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.
Adopting pets become too difficult, credit check required, homeownership, sit down interviews, home visits by agency representatives, making sure dogs go to good homes, medical needs, cost of owning pet
Stacks of paperwork, proof of good credit and homeownership, sit-down interviews and home visits by agency representatives are all part of the game when it comes to adoption.
It is nice that shelters make sure that dogs are in good homes, but I have to admit, sometimes they go too overboard. Well, in our case, when we adopted Hef, we had to fill out paperwork, go back and bring Portia so they can see if they will get along right away or not. But the good thing is that we didn't have to go on a waiting list and wait before we adopted him.
I didn't read the link, but no, I don't feel that adopting a pet has become too difficult. I'm glad they are finally cracking down, it should have been done sooner. I know that shelters I adopted from before have started to change things and I think it's great! When I adopted my Rhodesian Ridgeback/ Rottweiler mix all I had to do was fill out one piece of paper with my basic info, show an ID and pay about $60, then I just walked out with my dog! I'm a responsible owner and a lot of other people are responsible owners, but at the same time, a lot of people are not! It has been way, way, way too easy to adopt a pet for way too long! People can just decide that they want a pet and within maybe 20 minutes of picking out a pet they can just walk right out of the shelter with it! If people have to go through a long, drawn out, sometimes miserable process to get a pet, only people that really want that pet will go through all of that to get it. Someone can't just go in and make a spur of the moment decision to adopt a pet. It may not be fun, but it is what is best for the animals in the long run. So no, I don't think it has become too difficult! I think that it should be something that not every single person would want to go through because not every single person should own a pet. If someone really wants to adopt a pet, if they are seriously willing to take proper care of that pet for it's whole life, they shouldn't mind having to go through the adoption process and they should be happy that things are the way they are.
"If people have to go through a long, drawn out, sometimes miserable process to get a pet, only people that really want that pet will go through all of that to get it."
So instead this may drive some people to the pet shops in the mall that sell puppy mill pups... where they plunk down $700 and get what they want right away.
They'll get their dog one way or another unfortunately. I agree that the shelters are stuck between a rock and a hard place because of this fact.
I think the shelter around here charges too much for their dogs at least. Up to $200 now.
But don't these dogs come spayed or neutered, up to date on shots, heartworm tested, etc? If so, those procedures will run you a LOT more than $200. And frankly, if someone cannot save up $200 for a pet, what are they going to do if the animal becomes ill? How will they afford yearly medical needs?
Yes, I think they come with a spay neuter certificate. But for another $200, I can get a dog from a breeder that I know has been socialized in a home setting, and it has it's shots as well and a health guarantee.
I personally think the shelters should be subsidized with more $$. They do a good job with what the types of animals are dealing with.
"If people have to go through a long, drawn out, sometimes miserable process to get a pet, only people that really want that pet will go through all of that to get it."
So instead this may drive some people to the pet shops in the mall that sell puppy mill pups... where they plunk down $700 and get what they want right away.
They'll get their dog one way or another unfortunately. I agree that the shelters are stuck between a rock and a hard place because of this fact.
If someone is willing to "plunk down $700" for a dog, then why wouldn't they be able to go through the adoption precess? That makes absolutely no sense! lmao! I do see what you mean, but if someone would rather pay $700 for a puppy mill or pet store puppy instead of waiting a few days and doing a few things to save a puppy, then there's really not much you can do anyway. At the pet store you have to pay out the a** and at the shelter you have to go through the adoption process, either way it's a pain. My point is that if someone has to go through the adoption process, chances are that the people that just decide to go get a dog at the last minute without thinking it through, will really be forced to think it through. Same with someone that has to drop $700 at a pet store. When you don't have to go through the adoption process or pay a bunch of money, it's too easy for people to not think it through. Taking on a pet is a huge responsibility. It's an expensive, time consuming, not always pleasant lifetime commitment and people should have to think things through before taking on a pet.
If someone is willing to "plunk down $700" for a dog, then why wouldn't they be able to go through the adoption process?
Because some .. well, many, in my experience ... rescues have devolved into pet nazi organizations who consider a potential adopter guilty until proven innocent. That is, "we consider you a potentially bad pet adopter until you are proven otherwise" . I say this while being the pet parent to 5 dogs, 2 of whom I went thru a rescue to adopt, and a whole herd of cats dumped on us because we live in the country.
On top of our pet-related expenses (just took another stray purry to the vet to be neutered and brought up-to-date on shots. I love how people think that cats dumped in the country will survive on their own, after all "look at all the barns! I'm sure they'll be able to hunt mice to eat!" ) we support our local rescues and donate to Best Friends, but I don't think that their generous, well-meant purpose should be immune from criticism. The Michael Vicks-types are the minority, IMO. Most people looking to adopt are just plain good folks who love critters and want to do the right thing by adopting rather than spurring on continued breeding, mostly by people who are doing it for profit rather than to continue a breed in a healthy matter.
The rescues could really help, and also move more pets through their services, by lightening up a little. We endured the indignity and intrusiveness of being interviewed and providing references, not to mention the onerous ordeal of having to make a 500 mile round-trip in one day; returning with a Chin who we soon found out becomes hideously sick riding in a car; because we truly wanted the particular dog we saw up for adoption on Petfinder. Others might not be so willing and, when told they'll have to submit to a virtual strip search of their lives, character and pet-worthiness, might just say "f* this" and go to the local pound. There they might get lucky and find a pet with no behavioral or health issues, they might not. Those adopters might even feel more virtuous, thinking "HA! that rescuer didn't think I was good enough to adopt one of their dogs, but here I am rescuing from the pound! "
Again, I say "lighten up" to the rescues. If the potential adopter can prove they've taken the time to research a breed they are interested in; make a connection with a vet and provide a reference that says you've discussed the expense and responsibilities of keeping the animal healthy; and show proof that you live in a house/area that will be healthy for the pet; then let them adopt. Also, I think the mandate that if an adoption doesn't work out, the pet should be returned to the rescue is a good one, despite the Ellen Degeneres debacle. However, the rescue system has made the process of bringing a new pet into the family a scary and begrudging one, rather than an experience that should be joyful.
Because some .. well, many, in my experience ... rescues have devolved into pet nazi organizations who consider a potential adopter guilty until proven innocent. That is, "we consider you a potentially bad pet adopter until you are proven otherwise" . I say this while being the pet parent to 5 dogs, 2 of whom I went thru a rescue to adopt, and a whole herd of cats dumped on us because we live in the country.
On top of our pet-related expenses (just took another stray purry to the vet to be neutered and brought up-to-date on shots. I love how people think that cats dumped in the country will survive on their own, after all "look at all the barns! I'm sure they'll be able to hunt mice to eat!" ) we support our local rescues and donate to Best Friends, but I don't think that their generous, well-meant purpose should be immune from criticism. The Michael Vicks-types are the minority, IMO. Most people looking to adopt are just plain good folks who love critters and want to do the right thing by adopting rather than spurring on continued breeding, mostly by people who are doing it for profit rather than to continue a breed in a healthy matter.
The rescues could really help, and also move more pets through their services, by lightening up a little. We endured the indignity and intrusiveness of being interviewed and providing references, not to mention the onerous ordeal of having to make a 500 mile round-trip in one day; returning with a Chin who we soon found out becomes hideously sick riding in a car; because we truly wanted the particular dog we saw up for adoption on Petfinder. Others might not be so willing and, when told they'll have to submit to a virtual strip search of their lives, character and pet-worthiness, might just say "f* this" and go to the local pound. There they might get lucky and find a pet with no behavioral or health issues, they might not. Those adopters might even feel more virtuous, thinking "HA! that rescuer didn't think I was good enough to adopt one of their dogs, but here I am rescuing from the pound! "
Again, I say "lighten up" to the rescues. If the potential adopter can prove they've taken the time to research a breed they are interested in; make a connection with a vet and provide a reference that says you've discussed the expense and responsibilities of keeping the animal healthy; and show proof that you live in a house/area that will be healthy for the pet; then let them adopt. Also, I think the mandate that if an adoption doesn't work out, the pet should be returned to the rescue is a good one, despite the Ellen Degeneres debacle. However, the rescue system has made the process of bringing a new pet into the family a scary and begrudging one, rather than an experience that should be joyful.
First of all, I have to say that I do agree with a lot of what you said.
I just don't understand why so many people think that adopting a pet should be a really quick, really easy thing? It's not a fast food joint, these are animals, living creatures, most of which have already had miserable lives. I will say that I take back some of what I said in my first post. Well, not take it back, but change it a bit. After really thinking about it, I don't think that adopting a pet should be too hard. It shouldn't be hard enough to make people not want to adopt. But at the same time, it shouldn't be some quick, easy thing either! It should be hard enough to where people that really shouldn't be adopting will decide to not adopt. You said "Most people looking to adopt are just plain good folks who love critters and want to do the right thing by adopting", that may be true, but not all people that adopt are that way. And a lot of people that adopt are people that just decide that they want a dog or cat all of a sudden, so they will just go in and adopt not thinking about the fact that pets are not disposable. They don't think about the fact that pets are very expensive, they are very time consuming and they are pretty much a life time commitment! If most of the people that adopted were good people that really thought everything through, there wouldn't be as many pets in shelters as there are. The truth is, people that have no idea what being a pet owner takes, get pets everyday and don't properly care for them, or just decide that they don't want them anymore because they are too expensive, too much work, etc, and they just throw them away like a piece of trash!
I guess I must be crazy, but I do not think that adopting a pet should be a quick, easy thing! However, I will change part of what I originally said and say that I do think that it should be a reasonable process. It is not ridiculous or unreasonable for the shelter to make sure that you have thought everything through and you are willing and able to properly care for the animal, and provide it with everything it needs. I think it is ridiculous for the shelter to go digging around in your personal life too much, but it is not too much if the shelter is just trying to ensure that the animal has a good life in a good home with good people. The whole point is for the shelter to make sure these animals find good homes with good owners. If they didn't make people go through the adoption process the whole thing would be pretty pointless, in my opinion. I also feel that it is necessary for the shelters to consider everyone a potentially bad pet adopter until they shown otherwise. The truth is, the "Vick-types" are not the minority! If that were the case, the shelters would not be over flowing with animals that need good homes, and people wouldn't consider breeds like "pit bulls" (American Pit Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers and Staffordshire Bull Terriers), Rottweilers, Dobermans, German Shepherds, Chows, Huskies, etc, to be dangerous! None of the so-called "dangerous" breeds are born mean or bad, no breed is born mean or bad, they are made that way be the "Vick-types"! I don't think that there are too terribly many dog fighters out there, but there are a lot, and there are loads and loads of people that are irresponsible and would be or are abusive, neglectful and just completely heartless! Sure some, or maybe even most of the animals would end up in good homes, but not all of them would. Even with the adoption process for people to have to go through, not every animal will end up in a good, loving home, but the chances of them ending up in a bad home with a moron owner are way less. So no, the adoption process should not be a huge, long, draw out, miserable thing like I originally said, but I stand by what I said about the adoption process not being too hard. Some things could be changed a bit, but for the most part it's necessary to ensure that these animals have the best possible chance at finally having the good life that they deserve. No, the adoption process should not be "scary and begrudging" rather than joyful, but it shouldn't be too easy. This is not like buying a toy, or some sea monkeys.. lol! These are living creatures that have probably already had hard lives. They deserve to be happy, healthy and well taken care of. They deserve to be part of a family and be loved the way they are going to love their new owner or owners. Adopting a pet, or taking on a pet in whatever way, should be a serious thing to people. There is research that should be done and a lot of thought and preparation should go into taking on a pet. If things are too easy, chances are a lot of people won't do what needs to be done.
Oh, and I also agree that if an adoption doesn't work out, the pet should be returned to the rescue. I think that is a great thing and all shelters should do it.
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.
I do see what you mean, but if someone would rather pay $700 for a puppy mill or pet store puppy instead of waiting a few days and doing a few things to save a puppy, then there's really not much you can do anyway. At the pet store you have to pay out the a** and at the shelter you have to go through the adoption process, either way it's a pain. My point is that if someone has to go through the adoption process, chances are that the people that just decide to go get a dog at the last minute without thinking it through, will really be forced to think it through. Same with someone that has to drop $700 at a pet store. When you don't have to go through the adoption process or pay a bunch of money, it's too easy for people to not think it through. Taking on a pet is a huge responsibility. It's an expensive, time consuming, not always pleasant lifetime commitment and people should have to think things through before taking on a pet.
. I say this while being the pet parent to 5 dogs, 2 of whom I went thru a rescue to adopt, and a whole herd of cats dumped on us because we live in the country. 
"
It's not a fast food joint, these are animals, living creatures, most of which have already had miserable lives. 
I will say that I take back some of what I said in my first post. Well, not take it back, but change it a bit. After really thinking about it, I don't think that adopting a pet should be too hard. It shouldn't be hard enough to make people not want to adopt. But at the same time, it shouldn't be some quick, easy thing either! It should be hard enough to where people that really shouldn't be adopting will decide to not adopt. You said "Most people looking to adopt are just plain good folks who love critters and want to do the right thing by adopting", that may be true, but not all people that adopt are that way. And a lot of people that adopt are people that just decide that they want a dog or cat all of a sudden, so they will just go in and adopt not thinking about the fact that pets are not disposable. They don't think about the fact that pets are very expensive, they are very time consuming and they are pretty much a life time commitment! If most of the people that adopted were good people that really thought everything through, there wouldn't be as many pets in shelters as there are. The truth is, people that have no idea what being a pet owner takes, get pets everyday and don't properly care for them, or just decide that they don't want them anymore because they are too expensive, too much work, etc, and they just throw them away like a piece of trash! 
