Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't doubt it for some but too many take this to an extreme. I have dogs, cats and kids and love them all but my maternal bond with my kids cannot be compared to the bond with my pets.
I have always loved dogs; and I frequently prefer them to people; but I doubt very much that my love for my dogs would be quite as strong as my love for a child of mine, if I had ever had or adopted a child. It's a different type of love...Though I will say that I spoil my dog more than I would have spoiled a child.
I don't doubt it for some but too many take this to an extreme. I have dogs, cats and kids and love them all but my maternal bond with my kids cannot be compared to the bond with my pets.
Well you weren't part of the study so you can't say how your brain would have responded.
Why does it even have to be debated?
I find it funny, though, that your HUMAN KIDS who can be obnoxious, insolent, disobedient, lie, steal, willfully use drugs and drink, get pregnant through carelessness, refuse to do homework or projects.... and other charming forms of human behavior ...get a higher emotional RANKING than your innocent dogs who have no ulterior motives other than pleasing you and are completely INCAPABLE of intentionally doing the "wrong thing".
Some people value relationships with pets more than human relationships. Some people have no desire to have children. I don't think we can definatevily say you should value your pet more or less than a child, thats each persons decision and all people will feel differnetly.
Obviously there's a different type of connection with an animal who can't speak vs a child who can speak and who blood or is a part of you.
I would hope someone would choose their child over their pet if one had to decide but to say a owner/pet relationship isn't as important would almost be like saying someone who adopts a child doesn't love or care for their child as much as someone who has their child naturally.
I'm not a mom. I love my dogs dearly. But it's a different kind of love. I'm sure it evokes a similar brain response in MRI imagery, but the nuances are entirely different.
My older dog (age 14) just had a violent seizure today. It was her first one ever, and it was awful. I rushed her to the ER. I was distraught, but I knew exactly how far I would go to save her and the lines I would draw. The ER vet recommended that she be hospitalized for observation and given fluids (due to a second problem unrelated to the seizure) and IV antibiotics. It would have brought the vet bill to roughly $1700. Um, hell no. That wasn't even including the recommended chest x-rays. But it could just be an electrolyte imbalance. And if it's cancer or a tumor? I'm putting her down as soon as she becomes uncomfortable rather than pursuing a treatment.
She's home with me now. I'm getting a second opinion from a friend who is a vet, and I'm proceeding conservatively. My concern is that if I blow a bunch on every test under the sun, if there is a treatable problem, I won't have the money to treat it.
If she was a human child, I would have already mortgaged my house to pay for whatever test the doctor laid out. I would tank my life for a kid without a moment's hesitation. For my dog? I will proceed rationally, take what actions I can afford and make sure that at the very least I provide her with happiness in her remaining days and a peaceful end.
I'm not a mom. I love my dogs dearly. But it's a different kind of love. I'm sure it evokes a similar brain response in MRI imagery, but the nuances are entirely different.
My older dog (age 14) just had a violent seizure today. It was her first one ever, and it was awful. I rushed her to the ER. I was distraught, but I knew exactly how far I would go to save her and the lines I would draw. The ER vet recommended that she be hospitalized for observation and given fluids (due to a second problem unrelated to the seizure) and IV antibiotics. It would have brought the vet bill to roughly $1700. Um, hell no. That wasn't even including the recommended chest x-rays. But it could just be an electrolyte imbalance. And if it's cancer or a tumor? I'm putting her down as soon as she becomes uncomfortable rather than pursuing a treatment.
She's home with me now. I'm getting a second opinion from a friend who is a vet, and I'm proceeding conservatively. My concern is that if I blow a bunch on every test under the sun, if there is a treatable problem, I won't have the money to treat it.
If she was a human child, I would have already mortgaged my house to pay for whatever test the doctor laid out. I would tank my life for a kid without a moment's hesitation. For my dog? I will proceed rationally, take what actions I can afford and make sure that at the very least I provide her with happiness in her remaining days and a peaceful end.
There is a difference in that your dog is 14. If my 7-year-old dog had a seizure; and $1700 or more was necessary to diagnose him and hopefully prevent a recurrence, I would pay it; because he should have several years of life left - unless, in the course of the procedures, they give me a death sentence no matter what is done (in that case, I would want to keep him comfortable for as long as possible). If my dog were 14, then I would do as you're doing. In fact, when my last dog, at nearly 13, was suffering sudden and extreme neurological problems, and the veterinary neurologist said she could do a cat scan or a spinal tap to discover what was causing the problems, though she thought it was a brain tumor or a virus, I elected not to have the procedures performed, since I believed there was not much of a chance that they could save my dog or alleviate her suffering. I opted to try Prednisone, which didn't help; and I had to euthanize her a week or so later.
For a dog, every month after 13 is a gift; sometimes a lesser age if the breed is large or is known for shorter lifespans.
A friend of mine spent more than $1700 when his dog came down with some kind of debilitating virus at the age of 10. He bought the dog nearly 6 more years of high-quality life.
I think if you have a dog who could still have a good chance at a few more years, especially if it is less than 13 or 14, and in large part depending on the specific illness the dog is suffering and the degree to which that illness has advanced, then I think you should be willing to spend more than $1000, more than $2000, to help or save the dog. I don't think anyone should keep a dog unless they already have at least a few thousand dollars they could use for the dog's veterinary needs, whether or not the dog owner has children. Of course, the decision to use the money must depend on multiple factors, including the potential effectiveness of the treatment - sometimes it's definite and sometimes it's the vet's best guess. Every case is difference.
Obviously, if your child's life is at stake, you fight for it with every weapon, every dime, everything that medical science can do to save the child.
I'm not a mom. I love my dogs dearly. But it's a different kind of love. I'm sure it evokes a similar brain response in MRI imagery, but the nuances are entirely different.
My older dog (age 14) just had a violent seizure today. It was her first one ever, and it was awful. I rushed her to the ER. I was distraught, but I knew exactly how far I would go to save her and the lines I would draw. The ER vet recommended that she be hospitalized for observation and given fluids (due to a second problem unrelated to the seizure) and IV antibiotics. It would have brought the vet bill to roughly $1700. Um, hell no. That wasn't even including the recommended chest x-rays. But it could just be an electrolyte imbalance. And if it's cancer or a tumor? I'm putting her down as soon as she becomes uncomfortable rather than pursuing a treatment.
She's home with me now. I'm getting a second opinion from a friend who is a vet, and I'm proceeding conservatively. My concern is that if I blow a bunch on every test under the sun, if there is a treatable problem, I won't have the money to treat it.
If she was a human child, I would have already mortgaged my house to pay for whatever test the doctor laid out. I would tank my life for a kid without a moment's hesitation. For my dog? I will proceed rationally, take what actions I can afford and make sure that at the very least I provide her with happiness in her remaining days and a peaceful end.
Love is Love.
Still people have to be realistic.
When people are faced with finances beyond their means/sadly there is a choice to be made.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
