Is there ANY valid reason for giving up a pet?

Question

I was just reading a report by the RSPCA listing the most common reasons people give for getting rid of their pets. Some of these are:

> Pregnant / new baby
> Moving into a place that won't take pets
> Not enough money to care for the pet
> Not enough time to care for the pet
> Allergies

What do you guys think about this? Do you think there is no excuse for giving up a pet - is there always a way around it? Do you think there are certain situations where it is the best thing to do? Have you ever given up a pet yourself?

I am not thinking of giving up my cats, I am simply interested to hear your opinions.

xx Emmie

Personally I think that the only reason is death or being made homeless. If you are allergic, treatment is available - if you are pregnant, you don't need to get rid of your pet - if you don't have the time, make time - if your new place can't take pets, find another place - if you don't have the money, there are ways to get help.

Answer 1

Life is never black and white. Nothing is ever carved in stone. A person may think that there is no good reason to ever give up a beloved pet, but sometimes life has a way of sending you a curve that changes everything.

If a person finds himself without an income, it is in the best interest of the animals to find the pets a home where they will be fed properly and given the proper veterinary care. If a person finds himself physically unable to care for the pets, it is in the best interest of the animals to find the pets a home where they will be cared for properly.

Yes, several years ago, due to both failing health and reduced income, I had to make the painful decision to find my beloved pets new homes. There is not a day that goes by that I do not miss them terribly, but I have never felt that I made the wrong decision, for the good of the animals. They are with families who love them, can afford to feed them and give them the necessary veterinary care, and can physically meet the demands of pet ownership.

Answer 2

If you are receiving chemotherapy it might be best to not have a cat. I acquired bartonellosis from a monster game with my cat (I wiggle my fingers under the blanker, she pounces and kills the blanket monster). While cat scratch fever usually clears up on its own or can be treated with antibiotics for me it created a medical emergency.

My Mom took my cat until I had completed chemo and radiation, and had received a cancer free diagnosis. It was very hard, because she really wasn't "my" cat after spending that long with my Mom. I think flat out rehoming her would have been easier for her to adjust to than the bouncing back and forth.

Answer 3

Unfortunately i had to give up my beautiful GSD girl about a year ago. We are on a low income..but we managed for quite a while..then the council realised they had screwed up on ur claims so started taking money back from us. It was soo much we couldn't afford to even feed her a month. We didn't have any other choice as we had no-one who could take her temporarily until we were sorted out financially. It was the hardest thing i've ever had to do..and to top it off..she caught an infection in her new home and had to be put to sleep in the october. I felt so guilty, but sometimes you just can't help the situation your in. I would never give up a pet now unless there was no way around it.
I would never give up a dog if i was pregnant or expecting unless the dog was a handful and it hadn't calmed down by the time the baby arrived. it would be a danger to the baby.
as to moving somwhere that won't take pets...find somewhere that does!
if you don't have enough money..shouldn't have got the pet in the first place in cluding the same reply for time. Peope don't think that sort of thing through..and allergies can be rectified with anti-histamines...but would you want to be on a medication daily for the rest of the pets life? If they invented a once a month pill that would be great..but otherwise...i see nothing wrong with that

Answer 4

> Pregnant / new baby- If the animal is likely to be a threat to the child then definately yes, of course you could try to keep them apart but that isn't always possible!

> Moving into a place that won't take pets- If you had to live in a council house you wouldn't have much choice, the council don't tend to be sympathetic towards pets.

> Not enough money to care for the pet- Quite acceptable in my opinion, if you can't care for the animal, it's best to give it to someone who can, so it's technically a better life for the pet.

> Not enough time to care for the pet- This is a bit of a strange one in my opinion, if you hadn't had the time from the start then it's no excuse, you should have known what you were letting yourself in for but if a family member is ill for a long time and you have to care for them, then yes, it's not fair on the animal else.

> Allergies- Depends whether the allergy is treatable, not all allergies are treatable, but this is something you should try to find out before taking on the pet, although not something you may think to take precautions on i suppose.


So who knows, but that's what I think.




*EDIT*

To CarpetSharks:

You've just been a complete hypocrite really haven't you, saying you wouldn't give it up for tiny reasons like that, then saying about having their best interests at heart! And just because your dog doesn't want to cuddle you and doesn't want to be touched, isn't a good excuse, dogs weren't put on this earth to obey humans, that's possibly the worst excuse so far!

Answer 5

Of course there is. If you dont have enough money to take care of the pet (you shouldnt have gotten it in the first place) then you should give it to someone who can give it the life it deserves, with good food, toys, and vet care. Sometimes you have to move to another country. Some countries make you put your pet in a kennel for up to 6 months to make sure that you are not bringing any diseases into the country. They poor animal should not have to go through that. Those kennels are not a very nice place for the animals. If you have a new baby, your baby might be allergic to the pet. Sometimes you cant afford to choose to live in a place where they allow pets. If you cant afford to buy a house, and all the rent houses in the area are animal-free, then there is nothing you can do about it. As for the "not enough time" and "allergies'' reasons, you should not get a pet if you are allergic or dont have enough time.

Answer 6

I personally gave up my horse because his companion died and he was misrible on his own. However, for other animals I kind of think its just responisble to give them up to the RSPCA to be rehomed than getting rid of them some other way. It's not ideal but better than nothing. People's circumstances do change unforseeably. If you can't afford it anymore, then give it to someone who can rather than neglect it or whatever. Time too, pets are demanding so either don't get one in the first place or give it to someone who can appreciate it. End of the day, its about what is best for the animal - its heart breaking giving up a pet/friend but if its best, its best. I seriously couldn't keep my horse, it would just have been selfish. Now he lives with lots of other animals and has a young family to fuss around him. As for having allergies, that's just stupid, why would you get one in the first place if you're allergic to them, there's no excuse for that.

Answer 7

Hi Emmie,
Yes I think there is a good reason: if it is in the interest of the pet. That is why the RSPCA has powers to remove pets from their owners. People often obtain pets without due regard as to whether they can really provide for their needs. In such cases I think it is best to be honest, draw the line and rehome the pet.
However if the pet has become a well-established member of the household then this is different.
I read somewhere that animals will suffer a lot of mental pain if they are separated from their carers. I for one am convinced that my cats miss me when I go away (I'm about to post a question regarding this). Personally I feel like you in this case. It is a matter of loyalty and honour. My pets are loyal and faithful to me and they depend on me and I cannot just dispose of them like objects. They are part of the family - I have an obligation towards them. Therefore I'm willing to accept certain restrictions in my life to enable me to continue to care for my pets (e.g. choice of home, partner, job etc).
chirpy

Answer 8

Sometimes there are valid reasons, things are not always black & white, right or wrong. Holding on to a pet come what may is not always the best thing for the pet. Those who say "I'd never give up my pet" may not always have the animal's best interests at heart. I really admire people who put the animal's welfare before their own feelings.
I've never given up one of my animals, but I hope I wouldn't be selfish enough to put my feelings before my animal's needs if a situation arose where I had to think about rehoming.
On the other hand there are people who just don't take responsibility for their animals & dump them at the first sign of trouble - I have no sympathy for them.

Answer 9

Hi, Emmie. I had to give up a pet cat because of a family member's allergies, and there was no way around it. We were all sad, even the one who had the bad allergies. We found her (the pet, not the person!) a great home. Cats are also a problem around new babies sometimes, and I think it is better to find it a good home than to cage it up or put an indoor cat outdoors, don't you?

Answer 10

i would never give up a pet for little reasons like that. the only reasons i would give up a pet would be if like i died(obviously) or if the pet was really mean(like where you can't even touch it without it biting you) or if i didn't have money to take care of it. i mean come on! is it fair to the pet to not be properly taken care of just because you don't want to give it up. somebody else could probably take care of it better if something like that happened.
however i would have interviews to select a responsible owner, i wouldn't just drop it off at a shelter.