How much is your love worth?
The abandoning of family pets due to the foreclosure crisis illustrates the seriously shortsighted nature of how we live our lives
06/05/2008
This week’s feature by Hannah Guzik is troubling in two ways (See “Left Behind,” Page 12). Her description of dogs, cats and other pets left behind by families fleeing economic disaster in the midst of the home foreclosure crisis tears at the soul.
The idea that animals are being discarded as if they are the old furniture or too-expensive stereo system is absolutely unfathomable. Animal shelters in Ventura County — and no doubt the entire country — are already straining to accommodate hundreds more abandoned pets than normal, and the year isn’t even halfway through.
We often talk about the human cost of crises like the mortgage meltdown. What about the cost to life in general? How do we quantify that? Can we really talk about animals that have loved and accompanied us as assets we can no longer afford to manage?
Guzik’s story doesn’t only tell a sad story about the ethics of pet ownership, though. It also further illustrates the seriously shortsighted nature of how we live our lives in Ventura County in the 21st century. One of many things the economic slowdown, the drastic increase in fuel prices and the changing global climate have in common is that they are all to some degree our own responsibility.
We can attack predatory lenders, demonize oil companies and demand reductions in carbon emissions, but our own greed, our own unwillingness to change our lifestyles has led us here. We cannot stand not having our cake and eating it too. If each of these crises improve, as they most certainly will sooner or later, will we, as a society, have learned our lesson and changed our behavior so we are more conscientious about the impacts of our actions and so we can prevent yet more “unexpected” crises? Sadly, it’s doubtful.
In the case of pet ownership, it’s the very term that rankles. Ownership. Our perception of pets more as property than companions to whom we make a commitment to share our resources is unfathomable. Who can deny that animals feel love, pain, joy and sadness? Just like individuals should not have children if they are not prepared to love and care and support them, they should not take animals into their home if they can’t make similar commitments. Yes, human lives are important, but where do we get off being so anthropocentric to believe we don’t have a responsibility once we bring an animal into our home? They sacrifice their freedom for us, the least we can do is sacrifice some of our livelihood for them.
Certainly, the welcoming of animals into our homes as parts of our families is a peculiarity of prosperous societies. Pets are rare in most third-world countries, where to an extent we cannot imagine families struggle to feed themselves, let alone animals. That does not mean, though, that our love for animals is absurd. It means only that we must make decisions about how we plan our lives and grow our families responsibly and with dedication, but, by the same token, we must also accept the consequences of the decisions we make.
No one should be left behind. No one. No child. No spouse. No parent. No friend. No one, no matter the species. Love is universal.
DIGG | del.icio.us | REDDIT
Related Articles
Comments
From someone who has just lost a companion of 14 and a half years, I couldn't agree more with your articulate and heartfelt editorial.