Would you emigrate and re-home your pets?

Boop, I don't know whether or not you've seen Puss's early posts about her cats but this is now a long term problem that has not been solved. She's made it clear she's gutted to be making this decision and she is taking great care to make sure her cat is found a loving new home.

From what she's said, it seems the cat will be happier when there are not small children in her life.

I'm really cheesed off that you have no acknowledgement that not every pet problem in the world can be "worked through" and that sometimes people can't make their pets the centre of every decision. If you choose to do so then fab, but that's your decision. As long as the cat is rehomed where she will get good care and attention then what's the problem?

I'm going to leave this thread because I don't want to see my friend's feelings get hurt.

So you don't accept that the vast, vast majority of people that rehome / abandon animals do so because they simply can't be arsed with them any more, or because something more exciting has come along?

Thousands do every year. They're called boarding schools.

I know plenty of people who went down that route, without any obvious signs of long-term mental damage.

Sorry to say boop and nick, I'm another that thinks there might have been a slight over-reaction here.

That's not fair Boop - Zebra didn't say anything about IYHKYWU. You're coming across as pretty sanctimonious about this subject, responsible pet owners do need to make difficult decisions about rehoming somtimes. And responsible pet owners do go on holidays and put their puts in catteries and kennels.

Huh? What's that post got to do with children?

The point is that we're not talking about anyone dumping a pet or people who are utterly fickle, we're talking about cases here who are making hard decisions and taking their responsibilities seriously to their pets, rather than just offloading unwanted animals without thought. I think there's a massive difference.

I think most people on this thread recognise that this is the sad truth.

However, I think some individuals were hasty in immdediately tarring the OP's friend with that same brush.

boop, are you a vegan? 'cause the animals importance of life thing doesn't just extend to pets

i love cats and dogs, and i was sneered at a bit on the husky thread for seemingly being 'predictable' and saying puppies needed as much care as babies. but if i was emigrating to australia i don't know if i'd take the pets, especially if it wasn't long term thing. wouldn't it be cruel to take them so far? i think moving zillions of miles is not an unreasonable one on the rehoming pets front

I resent the implication of the bit in bold. I have tried everything we can think of, vets, feliway, change of diet and more I can think of. Kit is just unpredictable and has foul temper, I have scratches / bite marks on my legs to prove it. This problem has been going on for years and I have been trying to deal with it for all those years. However my children have to come first so I am having to do something that is wrenching my guts with guilt and misery for the sake of all of us. Kit won't be going to a shelter, she will be fostered until a suitable home can be found and will remain with us until there is a foster home for her. If I had my way I would be taking her out to Greece to live at my Dad's house but the only way to get her there is via Athens which adds 24 hours onto our journey and more money than we have to do it. It would also be a huge strain on her (being as she is quite highly strung and doesn't travel well). If there was another option I would be taking it, believe me.

I have tried and tried to see this from another persons POV, but to be honest, I am failing miserably.

Personification of animals is what we are talking about here.

I have pets, but I would never ever treat them as "human", or give them the same priority as a human being. My pets are exactly that, pets. I go on holiday without them, and make sure they are fed and watered while I am away. I find it a little strange not to go on hoiday because of them. They are fed and watered, given shelter and are happy (I think!)

To say that they should be treated the same as children is something I cannot agree with. Again, it is down to personification of the animal. Yes I DHK, and yes, I DU!

When I look at my kids I dont then look at the dog in the same light. I dont have the same emotions for it, or feelings. I would die for my kids. Sorry, not for the dog. Or the rabbit.

I just feel that the emotions are being simplified. I can see why people get attached to their pets, really I can. Treat them as I would treat my kids? Never.

I do accept that the vast majority are rehomed for the reasons you outline. However, that doesn't alter the fact that some are rehomed due to situations beyond your control. Ok I have another example.

My Grandma always had dogs. She died suddenly 3 years ago leaving a 6 year old Jack Russell cross behind. I tried to take him but it just wasn't doable, H and I both worked full time - far enough away to make coming home during the day impossible. We didn't have an enclosed garden at the time so we couldn't let him out alone. So sadly, I had to make the decision to rehome him.

My PILs fortunately adopted him and he now lives in the country, has the run of a huge garden, company and a dog next door he plays with - surely you can see in that situation we were not shirking responsibility and in fact acted in the best interests of the dog and he has a far happier life now than he could ever have had with us.

So if I had a cat (which I did) from being a kitten and it never liked children should I have waited until the cat died until having children? (Assuming I had done everything I could to try and get the cat to not hiss/swipe etc at the children)

That's not the point I was making at all and you know it - I was disputing the fact that it's been implied that there is NEVER a valid reason to rehome an animal - you know full well that is what I was saying - to try and then insinuate that I meant anything else by it is twisting my words and blowing things out of all proportion. Of course I accept that many people rehome animals because they are lazy/selfish/thoughtless, of course I do - but my point was that you equally need to accept that some people simply have terrible decisions to make and have their hands forced by tragic situations. I'm not debating statistics, it's about recognising that sometimes rehoming IS necessary.

I think you've been unfair to Zebra with your last post too - I don't know what children has to do with anything that she was saying.

Everyone here must know of someone where animal problems can't be 'fixed', no matter how hard they try. We (read people on this thread, not the general public) take on animals with the best of intentions but sometimes, we have to admit defeat and do what's best for that animal, be it putting it to sleep (in extreme cases, obviously) or rehoming to somewhere the animal will be much happier.

The message running through this thread is that human desires are more important than animal needs, that children come first, that it's fine to rehome pets when they get in the way with your lifestyle. I've already acknowledged that of course there are times when rehoming is the responsible thing to do, and that some of the examples on here are incredibly sad and hard choices. And of course responsible owners still take holidays/ use catteries etc - I never suggested anything different, I answered a question about my own choices, that's all. I don't believe, however, that's it OK to say that cats live a long time, circumstances change and you can't be expected to take account of the cats needs above your own desires for the whole of their life span - which is what Zebra said right at the start and with which I disagreed. I clearly draw the line where I'd consider re-homing a lot higher than most and I don't consider taking account the animals needs when I make decisions about where I live a sacrifice. Sadly all too many people cross that line at the first sign of any difficulties at all.

You can disagree with me without being nasty you know. I can't even begin to start to say how hurt I am about your "smug" comment.

*** you.

This still reads to me that I should have put my cat before my child even though my child was at risk of injury from my cat.

Seriously in my situation what should I have done? I posted about it on here (OT not BT) at the time and everybody agreed it was the best thing to do. However a couple of years down the line I think I would have received a somewhat different answer.

Of course - Mac was put to sleep because his physical and mental problems meant he was too unstable to live safely anywhere with humans, and because his quality of life was poor because of the stress and pain he was in.

I don't know what you all want me to say? I was wrong? Rehoming pets is fine in all circumstances? How many times do I have to say that the examples on this thread are not 'usual'? Go out, buy a dog, get rid of it when you get bored, you can always get another one?

I think you're twisting what people have said to suit your argument, Boop. I'm not going to continue this though, as I don't think that you've been prepared to even accept other peoples' views. And FWIW, I still think you've been bloody unfair to Zebra - an apology wouldn't go amiss.

Who is Mac?

Boop, my question above is a genuine one. I really want to know what I should have done in those circumstances.

Sorry, Moglie - didn't see it in amongst all the others. Mac was our first rescue dog.

I don't know what you want me to say. Your cat's happier in a home without children, you're happier because your child is safe. You were being a responsible parent and owner.

Surely that is what is being done here? Rehoming them is acounting for the needs of the animal. Cruelty would be dumping it on the streets.

If my desire was to go and live in another country, or change my lifestyle dramatically so that the animals needs could not be accommodated within it then yes, the animal would be rehomed. Whilst I think that your dedication is admirable, I feel that it is somewhat misguided.

We got our cats & dog in 2002. We just rehomed our dog with WTP's aunt for a number of reasons, most inportant being that he just wasn't getting the love and attention he needed. When we got Sam, I worked F/T but WTP worked from home. We didn't have kids, we lived in the country, things were very different for us.

Now we have 2 kids, WTP works all over the place, I still work F/T, we moved to an urban environment, with more noises to upset him and Sam wasn't getting to go out as much, he wasn't stimulated as much, we didn't have as much time for him as we used to. He wasn't neglected by any means, he just didn't get the time & lifestyle he was used to. And so to WTP's aunt - she was considering getting a Westie pup, since she has been incredibly lonely since WTP's Nan died in May. She retired this summer, and was dreading the solitude.

Since I was unable to give Sam the things he needed, I feel I have been a MORE responsible pet owneer by recognising his needs and making arrangements in order that they be properly fulfilled. While I can fully see the argument that pets are not disposible, I am sure that I have done the right thing by our dog by assuring him the love and attention he has been without for a couple of years now.

I don't see where I've twisted anything - and I don't know how many times you want me to acknowledge the points that other people have made. Even in the post you've quoted I've said it! As for Zebra's feelings - well, mine were pretty badly stung by the post she made and the numerous other comments about being santimonious etc. Perhaps apologies are due all round?

I'm loathed to come to this thread so late but I really feel I want to add my point of view.

Anyone that knows me knows how much I adore my dogs. They come first in everything. We aren't going to have children and I do look at them as being my children. We go out, we get a dog sitter, we holiday with them, we take them with us, we make career choices to give them the best life. However, that's what I have chosen to do. I totally recognise that others have different feelings about "pets". A friend keeps her dog outside in a kennel, she got pregnant and said she wasn't sure about wanting a dog around a baby so she may rehome him. He'd become disposable now that she's replaced him with a baby. I think there are people who do that and then I think there are other people who just have no choice at all and do what they feel is right for the pet (please note I am in no way aiming this at anyone on here!). Another friend has an aggressive dog, she's had a baby and her dog is now tied up at all times in the house. On the one hand I admire that she's working to keep the dog, on the other I feel that the dog would have a far better life in a new home where she could be free.

If you'd asked me two years ago I'd have said I'd never give up on a dog. Well I did, we took on a dog from the RSPCA and she made our other dog's life hell. It was heartbreaking and on the advice of professionals we had to return her. I still feel heartbroken, I still feel that I could have done more. We got another dog, so I suppose we did replace her but I can't regret that decision as it's given Hugo a far better life having a wonderful playmate. I suppose the point is that you do what you think is best at the time and you hope you make the right decision. There will always be someone who thinks you could have done more but it's not their choice.

My overall point is that yes, there are people who give up on animals at the drop of a hat but then there are others who just do what they can at the time and make the best decision they can. I think there's a huge divide between the two.

Yours, and Puss / Moglie etc, are a classic example of why rescues are so reluctant to rehome cats / dogs to families who want children / have small children - for all the reasons you list about time / environment / stimulation etc. I just wish more people considered that before getting a pet, not afterwards.

I'm confused by this though - do you mean all or most people who have dogs then have to rehome them when they have children? Or, is it just a minority? If it's the latter as I presume, then how will people be able to predict whether there will be difficulties or not? I find it a tad patronising to say people should consider this first. I don't know that much about dogs so perhaps I'm barking up the wrong tree [groan] but surely lots of dog owners have children? Is there an abundance of people begging to rehome dogs? ie can dog rescue places afford to be as choosy and not rehome to people not only with children, but those planning to have them? What would happen to these dogs otherwise? Sorry for all the questions as I don't know but do dogs who don't get rehomed within a certain point of time get put down. I'd have thought it would be better to give a dog a few years of a happy home than be put down? Oh dear, I perhaps shouldn't be posting as I clearly know nothing about dogs!

Had WTP's aunt not offered to take Sam, we would have kept him. I just think his quality of life will be better with Auntie than with us - his place in the pack is higher for a start!

At the time when we got Sam, I was unsure anyway - it was a tradeoff between WTP and I - he wanted a dog, I wanted cats, so we got both. The priority shift came when we had Evie - she took up so much time & energy as a baby, that it was impossible to devote so much time to Sam. Then once we moved, and our daily schedule became more frantic, rushing about for nursery, work etc, he just moved further down the priority list. It wasn't a conscious thing, nor a malicious thing, simply a priorities thing. I'm satisfied now that he's very happy in Blackpool, is getting lots of exercise and meeting lots of new people, as well as bringing a new dimension to Auntie's life.

Boop, it's not what I want you to say it's what you would have advised if i asked the question now?

I can't quite work out what all the rows are about here. I think both sides have agreed that a lot of people do rehome pets unnecessarily but there are situations where rehoming can't be avoided. It's just that the subject is highly emotive for some that it's got out of hand. I do think conclusions were jumped to before knowing the OP's mate's circumstances but I can also understand why people feel strongly about things like this.

I think it's pretty sad that it's come to this and people on both sides have been left feeling crap about it all.

FWIW I would not rehome the B man for anything. Ever. I can also acknowledge that I am a leetle ott when it comes to him.

I got a kitten when I was single, no steady relationship, no plans for children. I then quite quickly met somebody and we married and had a child. When I got the cat I had no idea when or if I would ever have children. As a single woman of child bearing age should I not have been allowed a cat?

Like LTP my cat is far happier away from children, getting lots of attention and affection. She wasn't happy at home as the baby crying distressed her and I didn't think it fair to keep locking her out of the room we were in.

I don't like it when friends fall out - this thread has made me a bit sad ☹️

No-one would every purposefully just get rid of a pet. I am sure everyone on here did a lot of thinking/crying when having to give up a beloved pet. Luckilly I have never been in the situation, but couldn't bear it if I had to make a choice.

?

What Chicken said 100% (although inserting 'the pugs' in place of the B man in my case) . I appreciate that not everyone is as potty about their pets as we are and I do think that it's impossible to have a general rule when life is so unpredictable.... however, I also share Boop's frustration and anger at the great many unecessary rehomings which occur because of lack of planning or insight on the part of the (usually gormless) owners. I don't think any of these points are contentious though and this trhead does seem to be a bit of a storm in a teacup with misinterpretation (deliberate or otherwise) at fault.