Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to think it's time we stopped keeping "pets?"

254 replies

Hullygully · 14/11/2011 08:13

Why do we still do this?

Apart from working animals, guide/guard dogs etc, isn't it odd that we keep animals in our homes? Expensive, huge amounts of waste that has to be dealt with, extermination of songbirds etc etc

Yes?
No?

Am discussing with dd, so interested in views!

OP posts:
gordyslovesheep · 14/11/2011 08:15

No - pets teach kids to take care of things and offer them an 'ear' to share troubles with, they are fun as well

I have 2 cats and 3 guneapigs - we love them - they are not expensive

TootaLaFruit · 14/11/2011 08:17

Pets are fun! Lots of work, yes, but they don't have to cost a fortune (coldwater fish for eg)

cory · 14/11/2011 08:18

my tropical fish eat left-over vegetables and help to fertilise the garden

mummytotwoboys · 14/11/2011 08:18

my dh used to work with a guy from africa who couldnt work out the idea of pets at all! why keep an animal and spend money on it if you arent going to eat it?!? The answer . . . They are lovely, companionship, and just generally nice to have around. Personally I hate the birds in my garden so if my cat decides to eat one, im not that bothered and she is a tiny little thing and her crap goes in the toilet just like mine so not exactly huge amounts of waste. She is expensive to keep soetimes but less than one of my kids and a lot more grateful 9well she seems to be!)

CaveMum · 14/11/2011 08:19

What would you suggest we do with the millions of domesticated animals that we currently have in this country? We can't "set them free" so the only other option would be to destroy them all.

CaveMum · 14/11/2011 08:20

Sorry, just realised my post might have come across as confrontational. I didn't mean it that way Grin

GypsyMoth · 14/11/2011 08:21

I was wondering that cavemum!!

Not really workable is it?

Hullygully · 14/11/2011 08:22

We could let them live out their natural lifespan and stop breeding new ones?

So all in favour of pets so far, but only from a "they are nice for humans" point of view.

OP posts:
Hullygully · 14/11/2011 08:23

No, cavemum, I didn't think that!

I really am justr interested in all the different views, don't mind what they are Grin

OP posts:
carabos · 14/11/2011 08:23

What makes you think it is us who are keeping them as pets?

PeggyCarter · 14/11/2011 08:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CaveMum · 14/11/2011 08:24

The animals benefit from the arrangement too - guaranteed food and shelter, no worries about predators, etc.
We domesticated animals as they were useful - guard dogs, hunting dogs, cats for pest control, horses for transport, etc. I'm afraid that's what dominant species do.

Bicnod · 14/11/2011 08:25

times are hard. eat them?

Hullygully · 14/11/2011 08:26

Agreed cavemum, but we've gone way beyond that now, haven't we?

OP posts:
GypsyMoth · 14/11/2011 08:28

What about the elderly people who have no companions? A human buddy system instead? How would we recreate the pleasure the lonely get from pets?

CaveMum · 14/11/2011 08:28

But is it right that we should discard them now that they are no longer useful to us? It's a bit of a cyclical argument Grin

PeggyCarter · 14/11/2011 08:28

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

RealLifeIsForWimps · 14/11/2011 08:30

There's also the fact that what we consider to be a pet and what we consider vermin is cultural and fairly arbitrary. In much if the arab world, they shudder at the idea of a cat or dog inside as a pet. It would be like having sewer rats in your house.

Most people in the UK would be appalled at killing a cat but not a rat.

peanutmakinalistncheckinitwice · 14/11/2011 08:30

Companionship....our dog has been wonderful for my mum since my dad sadly died, companionship, a cuddle, a reason to get up and get dressed to take dog out and feed him. I don't think shed of come through it with out him. He's loved, wanted and cared for and we can afford him [despite a very expensive health problem he has] so why not?

cory · 14/11/2011 08:32

I keep threatened species of tropical fish and breed and sell on auctions to other breeders to keep the gene pool going in case of sudden habitat extinction: is that a more interesting viewpoint?

Ireneisback · 14/11/2011 08:32

I totally agree with you Hully. My view, and I don't mean to cause offence, is that cats are vile and shit in your garden and kill songbirds and although dogs can be lovely, I heard they have a massive carbon footprint (I probably gleaned that half arsed info from QI or something).

I'm posting and running because am looking after DS who has a D&V bug.

PacificDogwood · 14/11/2011 08:33

I am pro-pets Grin.

Proven health benefits for people living with pets: physical ie dog walking and mental ie something soft, warm, strokable.
Teaches responsibility to children (and adults, well, it should anyway).
Yy to emergency rations when times are truly hard Wink.

Can you tell that I am a frustrated wanna-be dog owner?

Ireneisback · 14/11/2011 08:33

My post only deals with cats and dogs. Keep up the good work Cory.

PacificDogwood · 14/11/2011 08:35

Re carbon footprint: cows are far, far worse on the poo/fart front and they are only rarely kept as pets AFAIK.
We should ALL be vegetarians - which I am not, but I fully understand the argument that from a 'feed the world' and 'avoid more greenhouse gases' POV with should be.

FellatioNelson · 14/11/2011 08:37

How do dogs have a massive carbon footprint? Confused I would imagine most of the meat products they eat are by-products of meat bred for human consumption, although I don't know for sure. I am struggling to think how else they have a carbon footprint at all TBH!

Swipe left for the next trending thread