Discuss: What’s the Use of Pets?

I thought it ironic that Ginger Strand’s article, which highlighted some of the more hyperbolic and hyperconsumerist behavior towards pets should follow the beautiful piece on unplugged schools:  obviously pets put us in contact with something we crave, something alive, dependent and unscrutable. This is often a perfect antidote for plugged in life. The Global Pet Expo is an easy straw man for ridicule, but it hardly represents the range of American’s behavior toward, and need for, animal companions.
In my small animal practice, I find that most people interact with their pets pretty much in keeping with the way they treat other humans:  some are manipulative, adoring, indulgent, strict, some are abusive but many adopt a healthy attitude of give and receive. If we can accept that pets fulfill a role in our lives, if we bring them under our dominion, then from there forward it is our responsibility to ensure the best health we can reasonbly afford. For some with destructive behavior, yes that means Prozac. For most, it simply means healthy food, freedom from parasites and infection, exercise, training and hopefully a little affection. What pets give back to their humans is immeasurable.
I would add that sometimes there are surprise lessons. On many occasions, a pet (through me) has been able to teach a person basic anatomy, the major functions of the liver, what the immune system does, or even how to measure in milliliters. Most people enjoy caring for animals, and particularly a sick animal, brings the pet, the owner and the pet’s doctor closer together. Although I do tend to roll my eyes at yet another rhinestone collar or fuzzy hooded sweatshirt on a Chihuahua, in the end I don’t care if the owner considers the animal to be human-like or not. I only care that that he or she be loved, respected and have basic needs met.
I recently attended a conference where a prominent gastro-enterologist asked the mass of us veterinarians sitting there: What do you like about your pet? He volunteered that he loved to feed his dog. I love to feed my dogs. I love to see their instant gratification after a bowl of (the same old)kibble, I love to see them sniff outside, I love to see them napping soundly and dreaming (of what?) I love that I will never know what that dream is, or what sniffs are on my front walk, or why garbage tastes so good. Why does my cat sit on random pieces of paper?  Why does my lab mutt like to carry dirty socks around? As one of your other commentators said, animals help us temporarily to forget ourselves, to care for another, to have responsibility. Yes it is alot like having children, after all.

The purpose of giving pets to children was to teach them responsibility and how to care for others. However, that idea became subplanted and confused with the notion of caring soley for pets instead of people. So, instead of adopting orphans, providing foster children with homes, or helping poor children around the world, our society has become insane - totally insane - and are now caring for pets as surrogate children.

But how can we stop this parasitic cycle and restore normalcy when the pet industry wants us to buy more, pamper more, and no one in the media or in society is saying STOP!

Kevin, Many would disagree with you. Pets are not teaching tools for children. That’s what paper routes are for. Pets are animals that find a home in our families because they need us and we need them. Dogs domesticated themselves to human societies and humans accepted them because there are benefits for both. Nobody is insane; nobody is getting a pet instead of adopting a foster child. Living with animal companions means that we are responsible for them. Have you ever been to an animal shelter? Who will care for these animals?

Animals did not choose to become domesticated. They were captured and kept by humans. Some for food, some for labor and beast of burden, and some were made play things and objects of affection and status.

I can only imagine what the 150,000 foster children awaiting homes, or the 25 million Aids orphans in Africa must think when they see an affluent American pampering their dog. Three simple letters ... WTF?!

I agree with Liz Bernardini’s comment on domestication. The 19th century view of nature and species interactions as one of domination, failed to understand the interconnectedness of all living creatures. Thinking that caring for an animal while children suffer is offensive, is like thinking that treating a broken bone while the patient has liver problems is offensive. Both the bone and the liver are part of a body, and both need to be healthy for the body to work properly.

Kevin, Dogs were captured and forcibly domesticated? What evidence is there for that idea? There are dog burials right alongside human burials dating to precolombian North America and neolithic Europe. Dogs are natural companions to people. That doesn’t excuse some of the more perverse relationships they may have, but we shouldn’t distort the true dog-human relationship for sake of your argument! Not evertyhing in the world has to have a utilitarian function to be part of our lives.

It’s offensive to pet owners who’s priorities are unbalanced and unnatural. Koyaanisqatsi, as they say.

You may want to ask yourself why America has the largest pet ownership in the world, but also the largest amount of endangered species in the world.

The problem of pet shelters and abandoned animals is the fault of PET OWNERS. For whatever reasons, millions of pets are dumped every year. Over half of them to be destroyed like so much consumer waste products.

In my county in Virginia, the pet shelter has a large smoke chimney and is located, appropriately, next to the garbage landfill.

Animals aren’t the problem.

“Dogs were captured and forcibly domesticated? What evidence is there for that idea?”

All scientific evidence indicates that humans bred dogs from wolves. The wolf is a wild animal hostile to people. Humans captured and domesticaed it.