Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

I don't want to get a family pet due to ethics

253 replies

Markinsomerset · 26/08/2015 19:01

Hi,

My wife really wants a pet and thinks it is very valuable for the children. However ethically I don't agree as cats are responsible for distroying lots of species. Dogs I think its very unfair for as each day I'm sure they feel like they are being abandoned each time they are left alone. Can't guarantee that the suppliers are ethical.

If everyone got rid of their pets then no one would go hungry in the world. They just seem like a selfish interest IMO.

Who is right?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
21
acatcalledjohn · 28/08/2015 14:22

But hey, I'll do the ethical thing and evict my cats. I will do it today. It would be so much better for everyone.

Hmm
Gunpowderplot · 28/08/2015 14:24

I disagree, in this country if people took the decision (it would probably happen gradually, over an extended period) that keeping a cat was not a great idea, then people would stop buying and hence breeding the cats that are currently being sold, people would neuter cats more in the knowledge that they would not find a home for the kittens, and so on. Over time, there would be fewer and fewer cats as the old ones died off and fewer new ones were born due to a lower demand.
We don't have hordes of stray cats here now (though there are some) - the number of cats depends on the number of people who want cats. That would be the same in the future, with fewer cats.

IceBeing · 28/08/2015 15:00

slightly astounded at the response the op got there.

After children, having a pet dog or cat is one of the worst environmental decisions you can make.

Carbon foot print for a dog is about twice that of an SUV for instance.

If people stopped keeping cats and dogs the population would certainly decrease as puppy/kitten farms would cease to be a thing.

FrenchJunebug · 28/08/2015 15:47

how is the carbon foot print for a dog twice that of an SUV iceBeing?!

IceBeing · 28/08/2015 15:56

Well you factor in the construction and petrol used by an SUV in average usage for a year...and then you calculate the upkeep of a dog in terms of food (meat and grain) and it turns out the dog is twice as bad for the environment as the SUV.

Cats are pretty bad too...probably not quite as bad as an SUV though...

And as previously mentioned the very worst thing you can do to the planet is have children.

BoneyBackJefferson · 28/08/2015 16:45

squishee
"This is one for Classics surely?"

I hope not

IceBeing · 28/08/2015 16:50

urgh..read a bit more of the thread...some people are really REALLY proud of how selfish they are...aren't they?

BoneyBackJefferson · 28/08/2015 16:54

Icebeing

For me its how people have jumped in on the poster and not read (or understood) the first post. IMO this could have been a great thread about owning pets, why some do and some don't, taking into account ethics and peoples behaviour towards pets ownership, but its turned in to pot shots and pet pictures.

FrenchJunebug · 28/08/2015 16:54

I think my head just exploding at some of the madness showed in this thread.

SuperFlyHigh · 28/08/2015 16:57

Wait so if you have rats/mice then you'd rather poison them with nasty poison then let nature run it's course and a suitable feline dispose (or not as the case may be) of them?! Confused

SuperFlyHigh · 28/08/2015 16:58

oh and it's 'destroying' not 'dis'. Smile

SuperFlyHigh · 28/08/2015 17:00

sanfairyanne a collar with a bell is all very well but what if the cat won't wear one? my old cats managed to dispose of them... rubbing their necks on the floors etc...

Twindroops · 28/08/2015 17:10

I can see many sides to this and to an extent I do agree with some of the issues the OP raises, I feel very guilty that I am spending money on food for my dog that I could spend on food to put in a food bank, for example.

But, having a pet is also instilling in my children wonderful qualities and life skills by caring for another being, putting the needs of something else before ourselves, our dog has been wonderful for DS2's anxiety issues. she has also helped my depression and got me exercising daily (of course I could have done that without her but I suspect I am among many dog owners that wouldn't walk miles a day without good reason).

Our rabbits also ensure our lawn never needs mowing thus saving us electricity and the waste from their cage is composted so relatively environmentally friendly pets I'd have thought? Animal shelters often have rabbits and guinea pigs.

I can also confirm OP that rather than separation anxiety, after six weeks at home with three kids the dog breathes a sigh of relief and instantly claims the entire sofa if we all put our shoes on without picking up the lead.

Perhaps its worth looking into other ways you and your wife could both be happy. Volunteering in a local shelter, or for the cinnamon trust, or getting involved with Guide dogs/dogs for the disabled, could give her some of the "pet" experience without you feeling guilty about it?

LovelyFriend · 28/08/2015 17:12

I haven't read the whole thread but just wanted to say to the OP MarkinSomerset I hear you and although I have had pets over 20 years ago, and I do love cats and dogs, I agree with a lot of where you are coming from.

As a city dweller I will probably never have a pet again. For many reasons it just doesn't feel right to me.

kali110 · 28/08/2015 17:24

I'd rather have my unwanted cats than anything.
They help me when i'm in severe pain or really down.
Also according to some research they're not the biggest killer of birds.

tomatodizzymum · 28/08/2015 18:15

Cats are pretty bad too...probably not quite as bad as an SUV though...* what about strays, are they better or worse than an SUV? People can always change their pets diets and the source of their food and probably bring their carbon emmissions below that of an SUV.

There are no predators in the UK of cats and dogs. In Africa, Asia, South America and even other parts of Europe, there are. Releasing animals into an ecosystem with no predators has never resulted in a reduction in its population, quite the opposite. They would wreak havoc on the wildlife, far more than they do as pets.

pigsDOfly · 28/08/2015 18:26

Just a slight digression from where the thread has got to. Posters keep saying that the OP says this or that. Actually the OP has said very little if you read the whole thread and absolutely nothing since the first page.

I don't think the OP really has an opinion on this one way or the other otherwise surely he would have been back to argue his case.

Ironfistfunkymum · 28/08/2015 18:41

Wow at the first few pages of responses. Talk about misreading something to get offended!

I agree with pp this is a topic that is very important to discuss. Dogs do eat a lot of meat so its not surprising they have a huge carbon footprint, especially how m
Big some are.

I love animals but with a busy life and being veggie I make do with the slow worms and birds in my garden. Both of them are harmed a lot by cats, especially slow worms.

The pp that said that a fed cat would not kill animals is 100% wrong! They often kill just for fun.

catzpyjamas · 28/08/2015 19:42

Tbf, the OP disappeared after the first page so everyone just started having a bit of a laugh.

To be serious, I honestly don't believe that humans have any more right to exist on this planet than any other species. We domesticated these animals and have therefore accepted responsibility for their care.
Dogs are believed to have been first domesticated some 12,000 years ago and cats 3000 years ago. It is rather late to change our minds now Hmm.

A more responsible approach would be to neuter the animals we do keep and ban puppy and kitten breeding until all the rescued animals are rehomed. IMO, the most unethical part of keeping pets is the factory production of living creatures as pets not the responsible keeping, caring and feeding of them.

BoneyBackJefferson · 28/08/2015 19:44

pigsDOfly

Looking at the responses on the first few pages why would the OP have come back?

Ironfistfunkymum · 28/08/2015 19:49

Of course the op didn't come back seeing the totally uncalled for replies.

In the uk alone 10s of millions of cats and dogs are kept as pets it's fair to say that if we didn't have pets and the food was redistributed a 10m+ people in a another country might not go to bed hungry.

tomatodizzymum · 28/08/2015 20:37

Seriously if the food was redistributed Confused - dog and cat food might be "the choiciest chunks" and all that, but it's usually made from animals which are diseased, dying or sometimes already dead. Perhaps a better solution would be for the 1.5-2 billion people in the first world to stop being so greedy and re-distribute some food to the 800 million starving people in the third world. Dog and cats are not the problem!! Hmm

Fluffy24 · 28/08/2015 20:58

Commercial pet food is not made from animals which are ill, diseased or dying - normally they just use different/cheap bits of a carcase the rest of which went to human food chain.

tomatodizzymum · 28/08/2015 21:39

Fluffy24 so what happens to those animals? If they are just discarded rather than fed to cats and dogs, then I personally think that's worse. Cats and dogs have evolved to eat the type of meat that would make humans sick. It is not harmful for them, it is actually more harmful to give them a lot of the food that IS fit for human consumption, it can lead to all manner of health problems, especially in dogs.

Meat is not reared specifically for pet food and there is not enough offal to meet pet food demand. The quality of pet meat might be slightly higher in the UK than say the USA, but not by much. If a cow lives, gets sick and dies then better it is eaten by a bunch of dogs, far more ethical, green and natural than just to dispose of it because we wouldn't or couldn't personally eat it.

Fluffy24 · 28/08/2015 21:52

No if the animal is ill it is incinerated/rendered. What if it was ill with something transmissible to other animals? Or humans?

We also have strict welfare laws to try to prevent animals who are unfit to travel being transported for slaughter rather than put down on farm.

This isn't a comment about the ethics of feeding pets etc, just a point of information.