Pet ownership should be for the wealthy

[spottybaghottyhag]

Pre emptying this by saying we are low income, get topped up by UC and my pet is eligible for PDSA treatment

My ddog 13 has been eating less than usual and not keen to go out as much, but otherwise bright and seemingly well. Made an appointment with the above vet. Due to his age they wanted to do x-ray/scan under sedation. Was very shocked to discover he has a tumour in his stomach. Vet basically said (over the phone) that as they are a charity hospital they cannot do anything further, the options are either a referral to a specialist vet to ascertain if it's cancer, or PTS. She said the referral + tests would be circa £1k, which wouldn't obviously include any actual treatment or surgical options.
Personally I don't want to explore other options regardless, he's 13, had a great life and I don't think major surgery or chemo on any elderly animal is fair. We are making sure he's still comfortable and will PTS when we feel he's not.

Onto the AIBU: it really made me feel that you should only get a pet if you can afford expensive vet bills. The PDSA are very limited in what they do (very understandably) and you cannot rely on them as a complete veterinary service. Insurance doesn't always pay out. Someone asked me will I get another dog when ddog goes and my answer was we cannot afford it. She felt I was being very unreasonable. Am I?

What? You say you can’t afford a pet and someone says you are being unreasonable?? That makes no sense whatsoever. Of course you consider the affordability of having a pet! It’s totally irresponsible not to! Really has this person no common sense? Don’t listen to such a fool. You are being sensible and responsible.

This is a better way of putting it.

YANBU, though you’re clearly a responsible owner wanting to do the best for your dog now. I’m sorry you’re going through this.

Ooooooh! You’re brave!!

(and also correct)

Kids are absolutely not the same as pets and it does annoy me when people try and put them together.

Children are an investment in the future and the state should quite properly have an input into education, healthcare and welfare of future members of the adult population. Without children our society has no future. Restricting childbearing to the wealthy only will have a detrimental effect on future society, as we are seeing with the birth rate drop

Pets will never contribute to society. They are a hobby and as such a luxury item. In terms of world-wide incomes they are absolutely an item for the wealthy only. A British person who can afford to properly look after a dog, including healthcare is wealthy in world terms, where significant numbers of people still can barely afford to feed themselves, never mind an animal with no practical use.

Yes I agree, if you’re replying on PDSA treatment with no other alternative.

We were recently caught out with vet fees for dental problems with my cat that our insurance won’t cover. It has made me think twice about getting any more pets, vets are absolutely extortionate.

I would recommend VERY strongly for ANY pet owner to insure via Petplan to the max of lifetime cover up to 12k a year for treatment
Petplan are more expensive than any others BUT Vets will invoice them directly and ask you to settle any excess after Petplan have paid

You are therefore not filling in forms and going to and fro replying to queries from the insurer which you have to get from the vet.

Most vets recommend Petplan

Our puss was ill last xmas

Total vet bill was £11,900

Our contribution with excesses about 3k

Local vet - First tests cost 1k and were inconclusive
Next set of tests £500
Vet called and dais they were not sure what was wrong and puss was getting worse.- so 2 days in puss is not getting any treatment - breathing is getting worse

What many pet owners do not know is this:

You local vet is like a GP

If they are unbale to treat effectively you can ask for a referral to a specialist vet - these people are experts in their field equivalent of say a heart surgeon or oncologist in human terms or the TV supervet

I asked vet to make a referral - vet said no problem but that is expensive

I was not bothered as we have max cover

Took puss to Lumbrey Park a specialist referral vet in Alton for2pm

Next morning they called to say was poorly and puss had
B2 and B9 vitamin deficiency
Bronchitis
IBS

We went to visit puss every day and saw improvement

He came home 1st Jan last year

Is now in excellent shape albeit on a hypoallergenic diet recommended by Lumbrey Park

He did have a short relapse which was quickly dealt with by Lumbery at which I took puss in at 10 am and he was with the vet until 1 pm being treated etc

Ok it cost us about 3K but we would have just paid anyway had we not been insured - he is one of our family
We now have a happy puss who gives us enormous joy

Omd right? We have two dogs and two cats. The two cats and one dog are insured. The other dog is 13.5 and no longer insured due to costs. We recently had to pay £1100 for a dental, a biopsy, histology, and then antibiotics for a post op infection. She is in otherwise good shape and has now fully recovered. However - since both dogs are pretty old and our cats are four and two respectively, we feel that the overall cost has skyrocketed in recent years. All four are in the vet plan that covers their vaccinations and flea and worm treatments plus six monthly checks (£20 each = £80 a month) - but due to claims the insurance for the three exceeds £100 a month! Kennels and Cattery costs when we go away have become exorbitant. The oldest dog gets clipped every seven weeks for £40 a throw. Then there’s food. The plan is that once they pass we will simply not replace them. They are very loved and extremely well cared for but as we are soon retiring we will aim to have just the two cats (who are still young) in time. Yes indeed pets have become a complete luxury - though of course I admit we have too many.

Your friend thought it was unreasonable to not get a dog you can’t afford? Is she a bit thick? She can’t be an animal lover because if she was she’d think pets should be owned by people who can afford to properly care for them, including when they are unwell (I’m not talking about affording luxuries, I just mean adequately fed and sufficient insurance paid for).

I don’t think it’s fair to call vet bills extortionate.

People expect human-level medical care and drugs for their animals nowadays. That doesn’t come at bargain rates.

PS I do NOT work for Petplan I just ant people's pets to get the best possible csre

A huge percentage of people are lifelong burdens to society, not assets.

I think YABU

Even if you were wealthy, the right decision was still to PTS.

As a wider point, no I don't agree with this. There is a huge spectrum between on breadline and wealthy and variety of pet types and housing situations where pets could be looked after well. Even pets to homeless people could be well. It's not an automatic thing.

I believe most vets in the UK would not put down a healthy pet or a sick one with a high chance of survival and quality of life later even if the owner can't afford it but they don't advertise that because some people will take advantage.

This is true, but we cannot discriminate at birth, not do we practice eugenics.

One can guard against excessive numbers of unproductive adults however, by adequate education, welfare and healthcare during the critical years of childhood. It is an investment in the future population, not a frivolous expense.

Maybe not even then.

We insure dogs third party in case they cause a car accident or similar, but not for vet bills. We pay for things like antibiotics and jags and minor treatments, but would never put a dog through complex and painful treatment for something like cancer (unless a simple skin cancer or something). I wouldn't do it even if I was a millionaire. Dogs don't understand why they're in pain like people do.

So no, I think that on the basis that I believe it's cruel to over treat animals, I do not think you need to be wealthy. You need to be able to afford normal, minor treatments.

Since you have a relationship with the PDSA you could ask them what kind of things are likely to come up in a dog's lifetime, and how much they cost. Then decide which ones you can afford and whether you feel this would give a dog a decent quality of life (by which I do not mean endlessly extended at great cost to the dog).

I have pet insurance it really isn't that expensive I wouldn't put an old dog through extensive tests and cancer treatment regardless, yes pets can be expensive but most people get insurance but they also weigh up the pros and cons of expensive and intrusive treatment for their animals.

I do.think pdsa is a great charity though as I think animals enrich lives.

I wouldn't think a homeless person's dog can be well looked after unless there are some input from charities like the PDSA if the animal is ill. I sympathise with people who already have a dog when they become homeless and they will have to try as best they can to look after it with help from charity where possible. I don't think anyone who is homeless or knowingly in a precarious financial position should get a new dog.

For people with a stable, caring home to offer a pet, but limited finances, there are charities that look for foster homes for animals, but the medical ownership costs are covered by the charity. That can be an option for animal lovers.

The answer is either pet insurance or a credit card kept empty until/unless needed for vet bills.

I personally go with pet insurance for younger animals and switch to the credit card aged 10+ as aside from minor illness and injury, I wouldn't treat a pet over for anything serious. A young dog needing chemo or an operation would still have a lot of quality life left, an older dog wouldn't.

Although you do need funds for neutering, chipping, vaccinations, etc.

If money is the only thing preventing you from pet ownership, would you consider fostering? All costs are met by the rescue.

Oh sorry I meant to say I am sorry about your dog it is heartbreaking

Pet ownership should be for those who can afford it. And that includes the unexpected vet bills.
Obviously there is also the option of pet insurance.

We have a large number of animals here- horses, dogs, cats, small furries, reptiles…
My monthly outgoings on animals are more than a lot of people’s mortgages.

I'm not sure it's a huge percentage.
Even people who are in and out of prison or unable to ever work or volunteer on medical grounds benefit society indirectly, they help create jobs for others (job centre, prison guard, rehab, health care assistants, benefit tribunals, PIP assessors) and teach society lessons about humanity and each other. There is nobody without any values or lessons but I suppose if you measure burden to society financially, then yes from a materialistic government point of view they want us all healthy, work til we drop dead, no benefits no gov pensions or state help at all at any stage...but most people don't measure human value so. We have to look after the weak and troubled in a civilised society because we or our loved ones might become such too one day.

I agree, they can become expensive in old age and I don’t think people account for that when they get a pet. My old dog now has a myriad of issues we’re constantly shelling out for - insurance doesn’t cover everything and even the things it does, as he’s old they only cover 80%. We adore him and so we pay it but it must be very very difficult if you don’t have the means once you’ve grown so attached to them.

Same for me. Always had pet insurance from day one with all my dogs and horses and never had an issue with them paying out. I know some people choose not to have it, but for me, I'd never go without and has been worth every penny I paid in.