<p>@acollegestudent I’ve bitten my tongue but now I feel the need to say something. </p>
<p>I agree with you that the OP should keep the dog. However, your other views are extreme, unrealistic, and cause the deaths and prolonged suffering of animals every year. </p>
<p>Animals should be given a shot at life- even if that means with poor people who won’t be able to artificially extend their lives for months. </p>
<p>I am poor and do the best I can by my animals. They live like royalty. I mean look at the face underneath my name. I also foster a LOT of animals and try to get them into the best homes we can. Sometimes, I foster them until they live out their lives because the procedure that they would be required to have would be far too expensive for the rescue and no one is willing to take them in. All I am able to provide is comfort and love while they live out the rest of their days. I’ve had animals die in my arms from treatable, but expensive, conditions with the alternative being that they would’ve just been left in their abusive situation. </p>
<p>You’re too black and white about this issue. Caring for animals requires shades of grey.</p>
<p>I am familiar with your financial situation, but that’s not the OP’s situation.</p>
<p>My views are neither extreme nor unrealistic for a large majority of middle-class (maybe not lower-middle class but middle middle and higher) Americans - which is what most posters on this forum are. I am not talking about people who truly don’t have the money and are sharing their last meal with the dog. I am talking about solid middle-class families who are OK to spend the money on a luxury car or a remodel or a prestigious school, but feel that a pet is less of a priority than those things.</p>
<p>For what it’s worth, I too think that an animal should be given every possible shot at life (although I do resent the statement that a person with money “artificially extends” the animal’s life by giving them vet care), a less-than-ideal situation is preferable to death. My only other comment was that if I had two homes to choose from, I would choose one that can afford the vet expenses (as long as they qualified in other ways, of course). I stand by that.</p>
<p>My responses were directed toward OP’s situation and some other posters who are clearly NOT poor.</p>
<p>^^^^^
One of the most judgmental posts I have ever read on CC- and thats saying something!</p>
<p>[-(
OP is saying she can’t afford it.
I believe her.
She is also saying she can’t cope with the logistics and the effort involved in his care, but will work to find a suitable home.
Sounds like she is doing all she can, although it is difficult to recognize your limits.</p>
<p>" am familiar with your financial situation, but that’s not the OP’s situation."</p>
<p>^^^My grandfather used to say, “It is easy to count other people’s money” meaning that it is easy to judge someone based on what you see without knowing all details. I agree with Consolation that someone who cannot pay down $6K debt will not be able to add extra expenses that will eventually erode her financial stability completely. So what that she said she lives in a 3-bed condo? Many divorced women do not have the luxury to move since their credit score is completely damaged by divorce - and it is quite different form a recent grad or immigrant who is starting clean with a zero credit history. She may be able to move out of the place, but it would be next to impossible for her to find a cheaper place, and I’m not even talking about the dog! Dog (as Consolation would say ) forbid you ever have to go through a divorce!</p>
<p>Acollegestudent: this thread is not about you.<br>
And you have not offered to help Stan.
And if you did, at this point, I’m not sure your rigidity is what OP hopes for, for Stan.</p>
<p>You have stated your case. Most of us here don’t need OP (who appears to be considerate, intelligent and concerned) to somehow prove that Stan’s needs and her financial situation are causing an issue. Or for her to find the exact right words to convince us that she is torn. We can tell. Have a heart that includes OP and her predicament. Please.</p>
<p>Apparently, my views can’t be valid until I am OP’s age or have kids or go through a divorce (even though even if any or all of those things happen, I am sure other reasons will be found why my views can’t be valid).</p>
<p>Where did OP EVER say she couldn’t afford it? She said it was stressful, it was a lot. Just re-read her first post yet again - unless I really can’t read, it doesn’t say she can’t afford it, just that it’s difficult/stressful. Not the same thing.</p>
<p>Also, many people who are currently commenting have commented on other threads, judging people who buy luxury items but won’t help with college costs. Somehow, that’s not considered judgmental. But you say that a pet (that one has committed to) should be prioritized over luxury items, and you will get the most judgmental post on CC.</p>
<p>No, it’s that you are pounding. It doesn’t help.
You are not the judge.<br>
This bears: if you are not part of the solution, you may be part of the problem.</p>
<p>I know people who foreclosed on their house and moved to a new one on land contract. They’ve now had to forfeit the land contract. They’ve moved in with a friend and are paying him rent. All through this, they had thirteen dogs. Do you know how much money it costs to feed thirteen dogs? Plenty enough to pay their mortgage or land contract payment. Animals cannot come first in all situations. </p>
<p>Lookingforward, as far as I know NO ONE has offered to help Stan. I think one person did, but they are too far away. You are judging as well. You are judging me, you are judging the OP, although your ‘judgment’ of her is a positive one.</p>
<p>Here’s what happened. When this thread first started, a bunch of people came out and said OP needs to keep the dog. They were all accused of “guilt-tripping” (like it’s their responsibility for making the OP feel bad) and their views essentially dismissed.</p>
<p>I have come to believe OP will do what she will do. I am still in this thread, because it has evolved into a larger discussion of owners’ responsibilities, and it’s a discussion I want to be a part of. OP has not come back for a while, and I think she made up her mind a long time ago.</p>
<p>Honestly, I am just hoping for this thread to fade. It’s one of the most upsetting threads I have read in a while.</p>
<p>Sometimes, you have to get off another person’s thread. This is not a general discussion, not the sort where we all get heated just for the sport of it. You may find it has evolved, but many of us would say YOU evolved it. </p>
<p>This also isn’t theoretical. Nor a soapbox.</p>
<p>I also agree very much with Consolation’s 1134 post. Let’s help OP get through this, one step at a time. </p>
<p>Persoanlly, rather than risk shipping a dog with a serious medical history, I wonder if the lawyer D is willing to help pay off any outstanding medical debt and help with ongoing costs. </p>
<p>I think somebody pointed out upthread that people frequently have to make difficult decisions like this with human children. We know several people who are raising the children of relatives because the kids are better off in a different home. It’s tough, but you do what’s in the best interests of the kid. So the question here is, to me, is the real goal to do what’s in the best interest of this dog? If so, the feelings of the non-custodial children who have moved away don’t really matter much. Whether the dog stays “in the family” doesn’t matter. What matters is what’s the best home for the dog. The current home isn’t great, because the dog will be alone a lot of the time. The London home seems as though it may have the same problem. It seems to me that if I were a judge, and there was a viable third option to place the dog with a family that had more space, and more attention to the dog during the day, the decision would be simple–if my standard was the best interest of the dog.</p>
<p>So I guess my suggestion to OP is to discuss this with your children again, and ask them to think hard about what’s best for Stan, and not necessarily makes them feel the best.</p>
<p>Earlier, the OP did say that finances will be changing because she’ll no longer be getting child support after the youngest child starts college. I think the cost of boarding the dog while she’s away working will be an issue.</p>
<p>Right, but an issue vs. challenging vs. prohibitive are all very different things. That’s why I thought it was pretty extreme for someone to write the costs would drive OP into the poorhouse or that she can’t afford the dog any more, when she herself never said that. She said it may be stressful, and she may not want to, but nowhere did she state that she can’t afford it or it will bankrupt her or cause her to lose her home or anything like what it’s been made out to be.</p>
<p>In general, a lot of things OP said have been stretched out into these huge, monumental issues that she herself never confirms.</p>
<p>OP has every right to decide to let some other family adopt the dog without having to prove to anyone, especially a group of strangers, that caring for him is unaffordable, or will cause her to lose her home, or push her into bankruptcy. If she feels that adoption is what’s in the best interest of the dog, then she should let him be adopted. Dogs sense stress and a stressed owner doesn’t make for a happy dog.</p>
<p>OP- Assuming that you decide to re-home Stan please make sure that any new owners know about his previous surgery. Also that make sure they know that he needs to be taken out every 2 hours and if he is at any risk having bladder stones again which would need expensive surgery. Not all pet owners are going to have the money and/or time for a dog like that. It would be better if they knew about everything before hand. </p>
<p>@acollegestudent The people with the 13 dogs didn’t anticipate the husband would be in a career ending accident leaving him permanently disabled with a fixed income from Social Security which is a mere fraction of his previous salary. Just as few people save up in case of divorce, a lot of people figure as long as they are healthy, they don’t have to worry about becoming disabled. </p>
) forbid you ever have to go through a divorce!</p>