To say that having a pet is a luxury, not a right?

[YourSnappyFinch]

Pets are expensive and time-consuming. Shouldn’t people prove they can afford and care for them before getting one?

Having pets is a luxury but not in the affordability sense. If you can't look after your pet properly and force it to live in squalor or to be deprived of food or exercise or allow it to be hurt and abused, then you should not be able to have another. Being poor and living on benefits should not be a reason to prevent a person or family from the joy a pet can bring to the home.

Why so much focus on pets? I see people getting upset about people who don't have the time or resources getting pets. Apparently you should have the money for training a dog, the insurance, decent food, a garden and you should be at home most of the day. But no one says these things about people having children.

I think we need to sort our priorities, children are more important than pets. I'd much rather some idiot made stupid decisions that only impacted an animals life over a child.

And for going out? Since not all people behave reasonably on their nights out - some end up in A&E after making unwise choices.

Of course@YourSnappyFinch it is true that having a pet is expensive but you are making a wrong conclusion out of it.

Presumably because it doesn’t impinge on bodily and human rights to make laws around animal breeding and pet ownership - whereas making laws around who is considered worthy of procreating and attempting to restrict children being born to the “wrong” people understandably has a bit of an image and PR problem.

I got my cat nearly ten years ago and my life has changed so much during that time, including being at uni, getting a divorce and moving house several times. I've been the poorest I've ever been, and the richest I've ever been. Hell, I don't even live in the same country I did when I got her !

I think this is tricky. Our cats came as kittens from someone we know who isn't well known looking after their house or there cats. Our cats definitely have a better quality of life here. They are insured, have decent quality food, good quality litter, a big garden and they are vaccinated.
It's a possibility that someone else took a couple of the others, feeds them poorer quality food, plus doesn't insure or vaccinate but they are loved and have shettler. Are those cats better off than where they were (a bit of a shithole) or in in rescue centre? I think they probably are yes.

I do think pet ownership is an a bit of a weird space, like people getting pets during the pandemic and dumping them when life was normal again. I just think there needs to be more thought and consideration into it by people wanting pets. But I also don’t necessarily think the government needs to regulate it.

I get mailings from a local cat rescue, and they are having many more cats surrendered to them because their owners can't look after them any more - this includes family break-up, unable to find rented accommodation that accepts pets, serious illness, as well as cost of living issues. None of these could really be predicted when the owners took on their cats, could they??

Our cat , who is 12 this year has a vet's " lifetime care " package . For about £15 a month we get flea / working treatment plus 10% off an appointment and their yearly boosters.
Her food is subscription from Katkin at £62 a month , plus treats , litter , dry biscuits & any extras like brushes , toys ect and pet insurance.

She had a vet's appointment yesterday and had to have a long acting antibiotic injection at £62 .
So this month is likely to cost us £181 which is scary when you add it all up .

I realise that she could be fed cheaper but she gets on well with it and has little waste , whereas before we'd throw out quite a lot when she had the small tins / pouches.

I just looked up the average cost of a cat in the uk and it says £1500 a year which is £125 a month so still a considered amount .

That should read flea/ worming treatment !

Why the post, op?

Most people can afford things when they get them - life has a habit of throwing things your way

Edit - plus the col crisis

I took my cat to the vet today for flea treatment and while I was in there I asked if the vet could cut her nails

They tried to charge me £24 for that!

Thank God they agreed not to charge this time but bloody hell, I thought that was a crazy price

Just because something is the right way to behave doesn't mean the government should be allowed to micromanage.

Firmly not enough of their business to have the level of control.

That's what common sense and animal cruelty laws are for.

I do agree - I look at my friend who is struggling with money, recently had to find new rental accommodation for her family, and yet not only got a dog 2 years ago, but just took on a kitten last year, and I realise that pets are lovely, but, so is having enough cash to live and a roof over your head, and I know that I factored this into when I got a pet.

I hate all this transactional judgement directed at ‘lesser’ individuals about the things that bring meaning and joy to our lives, the things that make us human. She shouldn’t have had that second child, she can’t afford it. She should have to hand over her bank statements to a selection panel to see if she can keep her cat. Etc etc.

I’m keeping my finger down, going to point it at a society that doesn’t seem to think that our work is worth less than that which actually gets us to work. I am a human and I demand in exchange for my effort enough for a few of the things that makes me so, art, literature, music, children, pets.

Of course some people make bad choices with their money. But as said, situations can change. And besides, these things should be available if you are on minimum wage, drawing a pension etc and the fact that they are so often not boils my piss.

It's not about affording. It's about prioritising.

I've always been on a low income but I've always had pets because I make other sacrifices in order to do so. If someone told me I couldn't have a pet because I'm too poor I don't think I'd want to go on living.

People can be well off but not give adequate care to their pets or bother to spend any time with them because their priority is holidays, meals out and socialising so they hardly even notice their pets exist.

I have 100% commitment to caring for my animals. I love them more than anything else in the world.

This! People seem to expect human - level medical care for a pet.

People also seem to think thousands and thousands should be spent on "rehabilitating" dogs that are clearly in the wrong home, or are downright dangerous.

It's not about affordability, it's about responsibility.

You need to be able to afford to vaccinate, worm and feed your pet. You need the time and space to provide walks, a sleeping space, secure quiet environment or whatever the particular pet needs. You also need a couple of hundred pounds saved up for emergencies. But that isn't too restrictive for most people

As well as that, a plan for how you will pay for treatment, what sort of budget you will want to set, how you will transport your pet to the vet, what the likely costs will be, what you will do if your pet needs help in the evening or weekend, what you will do if you go away, are you planning to move house, have a baby etc.

Pets can be managed on a low budget but it needs some forethought and pragmatism.

Let's do that for children first, shall we? Prove you can provide adequate parenting before you are allowed to procreate. That's about the only totalitarian policy I could get behind.

No, it was all about the animal intensely suffering for another 12 hours. She admitted that she got the hamster as a cheap pet. They live less than two years, if you can't get/lend under £100 for end of life care, then it's still too expensive for you to have. Get fish, or volunteer with animals.
However I know people whose pets keep them going, but might not pass to get approved. They are really good owners. So I would rather see more prison sentences and bigger fines for animal cruelty. Rather than go for big, national, we should look at smaller, local charities. The small cat charities do so much good, but are under supported.

Let's stop the sale of inadequate tanks and cages from the likes of PAH. So a hamster /fish set up can't be bought for under £50. That could easily be put in place.

I don’t get the logic in thinking a hamster needs an expensive vet trip for euthanising when we are happy to poison rats and other animals just as capable of suffering.

Meat animals have a shit life. Many animals in the wild have a shit life. We are very sentimental in this country. (I am one of them. My cat is treated like a pampered prince).

Practically we would do more for animals by buying ethically raised meat than legislating for pet licences.

Nobody should be having an animal simply for their mental health. That is incredibly selfish and it would be under question whether the pet could be properly cared for.

You may not think it “leads to anywhere nice”, but that doesn’t mean we bury our heads in the sand over it.

If you can’t afford to properly care for your pet, or look after it appropriately, you shouldn’t have one, regardless of how amazing it would be for your mental health.

Not a massive fan of government micro-managing things, but the current status quo is clearly not working.

I'd be up for a complete ban on selling animals via social media.

Pet licences, mandatory insurance for owners? Maybe, but it's a tricky subject.

But what does "properly" mean?

Animals are so easy to buy on a whim. There’s a very old man on my FB village site who is constantly asking for free stuff. A free bed, because he sleeps in a chair, free food, a free electric wheelchair etc. he’s just shown photos of his new French bulldog puppy. It beggars belief how he’s going to fund the vet bills that will come for this dog.