Does it make you an irresponsible pet owner If you have to find a home or new living situation for your pets due to moving to a new country and not being able to take them with you?

Question Living

Does it make you an irresponsible pet owner If you have to find a home or new living situation for your pets due to moving to a new country and not being able to take them with you?

by Tabby Posted February 20, 2008 00:41:05

If you had pets that you can't take with you to a new country that you're moving to, would the action of placing them in a home or a rescue center or shelter mean that you are an irresponsible pet owner?

Answers
Results
Recommend This

Top Comment

+16 / -4 raves Katy February 20, 2008 00:48:23

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
No. I find thats actually quite responsible. You can't take them with you, so you give them to a place that will take care of them.
Irresponsible would be if you just dumped it on the side of the road.
View thread

Sort By

Most Raves
Least Raves
Oldest
Newest

text size

Comments

kmarkz30 September 10, 2008 16:06:05

Answered: It is irresponsible and bad pet ownership.
Too many people take animals on without thinking! It is time we as a people act with responsibility toward these animals! It is one thing to say I got a pet today...it is another to take care of, train, and own it with respect. It should be part of the decision to take on the pet in the first place.
2 Be Announced June 27, 2008 05:06:32

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
When people find new homes, it is common that they find a home that does not allow pets. People, with the economy being as it is today, can not be to picky about homes. If I were to find a home that was at a reasonable cost but did not allow pets, I would buy the house. I would first see if I could possibly give my pet to a friend or family member that I would take care of him/her. If not I would give my pet to a shelter that I knew would take car of it. I would never just drop my animal on the side of the road or something. The cat that we own today was dropped out of a moving vehicle out on the highway. We adopted the kitty and today provide a wonderful home for her.
my*chemical*romance*lover June 26, 2008 21:13:41

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
no thats what the riight thing to do is what eles would you do with the babys
Rebecca May 18, 2008 22:27:20

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
Moving to a new country is a big deal, and I don;t think it is irresponsible if you make decent arrangements for them. What I DO think is irresponsible is if you are doing a minor move, for example moving from one state to another or just to another place in the same city and you don't take them with you. That I think is you copping out on your duty.
CKB March 06, 2008 17:25:56

Answered: It is irresponsible and bad pet ownership.
I wouldn't move. My pets are my family, where I go, they go.
Karl March 06, 2008 11:26:33

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
No, that's actually the MOST responsible thing you can do.
+1 raves
Jen**GPAC** February 28, 2008 19:30:26

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
No.. just do me a favor .. make sure either it's a good home or a no kill animal shelter.
+1 raves
jljohn February 27, 2008 19:03:24

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
Those who find good homes for these animals...have a place in Heaven!!
+1 raves
Stephen February 27, 2008 01:06:30

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
Don't be silly. Someone will adopt it and it will have a great new home.
+4 raves
comet60 February 25, 2008 21:08:23

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
Make sure you check out the shelter/family/ association you are leaving your pet with. If you make sure that they will treat your pet with the same love and dignity you would give them and will provide (or help find) a new home your pet can enjoy for years to come then you are following a responsible path. If you decide to dump you animal at the nearest convenient site with no regard as to what happens next, that is almost as bad as leaving them at the side of the road. If your pet is going to a shelter make sure they aren't going to be put down if they go to long without being adopted. Use a organization that doesn't euthanize its animals.
+2 raves
shadow to comet60 February 25, 2008 22:04:18

Way to go Comet60! That is responsible pet guardianship!
+2 raves
TiffanyBelle February 24, 2008 20:08:14

Answered: Undecided
sometimes life happens.... and the laws don't allow what you'd CHOOSE.. or they make it as difficult as humanly possible. I think that as long as you find a new loving home that you're not irresponsible. If you drop you pet off at a shelter/rescue center your pet is not guaranteed a new home (or life at all since some shelters put them to sleep after a certain time frame if they're not adopted) and that's not very responsible.
+1 / -1 raves
Tayler February 22, 2008 23:43:26

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
and i hate to say this cuz i bet ill regret it but these people who r attacking others on here really need to get a life
+2 raves
shadow to Tayler February 23, 2008 03:58:53

Tayler, if you do not like what you read... use the back arrow... or better yet, turn your computer off, because if this is all you have to say so that your name appears on the board... it is not enough to cover the topic.
+2 / -1 raves
Tabby to shadow February 23, 2008 10:01:04

Sure it is! If you don't like his opinion you also have free use of the backarrow and the power button on your monitor. I don't mind his stance.
+1 raves
Tayler to shadow February 23, 2008 15:23:33 (edited)

all im sayin is yall r sittin here arguin with almost everyone on here and i just dont see why they wer postin there opinion just like you and its pointless to do thet just b/c they see sumthing differtly
and im not sayin this so "my name appears on the board" y should i care? do u honestly think im goin around to every sigle thing posted and sayin sumthing? cuz im not
CKB to Tayler March 06, 2008 17:27:35

Please learn how to spell. Netspeak is so immature.
+1 raves
nltsierra to Tayler February 28, 2008 01:07:51

Other people are saying that's its irresponsible because they are trying to save a life of a pet. If just one other person hesitates before taking their pet to the shelter then it is worth it.
+1 / -1 raves
SilentK_MCR February 22, 2008 23:21:41

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
it's definately not irresponsible. You would be putting your pets best interest first! Iresponsible would be just neglecting them and making them homeless, not giving them to someone who could love your pet, and give them all the attention it needs!
+3 raves
blueautumn February 22, 2008 22:21:31

Answered: It is irresponsible and bad pet ownership.
If you really care about it then you would make sure it got somewhere safe.. with a good family!
+2 / -1 raves
KittyWuv February 22, 2008 03:26:03

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
No. If you absolutely have to get rid of them, that is the best thing you can do. Too many people just dump them.
+3 / -1 raves
zigzag February 22, 2008 02:33:53

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
no u find a good home for the animal!!!!!!!
+4 / -1 raves
sojo February 21, 2008 07:33:29

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
To move away and leave them without food and water, or turn them out to fend for themselves would make you irresponsible and cruel. To find them a new home is very responsible and sounds like a pet lover's only option.
+2 / -1 raves
Brandi February 21, 2008 05:07:18

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
at least you are finding them somewhere to go. One of our dogs was just dropped off when it was a puppy. We have no idea where it came from it just come up one day and never left.
+2 / -1 raves
Dave Sawyer ♥ Child of God ♥ February 21, 2008 05:02:14

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
I've never equated pets with people. You wouldn't do that with your children, but an animal is an animal, and reasonable care doesn't require that you treat them like people. Letting them loose in the woods would be irresponsible.
+6 / -1 raves
chloesullivann February 21, 2008 04:15:42

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
moderated...
+3 / -1 raves
ShineFl... to chloesu... February 22, 2008 03:03:11

who down rave you???
grrrrrrrrr...
+2 raves
chloesu... to ShineFl... February 22, 2008 03:04:54

moderated...
+2 raves
ShineFl... to chloesu... February 22, 2008 03:05:58

no...
+2 raves
chloesu... to ShineFl... February 22, 2008 03:08:06

moderated...
+2 / -1 raves
Tabby to chloesu... February 22, 2008 03:24:38

no. people like to abuse the downrave on this site and downrave people for disagreeing rather than using it for what its meant for. Don't stress it hun.
+3 raves
chloesu... to Tabby February 22, 2008 03:30:23

moderated...
+3 raves
SilentK... to chloesu... February 22, 2008 23:23:41

I noticed that. That's so stupid that someone would do that to everyone on here just because they disagree with them!
+1 raves
ShineFl... to Tabby February 28, 2008 23:07:33

hi tabby... we are sharing the DR's!!
heeheheee.
maybe is an little coward... who dont show us her/him face..
and be in hiding... in a hole...
+1 raves
ShineFl... to chloesu... February 28, 2008 23:08:43 (edited)

the DR's... be hiding... in a hole...
and down rave me too... hahahaaa.. it's a coward!!
+3 / -1 raves
Animal lover February 21, 2008 03:59:56

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
If something comes up unexpected and you need to find your pet a loving home, then it is your responsiblity to find him ot her that loving home, However, please make sure it will be a loving home.
+4 / -1 raves
. February 21, 2008 03:12:07

Answered: It's not irresponsible.
Sometimes you have no choicce but you have to.=*(
+5 raves
Cassie February 21, 2008 01:39:11

Answered: None of the above
Responsible pet ownership requires a commitment to do all one can to keep the pet and to keep it healthy. If there is time, an effort must be made to find a new home if there is no way to keep a pet. Against my husband's wishes, and to the horror of my pets, we fostered my cousin's cat for a year while she was in transition. I have already made arrangements with the rescue person who provided two of our dogs that if anything happened to us she would take all three of our dogs. In fact, the woman who owns two of the brothers of my puppy has offered to take them, so those two are in contact. I think my sister-in-law would probably take our cats, although we haven't asked recently. My family and my husband's are both being provided with this contact information, so they won't have to take on pets they don't want.

If the pet came from a breeder or a rescue group, they want to know what happens to the animal they place with you, and are the first people to go to when you find out you can no longer keep them. If your dog or cat is purebred, contact breed rescue (AKC or CFA). And make plans early, so you have contingencies in place in case of emergency.

Personally, I won't move somewhere I can't take my animals, even if it means passing up a lucrative job. I promised them a home for life when I took them in, and will get rid of all my possessions before I get rid of any of them. Even the ones that annoy me constantly.
+2 raves
shadow to Cassie February 22, 2008 18:20:28

I'll bet they do not annoy you near as much as some people.
+3 raves
Raymond to Cassie February 24, 2008 04:06:28

Thank you Cassie. If more people saw things your way, rescues like ours would have far fewer animals to care for.