. I could sacrifice child 'wants' for various pet issues, but not their needs. And that includes stuff like college money > pet surgery. Housing > pet surgery.
$700.00 a year sure would go a long way for a kid's needs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Winchester
Joined: 23 Aug 2005
Posts: 6354
Location: Montana
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 9:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Wolfman wrote: When I took my dog into my home, it was with the implicit promise that I would care for him, not just as a pet but a member of my family; for in domesticating him, I have made him completely dependent upon me. In this respect, the rule is simple: I will do without everything, before my dog wants for anything.
When I took responsibility for my dog, the first thing I did was to obtain insurance with VPI (Veterinary Pet Insurance). The policy costs approximately $700.00 per year, including coverage for cancer. Happily, in the eight years that I have had my dog, I have never had to use it; and I shall have no regret for the expense, for my dog is priceless.
Wow, you've spent $5,600 to date on health insurance for your dog? At that rate it seems you'ld have been better off self insuring. I do applaud your dedication to your pet though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Click here to go to the original topic |
|