Why do families who are poor, have pets

Because they can still prioritise their pet over other things, and it’s not up to you to decide how they spend their money.

they would be live pets that the zoo would euthanase and I'm massively in support of the assisted dying bill. Hope it comes in and is more relaxed by the time I need care so I can just donate myself to feed tigers or something instead of being 'cared' for.

As someone who has a cat and dog I think pets have moved out of being affordable for most- vets’ fees and or insurance are mind blowing now!!

But the dead pets aren't making the choice for themselves, their supposedly loving owners are doing it.

The equivalent would be you dying - and everyone under the assumption that you wanted a standard funeral (it's not like the pets can tell their owners any different) and your kids choosing to feed your corpse to tigers instead.

Again, I am not saying animals are equivalent to humans, but in this scenario, that is the equivalent.

Dunno, I'd rather my corpse was useful rather than became landfill for no reason. Would prefer it for myself.

It is not ‘just about priorities’, you are describing wilful child neglect.

All well and good until they get older. My dog’s insurance is £100 per month. An operation cost me £2200 last week. My dog is 11 so I had to pay 20% of the claim plus the excess. I got around £1700 back but also had to pay the vet to start with.

Yeah, pretty disgusting. Would they be ok with feeding them human corpses? Or of course animals are not human and I am not saying they are - but people very much do love and grow attached to their companions. There is a bond there, they are not just ornaments or toys.

Anyone who is ok with this is a red flag and probably should not have pets. It doesn't matter - at all - if it's rationally not going to hurt the dead pets. It means you never loved them, if you are ok with doing this with their corpse.

I think you'll find some people (both rich and poor) don't do anything for their pets beyond feed them and have them put down if it becomes necessary. But yeah, as with pretty much everything people should definitely plan for their financial circumstances. Although to be fair, sometimes those do change unexpectedly.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0r7z2ynd2lo

Thought this was interesting as to the question of unwanted pets.

I think it’s just about priorities. I have a friend who is not financially well off at all. So much so that her dd does not have a proper coat or shoes for activities and often doesn’t have lunch money or enough food in the house for dinner (our dd’s are friends and my dd has had to buy her food at school).

But she has a horse (I also have a horse so I know all her costs, we use the same livery). She is paying £300 just for the livery per month, plus farrier and feed and tack and vet bills, dentist, chiropractor, saddle fitter. Honestly, I think the horse gives her joy that her family does not, so she buys horse feed and not fish fingers. The kids aren’t a priority and her husband is an alcoholic, so I think she avoids home and spends money where it makes her happy, instead of where she should if she was being responsible.

I think it’s probably how people don’t do right by their children for an easy life. She needs to leave her abusive husband, but I don’t know that she could keep the horse as a single parent. So she just avoids dealing with any of it and carries on. The kids seem miserable and hungry, but that’s just how they’ve always done it. But she loves the horse, maybe more than her kids, so that’s the priority.

Is that your answer to "why do poor people have pets?"?

Pet insurance? It doesn't make sense.

What was the point?

Thank you so much for this very thoughtful post!

There's so much hate on MN nowadays.

I’m poor. Didn’t use to be. I have three dogs and two cats. Really struggling with the cost of them. But to get rid of them would be awful.

Thanks for your reply. That sounds like a sensible approach.

I don’t know OP. Maybe it’s so they can eat them if times get really hard? Or maybe poor people are only poor because they spend all their money on vapes and special brew and scratch cards? It’s that the response you were looking for?

She is very old, so no heroics . The sort of stuff that insurance would have covered would be the sort of stuff that I would not put her through anyway,
A course of medication... fine. Loads of tests, no. Surgery to repair a broken leg... no.

Pet insurance

The same reason people have kids.

Poorer people have always had pets, most likely always will.

Sorry. I didn't realise

I think a lot of smug people on Mumsnet don't grasp how quickly and brutally life circumstances can change - you develop a disability, you get cancer, your OH of twenty years walks out, you're made redundant at age 50 with limited prospects, your baby turns out to have significant SN. Obviously you shouldn't acquire new pets if you can't manage, but if you already have a much loved well settled pet?

Lots of good reasons to have a pet, lots of ways difficulty can strike once you have a pet.

BUT also:

Lots of people who are poor, or struggling in different ways, are in difficulty because they are poor decision makers or find it hard to make strategic decisions.

Have another baby? Awwww…. Get a puppy? SO cute…. Move boyfriend in…. YeahWhyNot… Take out a loan… Give up your job… buy a handbag…. YOLO.

⚘

I thought the OP was asking more why people who are poor when they get the pet, get pets. People cant help if things change drastically years further down the line.

Couple of things:

Poor choices
Change in circumstances