Why do families who are poor, have pets

[hostleg]

They are expensive to feed, look after and to recover from illness and injuries.

Hear people who have a dog who swallowed something they shouldn’t have - £900 at vets. I’m sure these poor families don’t have £900.

I’m poor. Didn’t use to be. I have three dogs and two cats. Really struggling with the cost of them. But to get rid of them would be awful.

Thank you so much for this very thoughtful post!

There's so much hate on MN nowadays.

Is that your answer to "why do poor people have pets?"?

Pet insurance? It doesn't make sense.

What was the point?

I think it’s just about priorities. I have a friend who is not financially well off at all. So much so that her dd does not have a proper coat or shoes for activities and often doesn’t have lunch money or enough food in the house for dinner (our dd’s are friends and my dd has had to buy her food at school).

But she has a horse (I also have a horse so I know all her costs, we use the same livery). She is paying £300 just for the livery per month, plus farrier and feed and tack and vet bills, dentist, chiropractor, saddle fitter. Honestly, I think the horse gives her joy that her family does not, so she buys horse feed and not fish fingers. The kids aren’t a priority and her husband is an alcoholic, so I think she avoids home and spends money where it makes her happy, instead of where she should if she was being responsible.

I think it’s probably how people don’t do right by their children for an easy life. She needs to leave her abusive husband, but I don’t know that she could keep the horse as a single parent. So she just avoids dealing with any of it and carries on. The kids seem miserable and hungry, but that’s just how they’ve always done it. But she loves the horse, maybe more than her kids, so that’s the priority.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0r7z2ynd2lo

Thought this was interesting as to the question of unwanted pets.

I think you'll find some people (both rich and poor) don't do anything for their pets beyond feed them and have them put down if it becomes necessary. But yeah, as with pretty much everything people should definitely plan for their financial circumstances. Although to be fair, sometimes those do change unexpectedly.

Yeah, pretty disgusting. Would they be ok with feeding them human corpses? Or of course animals are not human and I am not saying they are - but people very much do love and grow attached to their companions. There is a bond there, they are not just ornaments or toys.

Anyone who is ok with this is a red flag and probably should not have pets. It doesn't matter - at all - if it's rationally not going to hurt the dead pets. It means you never loved them, if you are ok with doing this with their corpse.

All well and good until they get older. My dog’s insurance is £100 per month. An operation cost me £2200 last week. My dog is 11 so I had to pay 20% of the claim plus the excess. I got around £1700 back but also had to pay the vet to start with.

It is not ‘just about priorities’, you are describing wilful child neglect.

Dunno, I'd rather my corpse was useful rather than became landfill for no reason. Would prefer it for myself.

But the dead pets aren't making the choice for themselves, their supposedly loving owners are doing it.

The equivalent would be you dying - and everyone under the assumption that you wanted a standard funeral (it's not like the pets can tell their owners any different) and your kids choosing to feed your corpse to tigers instead.

Again, I am not saying animals are equivalent to humans, but in this scenario, that is the equivalent.

As someone who has a cat and dog I think pets have moved out of being affordable for most- vets’ fees and or insurance are mind blowing now!!

they would be live pets that the zoo would euthanase and I'm massively in support of the assisted dying bill. Hope it comes in and is more relaxed by the time I need care so I can just donate myself to feed tigers or something instead of being 'cared' for.

Because they can still prioritise their pet over other things, and it’s not up to you to decide how they spend their money.

Because life’s tough and it brings them joy.

Pets can be hugely helpful and therapeutic to those who are struggling or who’ve suffered mental illness or trauma.

I love the attitude that 'the poor' should put money aside for any emergency pet bills, because of course if they have a spare €100 a month, that'll go to Fido's just-in-case vet fund.

I've been poorish - single parent, mortgage and creche fees, almost paying to work to be honest.

PPs have said that we shouldn't have pets or children if we can't afford them.

Should I have rehomed my child, as I couldn't afford to keep him once his father left?

I did keep him, and bought a dog, and managed to keep them both alive and healthy, but I'll accept that was a fluke.

I'm top 10% earner now, thanks to promotions and getting back to full time, so do I get a voucher for additional kids and animals, as I'm worthy?

The cost of pets should be subsidised by the NHS and public money. They save the NHS a fortune in mental health support, reducing the numerous diseases caused by inactivity, increasing wellbeing, giving structure that feeds into structure to work and take responsibility, provide company for elderly who remain outside residential care longer if they have pets and are generally in better health, provide security that reduces burden on policing. Pets are for everyone.

OMG, who do these poor people think they are getting themselves a pet when clearly they should be consigned to a workhouse and a life of misery, eh?

How does the tax payer pay for pets of someone on benefit? I have four children. I never planned for them financially. I worked hard to give them the things they needed. I never claimed a benefit to keep them or my pets which they had loads of. It was my income and it was apportioned accordingly. All the pets earnt their keep (cats n dogs). Comforted us all when sick or upset.there were times when our neighbours were burgled and we weren't. Wood mice were kept out of our semi rural house. Once a benefit is paid it is up to the individual how they spend it. Imagine the hike on the NHS if these people didn't have their animals to assist with their mental health and terrible loneliness. I see having an animal as a proactive health choice actually. As I say, I have four children they were never seen as expensive and always had enough for their needs. I'd need to balance out the consideration against my first child being an only child and the loneliness that can bring. Loneliness is a horrible thing what ever your age. I don't know single only child who liked being one. When mine were little we did our work around them and for a while I worked from home, went to uni, trained for a second career, did an MA. Having children doesn't lower your life it utterly enriches it and you get by just fine.

For me the issue is, that if you are struggling to make ends meet, don’t then go and buy a dog and have this added expense. (I actually would say the same with children, don’t a third, fourth etc, if you can’t afford it). This also applies to people who are working, not just on benefits.

I do feel quite “judgey” about it, because SO MANY rescue organisations are desperately trying to raise funds to meet the medical needs of animals that have been dumped. Animals that have been left in dreadful pain and discomfort because the “owners” couldn’t afford or didn’t care about what the animal needed. Owning an animal is a privilege, not a right and if you cannot afford lifetime care, don’t get one.
Obviously people’s financial circumstances change and they should be supported but if they just dump the animal and bugger off? No, that is not someone who should own an animal.

Part of the reason I don’t have children is that I couldn’t afford to give them the life I would want to. I know of a few people who got a dog “for company” and said dog is never walked beyond the back garden. People get dogs for selfish reasons and don’t think of the finances involved

This . Everyone should be able to have a pet but only if you can afford the costs . Vets fees are huge and rack up quickly so if you don’t have insurance and you don’t have money then don’t have a pet . This was brought home to me recently , my dog became unwell and 3 days of treatment over 3 appointments cost me £1900 . If this treating hadn’t cured him we were going to X-rays and scans at £3500. Luckily I can afford it but what would happen if I couldn’t . He can’t remain ill and in pain .

Because sometimes the pet is all that’s keeping them going.

The concept of "cutting your coat according to the cloth" has long gone. (Though possibly will be coming back)

I was brought up by parents brought up during the war. They were brought up by parents born in the 1890s early 1900s. (My grandmother lost her first sweetheart in WW1 so was older when having children, both my mum and I were older first time parents) It was all save up, make do and mend etc. Traditional working class clear memories of no NHS, little support, living in homes with no indoor plumbing. (Bad enough to get put in the first council houses in the village, considered poor housing in the thirties, outside pump for water and privy at the end of the garden)

Things changed in the '80s with access to credit. Attitudes changed. Generations were far enough away from hardship to not remember. Welfare state, baby boomers, free uni education for many with grants, vaccinations for childhood illnesses, All bloody good stuff but a lot of people lost the wariness of spending more than they could afford etc.

Sadly things have got tough again. (Bad time in the nineties, but some recovery til 2008 when finances are tough again) But people have been brought up by parents and grandparents born and raised in the better times of more generous welfare state etc advertising of having it all (on credit) things continually getting better... Secure employment. instant gratification, poor teaching on budgeting society is not scared of debt.

Living within your means is harder in our society that pushes credit and spending and low interest rates on savings. Just as eating healthily is harder with readily available prepared food and both parents needing to work. It's easier to see what other people have got and want it and harder to resist. Pets are on every other advert. Loads of people have a dog it's seen as normal.

What is a luxury has changed. Past generation luxuries are now basics. Things that were luxuries are now essential in our society. (Smart phone for example as everything has gone online digital) some people need cars as public transport has declined, got expensive and jobs have moved out of the city where people live.

To me, pets are an expensive luxury. To others, not so much. Especially if they had them before their circumstances changed.