|
Post by sibemom on Sept 20, 2006 7:33:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Nicole on Sept 20, 2006 8:44:38 GMT -5
Nothing that you mentioned would cause me to not approve the family. So what if the house is run down. As to vaccines, as long as I live I won’t vaccinate after puppy shots. As to the lower end food, the people need only be educated that a higher end really doesn’t cost that much more because you feed much less.
The one thing that would concern me is the person having a money stash or a vet who will take payment plans for emergencies. I say this specifically because I wondered what someone with no money would have done in my recent case. Dogs get sick and sometimes the cure is expensive. It cost me over $2,000 for Sunny’s mass problem after all was said and done. If I had no money to spare what would have happened.
You see these cases so often on the animal cop shows. Many of these people love their dogs so much but can not afford to treat even simple issues and the dogs really suffer. You see them infested, with growths and sores and matted and it is heartbreaking. So in my mind there has to be enough money to treat the dog medically on a routine basis and in cases of unexpected conditions. And if a person truly loves dogs and sees them as more than “just a dog” then they will understand that this is a necessity and will consider this before getting the dog or any animal.
|
|
|
Post by sibemom on Sept 20, 2006 9:19:08 GMT -5
I agree with you on that point Nicki Fortunatly in our area we do have vets that will take payment plans when an extreme emergancy arrises. THANK GOODNESS for that and I do agree those are things a person should consider before getting a pet. I guess I was just concerned about the fact that because the woman felt the family did not look "HIGHER INCOME LEVEL" she was basing her decision on that point alone. We have a dog fund in our house and I would hate to say we might not live up to what this woman is expecting in the finance department but we do have an amount of money that is put away just for the dogs care, and it's not alot but because of my vet being so great about extending credit to those who need it, it is enough to cover a down payment on an expensive service or God Forbid the unexpected.
|
|
|
Post by Nicole on Sept 20, 2006 9:23:35 GMT -5
I guess I was just concerned about the fact that because the woman felt the family did not look "HIGHER INCOME LEVEL" she was basing her decision on that point alone. Well I think that is just snooty and plain wrong.
|
|
|
Post by sibemom on Sept 20, 2006 9:33:21 GMT -5
YES and I am making the good fight for this family. As far as the kibble the other thing that blows me away is that this woman feeds Science Diet YUK and her dogs are always at the vet for some sickness or skin issue and thinks that ALL DOGS should eat that Well I explained to her I would rather see them feed 'OL Roy' rather than that I will win the fight for them and they are such nice people. Their last dog lived to be a ripe old age of 17 which to me means they were doing something right They feed a lower end kibble BUT the also give some very healthy table scraps I have no problem with that
|
|
|
Post by willow on Sept 20, 2006 10:06:22 GMT -5
You see these cases so often on the animal cop shows. Many of these people love their dogs so much but can not afford to treat even simple issues and the dogs really suffer. I have also seen on the animal cops shows that they tell the people if they can't afford to care for their animals they can take them in to the local HS and have it done free, and have seen instances when they take the dogs in and get them cleaned up etc. and then take them back to the people. It angers me on these shows because the worse offenders are usually people who look like they haven't missed a meal in a really long time and they are not old and or sick so they can't take them in. I agree with every thing else you both have said. ;D
|
|
|
Post by sibemom on Sept 20, 2006 11:06:29 GMT -5
YOU SEE THAT IS MY POINT ;D Just because you have a VERY NICE BANK ACCOUNT, and just because you live in a REALLY NICE HOUSE, certainly does not dictate the kind of pet owner you are. I have seen more people who would call the UPPER CLASS, treat their dogs like GARBAGE and feel they are disposable. Then I have seen some very hard working people who barely have enough to sustain themselves but yet they valu and treat their dogs extremly well. I know when we did app screening for the rescues I do not remember ever seeing a financial disclosesure question on there but when I applied to adopt a Sibe from one of the rescues after Blade died, there was something about proof of income I found it extremly offensive because if my Vet gave me a shinning reference, and my personal refs talked about me and gave me a gold star, obvioulsy I was finding a way to care for my dogs, even in financial hardship, which anyone can have. OH YES I AM GOING TO GET THESE PEOPLE THOSE DOGS and YOU CAN TAKE THAT TO THE BANK
|
|
|
Post by Nicole on Sept 20, 2006 11:11:43 GMT -5
I have also seen on the animal cops shows that they tell the people if they can't afford to care for their animals they can take them in to the local HS and have it done free, and have seen instances when they take the dogs in and get them cleaned up etc. and then take them back to the people. It angers me on these shows because the worse offenders are usually people who look like they haven't missed a meal in a really long time and they are not old and or sick so they can't take them in. I agree with every thing else you both have said. ;D Oh I agree. Believe me, there is no excuse for how these animals are tended to. I always thought though that if they sought care with the HS, they had to sign the dog over to be placed for adoption which I think at that point is the best thing anyway. I think that anyone who cannot afford medical care should not own a dog. There is a lot of ignorance out there. But just because you aren't affluent is no reason to deny a person an animal.
|
|
|
Post by sibemom on Sept 20, 2006 11:16:25 GMT -5
Yes I agree with that to Nicki Sometimes I think when you are screening an app to place a rescue dog not only should you be calling the vet but maybe you should be calling thier kids Doc's to That might shed a whole new light on wether they are a candidate or not
|
|
|
Post by Nicole on Sept 20, 2006 11:28:41 GMT -5
Yes I agree with that to Nicki Sometimes I think when you are screening an app to place a rescue dog not only should you be calling the vet but maybe you should be calling thier kids Doc's to That might shed a whole new light on wether they are a candidate or not I edited that comment. I thought maybe it was too politically incorrect!!
|
|
|
Post by kaos on Sept 20, 2006 16:15:11 GMT -5
I think the important thing is that the person taking on the dogs has a realistic idea of the costs involved and has thought through how they would handle unexpected vet bills.
I would imagine most dogs would opt for a slightly scruffy house where the owners were less precious about dog hair and muddy paws over an immaculate one where they are rarely allowed indoors.
|
|
|
Post by willow on Sept 20, 2006 23:08:01 GMT -5
Oh I agree. Believe me, there is no excuse for how these animals are tended to. I always thought though that if they sought care with the HS, they had to sign the dog over to be placed for adoption which I think at that point is the best thing anyway. Not so. I have seen cases where the people just could not get to the HS or anywhere due to illness, old age etc. They try to work with people in most instances and educate them, rather than take their pets away from them, because for a lot of elderly or ill people, all they have are their pets. Of course, if the dog is emaciated because the owner does not have $$$ to buy food or has a mental problem and is starving their pet, than yes, they get them to sign the pet over to them, but if it is just grooming etc., they will take them in and groom them and bring them back to the owner. I have also seen some cases where the dog was thin though and they talked to the owner and did a follow up and the dog was in better shape, so they did not take the dog from them in that case either. I also agree about rescues asking for proof of income etc. No way, and some of the rescue volunteers have big problems with reality, and are very strange people, right Sibemom? ;D Thankfully, the resuces I got my dogs from and the ones I have been a volunteer with have been more "normal" and down to earth in their thinking. ;D
|
|
|
Post by sibemom on Sept 21, 2006 8:07:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by willow on Sept 21, 2006 8:34:17 GMT -5
;D ;D
I love happy endings.
|
|
|
Post by espencer85 on Sept 21, 2006 9:59:36 GMT -5
I think the income level has nothing to do with a healthy dog, you can see very often homeless people with dogs and they are way better than the ones in the animal cops shows If we talk about those shows then the name of this topic should be "Should ignorant or selfish people own a dog?" because that exactly what those people are when they just let the dogs in the backyard forever If poor people were not allowed to have dogs then they should not have kids either, they are way more expensive and harder to take care of
|
|