"poor" people owning dogs

what is not being said is that there are layers, upon layers to your question, and it's not cut, clear, and dry either. Animals have been known to pick people with no money or very little means when "Abandonened, and at least the person has common sense enough to ask, What do I do, and then someone with means makes the thoughtless statement, "What are you doing with an animal, you have no business with one. What about a woman who might have a pet that just adopted her, but is going through a divorce and the husband is locking her out of the house, taking the money, and doing really stupid things. The unexpected happens. Not every need can be planned for financially, and to be honest with you We as humans are complex creatures, and it's great, life is good if we can afford and finance for "emergencies, or the unexpected, but life even with our animal friends just doesn't happen that way. At least even those with few means that post questions here at least have hearts big enough to ask, what do I do about a pet in need occassionally. just don't brace yourself to judge harshly because noone really knows anyones true circumstances when posting questions on forums for help. Be compassionate, honest, even when it's difficult.

I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you.It sounds like your saying poor people should not own a dog..I got news for you most poor people love their dogs just as much as RICH people do maybe more..poor people may not be able to run their dog to a vet when they get a sniffle but poor people make do the best they can and their dogs know their loved. I've seen rich people who can afford vet care leave their dogs way away from the house tied up to a chain..they might get some attention when they get fed..maybe a little pat on the head because they dont' want to get dirty..then there ARE some poor people would do the same but to catagorize poor people as not taking care of their animals like a rich person would is totally wrong. I'm not rich I have 7 dogs, 1 cat now, 2 horses and a parakeet....they all know how much I LOVE them, if they need to go to the vet I make do somehow if it means I go without something..I just lost my 16 yr old Tinkerbell on Christmas day..16 yrs old!!..I also lost my 14 yr old husky ( Due to seizure for 5 yrs which I bought Phenobarbital for) a year ago, I have a Beagle thats 16 yrs old with enlarged heart which I make sure he has his meds that cost $37 a month sure its hard on me but my dogs are happy and loved and thats all that counts..my other animals are ALL over 10 yrs old so I must be doing something right, my horses are 26 and 21 yrs old but they are family just like the dogs/cat and bird. I may not be RICH but I'm richer in love from my animals.

suebee, I don't know who you are addressing your ire to but you epitomize the whole point we were making. I am assuming by the tone of your post that you consider your self poor. However, you ARE taking care of your animals. You are providing them with the medical care they need. No - love & food are NOT enough & will never be. If an animal is sick or injured it DOES need medical care. In many states the law requires veterinary care when needed (not all). I had a dog brought to me one time by state police. The owner was a homeless man who was now in jail for 10 days. I kept the dog (& all his belongings) until the man came. The dog was not only UTD but on HW meds too. I told him he owed me nothing but he insisted on paying the dogs way. I had a lot of respect for that man as a dog owner.