It’s been a while since I climbed onto my soapbox, so lemme dust this thing off and climb on up here…
In 2013, I wrote a post asking should pet adoptions be free, and the discussion on the blog and on Facebook included varied opinions, but it seemed that the general consensus opposed my opinion that, yes, pet adoptions should sometimes be free.
Then, a year later, I wrote a post asking what should I feed my dog, and the discussion was largely in agreement that you just have to do the best you can do, anywhere on the spectrum of grocery store brands of kibble to a whole foods, organic, raw diet.
I find those opinions fascinating, and stick with me here, pretty please, because I’m going to circle around to that.
Over the weekend I volunteered for a mobile, low-cost vaccination clinic in our area. The idea is to take the mobile clinic to “resource deserts,” areas where pet owners can’t access veterinary care (if you rely on the city bus to get to and from work, you certainly can’t take your dog to and from the vet on the city bus) and to provide affordable basics. Anyone on government assistance qualifies for discounted services. This is basic stuff; we’re not talking blood chemistry or urinalysis, but rabies shots and nail trims. The 16-year-old cat in the pic above was getting her nails trimmed, her rabies shot, and the owner had some concerns about fleas that the vet discussed with her and provided some recommendations.
These are services that we–and by “we” I suppose I mean animal lovers–deem worthy. We understand the value of providing low-cost services to animals who need to be up-to-date on rabies. We attend fundraisers and donate our time to these services. But if anyone asks the question–“Should animal adopting be restricted by income?”–we recoil. That flies in the face of the American dream where anyone from any background can supposedly do and achieve anything, pet ownership not excluded. And yet…
And yet we judge.
It goes back to what Christie Keith over at Dogged said years ago: “There is almost always at least a hint of judgment that poor people will be bad pet owners in a myriad of other ways, too.” Like in the discussion about free adoptions, there was a resounding cry that people who can’t afford an adoption fee can’t afford to take care of their pet. Who defines the “take care of” standard? Is attending a low-cost clinic in your impoverished neighborhood to get the rabies shot not taking care of your pet? Yet, oddly, we’ve gotten into the cultural habit of sharing Buzzfeed photo roundups of how much the homeless love their animals, and we praise and cry over that, but we somehow judge the people in between socioeconomic strata.
Over the years, John and I have volunteered for similar clinics wherever we’ve lived, and we’ve seen the tremendous range of wealth disparity and pet ownership. I’d argue, too, that the range of love and dedication to pets has a wide gap that is completely unrestricted by income. There are lots of disadvantaged folks who love their pets and do every single thing they can for them (see: those Buzzfeed posts about the homeless and their pets), and there are lots of advantaged folks with dogs languishing, bored behind privacy fences.
So, how do you measure the cost of pet ownership? If you can’t afford or are unable to get your dog to the vet, does that mean you don’t deserve a dog? Does that mean that dog is better off stuck in the shelter waiting for a more affluent owner than with the person who doesn’t have transportation to affordable services?
I don’t think there’s one right or one wrong answer here, and I fully acknowledge that, yep, my heart bleeds. But I also think this is one pet-savvy, animal-loving, brilliant community, so I think the discussion is absolutely worth having–and if anyone can come up with some solid thoughts and ideas, I firmly believe it’s you guys. I’d love to know what your thoughts are on this cost of pet ownership issue.
Also, I’d strongly encourage everyone to spend an afternoon volunteering at a low-cost clinic. Most areas having something–check with your community shelter. It’s an eye-opening, humbling experience to see the depth of love that everyone at every socioeconomic level has for their pets.
I love when you ask tough questions! I agree that ability to pay does not equal ability to love. I almost wish there was a way to assure the pet would be loved, no matter what the financial ability. I think shelters (as much as they can) and most certainly rescue groups need to be honest about what they see as any pet’s future based on what they know about them. For example, Melvin. Melvin was in terrible shape when I got him. And the rescue group was VERY clear that he was going to need lifelong vet care (daily, weekly, monthly) due to his allergies and due to the fact that he was probably going to always need prednisone and the other health issues that come with that. And they were only willing to adopt him out to someone who would commit to those costs. I was crazy enough to say yes, but the reality is, they were not lying. I got to make an informed decision about what he would need and if I was going to able to go through it with him (emotionally and financially). I think it’s ok that rescue groups outline the costs of dog ownership. That there is a discussion. I find it odd on adoption forms when they ask the adopter what they think the cost of dog ownership is. It’s not a quiz, this is the perfect opportunity to give minimums. Ultimately, it’s a choice the family will make but being sure that everyone has the facts is helpful. I also think we need to do more to help folks know where they can go to get things like flea and tick prevention (at lower costs), which vaccinations are imperative versus good to have and even, if you have $20 to spend on your dog this year, what should be #1.
That is such an excellent point!! I think if shelters and rescues were up front, as they were with Melvin, it might help a lot of people make informed decisions. Of course, health issues are wildly unpredictable, but as you mentioned, asking someone what they think the cost of ownership isn’t an effective way to open the discussion. Your last point really resonates with me, though… you CAN buy flea/tick meds at Walmart at an affordable rate, and rather than discourage that (Oh, I would NEVER! Have you seen what’s in that? etc.) we should encourage the best care at whatever rate the owner can afford.
I wish that I had had a really honest discussion from the ASPCA (which I won’t name, because really they are pretty great) where I adopted my darling senior dog Mike just this past January. They described him as “alert” and about 5 years old. They said that he had been in some terrible conditions and had been confiscated at the end of December when the weather was very cold from a muddy yard where he had spent his life. I signed an intimidating document declaring that I would pay for his care; and I can, and I do (it’s a lot).
Still, the truth is that Mike is closer to 9 years old or even older. He has a seizure disorder that there is no way that they could have over-looked while he was unmedicated but failed to mention to me. He had terrible atrophy in his back legs that has responded well to a special supplement that I buy for him. He has broken blood vessels in the back of his eyes from enduring many seizures (his retinas are permanently damaged). He is losing his eyesight. Mike is never really “alert”. He’s sort of brain damaged. In humans we might call this “differently abled”. In more plain terms the truth is that Mike is very stupid, or has been rendered that way by neglect. He can’t learn anything like “sit” or “stay”. He has no idea how to play and was not housebroken. He had never been walked on a leash, or been loved at all.
Since I got him he has changed a lot. He’s happy and very devoted to me. He’s very insecure and doesn’t like it if he can’t be right where I am. Luckily I am a senior too, and am home all day with him. He has learned to love (really love) walks on his leash and is mostly housebroken. That is if I stay on top of it and take him outside when he needs. He doesn’t know how to scratch at the door or anything; I just have to be aware that it’s time.
The hard thing to express is that I wish that they had been honest with me. I would have taken him anyway. My vet had some harsh words to say about them when he first examined Mike and even questioned whether I was prepared for this. Definately, it’s a one thing after another thing with Mike. I live two blocks from the vet (fortunately!) and we are there every week. His medication makes him sleep a lot. There are many things that he can’t do, and basically he is in the last phase of his life. He could live a few years like this but not many. I am happy and proud to care for him. I love him and love having him near me. I am constantly anxious that he is in pain. That’s the hard part. My vet thinks that he is not. At least not now that we have found the very expensive medicine that relieves the pressure on his eyes.
I just think that they could have been straight with me.
How timely! We just kicked off our Pets For Life program with a FREE clinic last Saturday. Our SPCA sits smack in the center of our most “underserved” zip code so after a week of handing out flyers we woke up Saturday morning to the remnants of a torrential downpour and wondered what we should do.
We ended up rearranging the flow a bit but the length of the line of people and dogs waiting in the rain for services was humbling and inspiring at the same time. You’re right, in some cases it was a tad hard not to judge (we’re human!) but for the most part, there was no need. These citizens clearly loved their dogs and were grateful for the services. A full 41% of our clients had never seen a vet and 34% hadn’t seen a vet in over a year.
(As someone in thick of it with these sickly foster pups, I can’t shout enough about the importance of vaccinations.)
I echo your sentiment, that everyone should volunteer for this at least once. The experience just can’t be explained in words.
What an amazing program. So, so proud of everything that you do!! And you’re absolutely right… it’s so difficult to explain in words when you see the depth of love people have for their pets. I always feel so humble afterwards because, sure, as you said, there are some cases where your knee-jerk reaction is judgment, and I love the opportunities to be proven wrong!!
I do judge people, but not because of their income. I know people who are on a fixed, small income, have 8 dogs, and feed them all a balanced raw food diet. I don’t think income has anything to do with how someone cares for their pets, because people will always do the best that they can for the dogs they love. What I judge people on are how they feel about animals – is it a family member or is it a income source? I met a family 2 summers ago who planned on breeding their dogs. Each of their dogs looked like it came from a very over bred line and they were planning on continuing the health issues in future litters and it broke my heart. So I started asking them questions about breeding, bringing up all the financial pit falls to see how they were going to handle them. I did so in the guise of someone who wants to breed too, but is afraid that I won’t be able to afford it.
I can only hope that I planted a seed. But that’s how I judge people. Harshly too.
Oh, the breeding thing… I’m glad you brought that up. It’s so unfortunate that some people have the misconception that breeding their dog might be the way to close the income gap, when the reality–as we all know–is the tremendous cost associated with it and the sad reality that many of those dogs will never find homes. I think it circles back around to the vital need for advocacy and outreach services in these under-served areas. If those folks can learn a bit about what breeding their dogs really means, and then they’re handed a voucher for a free or low-cost spay/neuter, it might change the hearts of at least a few.
Very interesting post, the comments on which I’m curious to read. Now, with that said…
Do I believe pet adoptions be income-restricted? Absolutely NOT! As you said, there are plenty of bored, dogs, owned by people who can well-afford the costs of said ownership, who languish behind privacy fences. Dogs who love their owners unconditionally in exchange for what? Lack of love, care, attention, etcetera. That’s no life for ANY animal, including humans. Meanwhile, there are plenty of less fortunate souls out there who love their pets as unconditionally as their pets love them. People who do the best they can for those pets under their circumstances and with their limited resources.
I, for one, have to budget EVERY little thing for my girls that only money can buy. I do the best I can for them. And one thing they will never lack as long as I’m alive and able is unconditional love. They give us (hubby and me) so much that we could never repay it with material wealth; but they will always have our love and our promise to do our best for them.
Thank you SO much for weighing in. We do the same thing – every single pet care expense is very closely budgeted. And, we often find ourselves skimping here and there (like, no dinners out) for us to make it work. But you are so, so right… there is no way to ever repay our sweet pups with material wealth! Thank you for making that beautiful point!
Great question, and I can understand both sides of the issue.
The way I see it though, sometimes it’s the people in lower socioeconomic classes that need the love of a pet the most. Many will do the best they can to care for a pet. There will always be some owners who can’t be bothered, but I think that has less to do with economics and more with general attitude.
Dogs love so deeply, it seems unfair to deny someone that love simply because they don’t fit some arbitrary income requirement.
On a related note, I saw this infographic a while ago about the cost of pet ownership – it seems appropriate to leave here! http://www.dogbreedidentifier.com/cost-pet-ownership-infographic/
Pet ownership can certainly be pricey, but I would never prevent someone from owning a pet simply because of money.
“Dogs love so deeply, it seems unfair to deny someone that love simply because they don’t fit some arbitrary income requirement.” YES!!! That is one of my favorite things said in this whole discussion. Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts!! I’m going to go check out that infographic – appreciate the resource, Meghan! Thank you!
I absolutely agree that there isn’t a “right” answer at all when it comes to adoption fees. I’ve spent a lot of time defending rescues who charge hundreds of dollars for their animals (who’ve been fostered, vaccinated, fixed, cared for) because they really have gotten excellent care while waiting for their adoption – and many times adult dogs spent months in their homes waiting. But I do understand why people question why a “5 year old dog costs 400.” It’s such a sticky point. I’d love for everyone to be able to afford going through a rescue because it does seem like the easiest way to make sure you find a dog that fits your lifestyle; though a lot of shelters are offering foster to adopt programs which is nice.
But it really does come down to love; anyone regardless of income will do everything within their power to make sure their pet is taken care of; and that sort of dedication doesn’t depend on money.
You are so, so right. It makes perfect sense why rescues charge what they do… because what they do costs a fortune! I think (some) shelters are in a better position to offer discounts if they’re funded at least partially through taxpayer dollars – even if those taxpayers aren’t contributing much because their income is low, they too deserve the love of a pet from the shelter!
Thank you so much for sharing your insights. SUCH great points!
I feel like shelters adding a wage requirement for potential adopters wouldn’t really be solving any problems. Money doesn’t necessarily = a good home, like you already pointed out. Being low income doesn’t necessarily mean pets won’t be well cared for. It might take some careful budgeting and a bit of sacrifice, but it can be done.
I’d wager that many people, if they really had their heart set on getting a pet, would just go elsewhere if they couldn’t adopt from a shelter. Hopefully they’d find another way to give an animal in need a home, maybe through Craigslist or something similar.
You are absolutely right, and someone who works in rescue pointed out on the FB discussion that many people in these areas do tend to get their animals from friends/neighbors/relatives rather than going the shelter route. That compounds the expense issue a bit, of course, because the animals don’t come fixed and vetted. You are exactly right: “It might take some careful budgeting and a bit of sacrifice, but it can be done.” Thanks so much for weighing in!!
I like your question and your opinion. Everybody always need love, and love makes people to become better. Do not have a relation between ability to pay and ability to love. My neighbor has a dog, named Ki, she love Ki so much, like her son, and take care him carefully, and sacrify for him, although she’s poor. And this is things a pet need.
If the pets can’t have a house, it’s so sad!