Would you save your pet or a stranger's child?

[NotADailyMailJournalist]

Hello all

Slightly inspired by another thread where posters were surprised that people were more interested in someone's dog than their baby...

If you have a cat/dog and you could only save it or a stranger's child/baby, what would you choose?

For the purposes of this thread, no-one would ever find out you'd been given the choice, so you wouldn't face any consequences.

Thanks

I imagine where the line is drawn is up to the individual.

People pull together for animals all the time. Statistically, animals welfare is the charitable sector that receives the most donations, according to this site at least:

https://www.nptuk.org/philanthropic-resources/uk-charitable-giving-statistics/#:~:text=Animal%20welfare%20is%20the%20most,and%20medical%20research%20(22%25).&text=Women%20are%20more%20likely%20than,(4%25%20vs%203%25).

“Animal welfare is the most popular with 27% of donors giving to this cause in the UK, followed by support for children or young people (24%) and medical research (22%).”

It’s fine that you don’t understand it. You don’t need to.

No-one knows what they would actually do. You're unlikely to have time to make rational evaluations, so would probably act on your first instinct. More people may grab for their pet than think they would, even those who think they wouldn't. We just can't know and it's not a situation anyone is ever likely to be in for real.

A strangers child.
I love my dog but it would have to be the child.

Of course people love animals but if faced with exact scenarios we’ve been discussing, I find it unforgivable the animal would be prioritised over a baby.

I’m not sure I believe that to be honest.

Yes very true. I guess what is said on here could be completely different if the actual event ever occurred.

https://www.cafonline.org/about-us/press-office/15m-people-donated-to-animal-charities-last-year#:~:text=Animal%2520welfare%2520is%2520the%2520UK's,of%2520more%2520than%2520%C2%A320.

“All figures on donations, unless otherwise stated, are from YouGov Plc. Total sample size was 23,792 people. Fieldwork was undertaken monthly between May 2016 to June 2022. The survey was carried out online. The figures are weighted and are representative of all UK adults (aged 16+).

Average (mean) donation to animal welfare charities (in £) from May 2016-June 2022.

The Charities Aid Foundation is a leading charity operating in the UK and internationally. Our work connects and enables the vital organisations, institutions, and individuals working together to ensure that everyone has a stake in the future. We believe that the agency of lasting change lies across sectors and borders, in the hearts, minds and hands of those driven to make a difference. We exist to accelerate progress in society towards a fair and sustainable future for all.”

I wouldn't have been in the position of the person who grabbed for their pet first and saved it, so I wouldn't judge them. Chances are they weren't making thought out and rational decisions but acting impulsively on instinct with no time to think. It won't happen but, if you found yourself in that position and ended up reaching for your pet before you knew it, I hope you would be able to forgive yourself knowing you didn't choose anything, it just happened that way.

Some people might also instinctively just reach for what is closer. If it was a rushing river, say, if the dog was arms reach away and the child was a lot further away, you might not even have time to get to the child, so you might as well save what you can get to. It's not always straight forward.

I’m about to go to sleep as I’ve to be up at 5.30 so can’t read that now. Of course people love animals and give to charity because no one wants to see neglected animals because that’s cruel, unnecessary and abhorrent.

The question what would you do in the situation described is a different issue.

Indeed. People can and do act very differently to what they would believe.

I have had mine tested. My family were already with me, and I instinctively did grab for my pet. I’m still unaware of who else may or may not have been around me, my focus was on my loved ones.

I’m off to bed now, early start. Night ya-ll

Not all, but some, of the latter posts on this thread have been very amusing. Not saying any one poster has been, but reading them as a cluster has been. I mean amusing in the literal sense.
Thank you all.
Excellent thread OP.

Donating to a charity takes some thought.
The instinct when it comes to an emergency situation.... seconds. And here we are.... people being judged for something they have no time to give a thought to.

You don't know what a psychopath is.

The actual circumstance surely makes a difference.
If I'm walking down the road and a runaway truck is hurtling towards me and my dog and a mother and child I will assume the mother has the kid covered and I'm saving me and the dog.

If my dog and a child are in a burning building and there's only me to save them then I'd probably go get the child and hope my dog has the ability to escape

In an immediate emergency where I can grab one and have no time to think, my loved one is likely to be an instinct, also she's always by my side so the dog

Given a rational choice where someone gives me the option. Hell it would be hard but I'd choose the kid. Not for any reason other than I'd feel judged if I didn't, guilt for years and I'd think of the other humans affected by my choice.

There's the difference. All circumstantial

That's a very good point @deviantfeline. I'm trying to think of any situation where my cat would be in the same building as a strangers child (or any child for that matter) with only me to rescue the pair of them! The only thing I could come up with was the vet and the child would be with a parent so not my problem!

This is the point I was making too. Beyond Devil's Advocate I think.

and most contrarian people who say they would choose a pet, could end up choosing the human child after all (and those were and are anyway very , very very few people..)sorry but a negligibly tiny minority, thankfully.

I don’t think so. Very very few people are rational in such a scenario, and if you aren’t driven solely by your own survival instinct (and that’s a very powerful instinct), those you look for are your own loved ones. You don’t ‘see’ others, literally or figuratively. You zero in on you and yours. For me, that includes my animals

Speaking from my own experience of being in real and immediate danger with my family (war). I instinctively went for my pet and getting my pet to safety. There were plenty of other people around, but I have no idea who they were or if they needed my help. I don’t know if they were babies, children, adults etc - my eyes may have passed them, but I never ‘saw’ them.

I remember another post like this, would you save an elderly relative or stranger's child (not sure whether it was MN or elsewhere). I said I would have saved my elderly relative (I was imagining it was my Mum) and apparently that's also wrong. She'd had her time so should be left.

@PinkSparklyPussyCat someone said they'd save a strangers child over their own husband! She said it as if we all would, as well.

I’d save anyone human first, obviously.

Where are the parent's of the child in all these scenarios?

Standing by trembling waiting for someone else to save their child apparently. Or absent altogether.

My dog died on Weds, she had a stroke in the night :-( karma for me saying I wouldn't save her first eh

Now I'll save all the children so everyone else can save their pets, I don't want anyone else feeling as sad and heartbroken as I do right now