To think you don't love your pets half as much once you have kids

[ishouldtryabitmoreachday]

We have a dog. We had him a couple of years before I had a baby. We'd had a previous dog together and my parents had a dog when I was in my teens. But I just don't love my dog like I did before I had kids.

My dog is looked after, he's walked twice a day, groomed and wormed, flea stuff and is part of the family. He goes most places with us, but I just don't have that love I had before I had kids. It's hard to explain, is it just me .. AIBU?

I don't have kids (yet!! Due soon) however i have cats and i would say it would be more about me having less time for them than less love for them. The two loves are different. However, my fiancé knows full well there's no competition between the cats and him 😂😂

@Igotthemheavyboobs ah, but do you have a fuckton of cats? (Meow)

No humans love you unconditionally in quite the same way a pet does. Pets every time for me, rather than humans, I'm afraid. I'd save my cats before my husband.

I still loved my cat, but I babied her a lot less after I had my baby. I understand, OP

Having kids didn’t change how I felt about my dogs...we had 2 before kids and now only 1. Our beautiful golden retriever died at the beginning of March. He was 12. I’m still absolutely heartbroken. They are a big part of our family and having children did not change that at all.

Your poor dog 😢😢

I can understand what you mean. I loved -or bonded more - to pets I had prior to children more than pets I’ve had after children but put it down to the fact I was busier and they were something else to care for on top of other demands. My children are older now and we got a new dog last year and I care for him much more - in a bonding way - than pets I had when my children were little.

Surely a pet doesn't have a concept of love so if you treat it well and look after it well, with appropriate care and affection then that's all that matters?

My SIL made such a fuss of her little sausage dog until her dd was born. Now she’s devoted to the dd and gets very impatient and irritated with the dog. It does have some bad habits, but it’s a sweet little dog, it’s quite upsetting to see.

Personally, I love our dog (almost) as much as the dc, I certainly consider her part of the family

JuanNil

It was mandatory to go out and get them at the time 😂

Surely a pet doesn't have a concept of love

They don't have concepts of anything because their brains aren't sophisticated enough to think in the abstract. But they know instinctively when they are loved - because they receive attention and words in a soft tone of voice, which reminds them of the attentions they received from their mothers as infants. Hence a happy cat will paddle you as if suckling, and a happy dog will greet you ecstatically.

I feel like the love you have when your baby is tiny and through the toddler years are when you have this very intense love with your child. Then as they grow and become independent as the years pass your love for them is just as strong as it was before but less intense. They don’t need you for everything anymore and are becoming their own people.
I remember that feeling of absolute love when mine were very young.
I got my rescue dogs when my kids were older so that they could be the centre of our worlds, and they really are.
When I look at the dogs I have this bursting love and pride and protectiveness. They are love itself and they need me.
They bring calm and laughter and absolute joy to all of us. They have taught me so much about slowing down and actually enjoying life.
The dogs will never grow up and become independent, in fact as they age they need us more. I think I’m a person who gets more joy out of spending time with animals than humans anyway.

But there is spending time with humans, which can be frustrating and upsetting and awkward and difficult, but that’s different to your own family.

It IS sad, regardless of the age of the children, when pets play such a pivotal role that everyone else is second fiddle and is arse about face.

I think the midwife mentioned in the first page has a point about pets becoming pets after baby.
I love our dog and that hasn't changed since the children but we don't devote as much time, money and attention to him as before. We used to go to classes (puppy classes then agility) we used to spend all day hiking and we used to buy him toys after toys, or new leads, collars harnesses etc. We've stopped the classes now (not just because of the kids, also because he's older) and we go on more reasonable walks and buy him less (not that he cares anyway). But it works out as he's older and much more chilled out. It was progressive, when we just had 1 child and she was a baby we still went on very long walks but slowly our lifestyle changed. So it suits him and it suits us. We still love him loads but I'd put my kids first before my dog.

I understand completely.

This is how I think about it. Pre DS, it there was a fire I may have risked my life to rescue my cats. Post DS, there is no way I would risk my life for pets as my love for my child (and ensuring I am still there for him), far overrides what I feel for the cats.

I’m not sure if it means that my love has reduced for my pets or if I just love someone so more intensely now that the love for the cats seems trivial in comparison.

This is absolutely fucking ridiculous but oddly intriguing at the same time.
There are people on MN who have admitted to not loving one of their CHILDREN (you know, the human ones they gave birth to) as much as the others and they've got a better reception than this.
OP has explained that her dog is well cared for and part of the family. But it is a pet.

The fact that people are guiltily admitting that they'd rescue their children first in the case of a fire is worrying. Of course you would, they're your children. You shouldn't have to clarify that.

TBH, the fire is a really bad analogy because if you were actually in that situation you’d probably do whatever you could, and that might mean saving no one.

So for example say you had two children and you only saved one - it doesn’t mean you love the other one less. It’s quite crass IMO

What would be concerning to me would be decisions that would either benefit your children being put by the wayside because of pets, or children being adversely impacted by the presence of said pets.

So let’s say your dog regularly needs treatment costing thousands of pounds and you’re a low to mid income family. Or your child has an allergy, or they are bitten by the dog. Or your relationship ends and you can no longer afford not to work but can’t contemplate leaving the dog, forcing the children into penury.

That is when priorities are wrong, no matter how sincere and well meaning they might be.

I've always told my children that in a fire we save the people and forget the dog. That isn't any reflection on my love for the dog, but in the main, if a dog is going to survive a fire, they'll do it without human help and people could die trying to find the dog.

It's the same when people jump into rivers after dogs that fall in - often the human drowns and the dog climbs out further along the river.

This argument always ends up at the fire analogy and it’s really not that difficult , in the event of a fire you prioritise so kids out and then dog out however I’m more than happy to say that I would not leave the house until they were all out and if that meant the kids were out and I died with the dog than that’s what would happen because he is a member of the family and I would try to save him . As it is he sleeps upstairs so it would be just as easy to gather him as everyone else .

@Floralnomad

This argument always ends up at the fire analogy and it’s really not that difficult , in the event of a fire you prioritise so kids out and then dog out however I’m more than happy to say that I would not leave the house until they were all out and if that meant the kids were out and I died with the dog than that’s what would happen because he is a member of the family and I would try to save him . As it is he sleeps upstairs so it would be just as easy to gather him as everyone else .

I find this so troubling. You’d rather leave your children motherless than let your dog die alone by himself?

The fire argument I was making wasn’t about who I would save - I would naturally try to save my son as a priority. My argument is that if there was a fire, my son was elsewhere and it was just me and pets, I wouldn’t make any additional effort to save the cats. I prioritise myself over the cats now because my DS needs me - whereas before DS I would have made a strong effort to the risk my life to save them.

Ffs do people really think that it’s so easy to get people out of a burning building as that?

And floral I do understand why you would make that choice but the problem is you would leave your children without a mother which isn’t exactly known to lead to a happy childhood, is it?

I agree OP. I have loads of pets, but before I had kids, my dog or my cat was my baby. I loved them with maternal ferociousness.
After I had children, I still love my animals and get a lot of pleasure from them and they are well looked after, but they are certainly more pets now than substitute children.

Loving your kids more than your dog = totally normal. Actually losing love for your dog when the kids come...?
I don't think it's cruel if your behaviour to the dog doesn't change, but Id think less of a person for feeling this way.
They say having kids makes you a better person - in so many instances I think it makes people worse.

It's still possible to love a pet after you have kids and I don't think the love would change but I think I get your point a little bit. There's people out there who throw birthday parties for dogs and share " custody" of a dog when they split from their partner. If they had children, the focus would be on them, not the dog. I have a cat and children and I love the cat. She's shown affection, well fed and got everything she needs but my main focus isn't her, it's the kids.

@Lougle,

I was just thinking that, I heard an interview with Lifeboaters who said in nearly 100% of cases where the owners drowned having jumped into the sea to help a dog who seemed to have got into difficulty, the dog got out by itself in the end.
Now having read this topic I think they obviously thought it was worth dying...and would do it again?(say if rescued/resuscitated). Actually I do wonder if anyone who nearly died for their dog or cat would do it again. I certainly wouldn't appreciate having to bury any of my family if they clearly put their life at risk trying to save a pet but it would be unthinkable in even my extended family, but I guess for people who put make animals their family it's acceptable?? So the kids of such a parent would accept it in a way, having always known their mum? loved them the same (in some cases less) than the pet, as this thread shows?

It does make you a worse person in many ways, Tania because you aren’t inclined to be as altruistic after kids.

You don’t have as much time to give to worthy causes or money to donate to them. I’ve had to cancel my DDs to charity as am pregnant, feel shit about it but that’s how it is.

The general idea is that everybody prioritises their own child. That shouldn’t come as a surprise to anybody.