Shouldn't those with pets be able to afford vet bills?

Question

I see questions on here all the time about how someone's pet is ill, yet they can't afford to take it to the vet. So instead they just have the poor animal suffer. Do you think this is right?

Answer 1

Of course not.

I bought my ferret knowing just how much he can run up the medical bill, so he's in a pet health insurance now too. So I'm also saving up for him just incase anything ever happens.

Almost all pets will need to be taken to the vet (annual check ups, or are just ill) so really, you should know that it can run up to the thousands. Not taking them to the vet and letting them suffer can be listed as animal abuse, I believe.

Answer 2

I am in agreement with you all the way. Don't take the responsibility of a pet if you can't afford the basic care. I also know from having a critically ill dog that vet bills can go into the tens of thousands and I know not every family can do this. But be prepared for the basic care and have a plan to save each month for an emergency.

Answer 3

I do agree that if you go get yourself a pet you should have the means to take proper care of it- BUT sometimes circumstances do change and pets are already part of the family. People lose their jobs, move, retire, get sick, whatever. Also- sometimes people have strays that have 'acquired' them. I had 2 mangy flea-infested beat-up cats show up at my house and after 2 wks of them not leaving I decided they had claimed us as theirs. They were semi-feral so I had to get a have-a-heart trap to get them to the vet but I had them fixed and shots done etc. One later got hit by a car, but the female is still living in my barn and has never left after 6 yrs. I had the means to help them, but some people just may not have the income, even though they do want to help.

Answer 4

Of course you have to take responsibility for your pet. If it's suffering and you can't afford to help it, at least put it to sleep. That's reasonable.
I have been poor and had little money for my own doctor, let alone my pet's, but I did my best and learned a lot of home remedies too. I am pretty good at treating myself and my pets. Not having much money doesn't mean you can't enjoy life, and it doesn't mean your pet can't enjoy life either.

Answer 5

I cant imagine who wouldn't agree with you, A responsible
animal owner will always be prepared, But I think the stores and people you buy animals from Should put a strong emphasis on this in case someone buys on impulse.....
and never have taken care for an animal excellent point though

Answer 6

I take my pets to the vets office if they are truly sick or hurt beyond my skills to treat. I have always considered all of my pets to be part of my family and couldn't bear for them to suffer.

Answer 7

Just about as "right" as the idea that some humans should be left to suffer from sicknesses that need attention just because they can't afford health insurance.

Answer 8

I agree! I've just answered a question about a ferret which addresses this problem.

I always take mine to the vets if they're sick. I don't have a lot of money and I sometimes go overdrawn at the bank just so I can fund it. There is NO way I could sit back and watch an animal suffer - you wouldn't do it to your kids or relatives, so why do it to a pet?

If people take on the responsibility of a pet then they have to understand that animals get sick and have accidents sometimes and that will involve a trip to the vet.

People who neglect their pets make me sick.

Answer 9

I don't think it is fair on the pet but maybe the owner had an expensive family crisis or bills. Vets don't come cheap

Answer 10

No it's not okay for the animals to suffer because there are so many selfish people. They say they love animals but yet do not think of the consequences of not taking care of them properly. It's either ignorance or just plain stupidity, either way it is no excuse.