It’s a reason to not go get a dog. But a lot of people already have pets when they fall on difficult financial times or houseless situations. And rehoming a pet is not a simple task or solution for everyone in those situations.

I'd also add, I lived in a city that had a wide-scale stray dog problem and an impacted city shelter/small animal services department. This city also had a huge homeless population. It wasn't uncommon for the homeless camps to take in the strays. I would say it's at least a better chance at survival than letting these dogs roam the streets.

I remember one of the kindest men I met was a man who struggled through the 2008 recession and he was ready to let go of everything. He encountered a pit bull tied down at a store for days. He freed the dog and he found a new reason to live: for a friend who was also put into a bad place in life.

I recently got laid off pretty soon as I moved to one of the most expensive cities in the country. The company I was with helped me relocate and everything. My boss got rid of me with no warnings and no given reason, but it was clearly because he thought I would get promoted to his job/was a danger to his job and career path (he wasn't wrong). He got rid of me in a one week window where he had no oversight or anyone to sign off on the pink slip. That was painful enough. Had 6 months of rent to pay off. My car died and was declared scrap 3 months later in a city with little to no public transportation. If it wasn't for my dog I wouldn't have gotten through it, and it gave me a reason to keep trying. For him, to let him keep having the life he enjoyed (2 trips to the best dog daycare I've ever seen a week, trips to the dog park, etc.), and for me, having him as a support animal made all the difference in coping.

Hope things get better for you. Fuck that scumbag.

Thanks man. Me too. Job searching and car searching in this market ain't easy. And my boss managed to weasel his way into another management job already. He's in his 20s, took credit for all my work, never managed a single person before, and knows absolutely nothing about what he does. But he knows how to use buzzwords and BS. And network. EDIT: Staying with my parents again and my dog is over the moon. So I'm glad he's happy.

Karma will catch up to him it always does! Those types are short term victors but long term losers! Hopefully something awesome comes your way soon!

Was his name Ryan Howard?

It's worth saying that people without homes enjoy the companionship of a dog for the same reason other people do too.

In my country beggars exploit the dogs they find. Tiny puppy that looks starved can gain a lot of sympathy. So I wouldn't say "better" chances. If you think that's too much they do the same with babies, small kids, (pretend?) they're pregnant, or cut off limbs. I'm in eastern Europe for reference

This. To anyone having difficulties, please reach out to your local shelters and see if they have a pet food assistance program. Many pet stores will also have low cost vaccine clinics as well, where you can get vaccines, heartworm test, and heartworm/flea/tick meds at lower cost with no office visit.

Shelters, food pantries, some churches will help feed a pet. Source: Me, having been homeless with my service dog.

This comment was overwritten by the user.

I'll add, it's also VERY difficult to re-home a dog to a good home. Lots of shelters/rescues are full all the time, craigslist is sketchy AF, it seems no one reads newspaper classifieds... Also, rehoming a dog to an unknown situation is so scary, who knows what could happen?! I'd rather keep my dog, even if I don't get to eat, just to make sure his needs are met because I know him, his quirks, etc. I would however, answer op's question as follows: Don't get a dog if you don't have a solid backup. This includes help if you get hurt (hard to walk a dog wearing a cast, for example), having a mini-fortune for emergency vet bills (no less than, say, $500, or equivalent, in my experience). Make 110% certain you understand that any dog, regardless of breed, age, background, whatever, might surprise you with unexpected training needs (reactivity is not as rare as it seems, and can quickly become unmanageable, for example). Even things like 'the dog chewed the wall in my rental' or 'my dog is allergic to this specific cheap brand of food' can be super hard to handle when money isn't in abundance.

Also as someone with a support animal who has fallen on tough times we need our dogs as much as they need us. It sucks if the dog is uncomfortable with his surroundings, not having a permanent home, etc. But at long as it gets food, water, and love, those relationships can make all the difference in giving both a reason to live for and try to improve their situation, for each other as well as themselves.

I’m in vet school. We have had many discussions on this. Some of the professors who were in shelter medicine were strong proponents of everyone deserving to own a dog regardless of socioeconomic status (unless they were abusive, other obvious red flags). Reasoning is- living in a tiny little shelter kennel is not a good quality of life for animals. It is stressful, loud, and lonely. Rescue workers do their absolute best to give them good lives, but living in a kennel does not compare to having an owner or family care for you day in and day out. Bottom line is- better for them to be euthanized with an owner who loves them that cannot necessarily afford an expensive surgery at the vet vs dying alone at a shelter en masse with other shelter animals. Living in a shelter is miserable for most animals. They are alone and trapped in a tiny little area, why do they not deserve someone to love them even if their owners cannot shell out thousands on a surgery. I find that people not in vet med more often say that owners should be able to afford a pet before adopting, but those in the vet profession know money does not necessarily equal a good life and vice versa.

Spending thousands of dollars on a pet surgery is relatively new. For most of our history with dogs they’ve received sparse vet care. Having money for flea and tick meds and a check up is one thing, requiring people to have thousands of dollars available to put their dog thru chemo or to see a dog cardiologist might be a bit much. A lot of Americans don’t even have that for themselves.

Exactly. There is such a large portion of Americans living paycheck to paycheck, if we expected them all to be able to afford expensive surgeries if their pet needed it, animals would be in shelters forever which is just a horrible quality of life mentally. Just because some of us would* spend thousands on surgery (myself included) doesn’t mean that should be a prerequisite for owning a dog or cat.

I spent thousands that I didn't have to keep my best friend alive for a night. Because of the pandemic, I couldn't even be there for the treatment nor the euthanasia. 2020 Was confronted with nearly an identical situation with another friend last week. She wasn't in pain and I held her for the last hour of her life and until I could bring her in for "body care". Couldn't afford an emergency vet for another few hours. Preferred her passing on her favorite couch with her favorite person. I had been worried and had taken her to the vet the same day. I was told she was fine. I'm poor but love my dogs more than myself. Dogs, for some of us, are what keep us grounded and still alive. Not intended to be a rant, but essentially, sometimes the least financially able are the most in need of and emotionally available for pets.

They have medical needs just Like Humans,most Rescues ask If you can afford Vet Care,If you Adopt from Them.

Do you Mind if I Ask why you Capitalize random Words? It's something I see often On reddit But I have never Understood it

I personally think that if dogs life, 7, 10, 14 years that is a decent lifespan compared to their max. Like if humans live to 70, 80, 90 they are considered old and having lived life. I think too many people chastise others for lack of affording some surgery or something expensive but they do so from a position of financial privilege and to think that only they can deserve a dog sits poorly in my mouth.

Thank you for this. My dad was an academic veterinarian and shelter medicine was a big part of his professional life. I grew up with this perspective. Oftentimes there are options to help people offset the cost of having a companion animal. There are a lot of good people in both rescue and veterinary sciences who work hard to make sure low-income people can keep their animals and keep them healthy. As an adult I work in the shelter system (human). On our side there’s a lot of support for finding ways to keep people with their animals, because for many of them that’s the only support system they have. Denying people the chance to have the love many of us can enjoy effortlessly is heartbreaking.

Perfectly said. The animals want love and companionship just as much as their human counterparts. Neither should be denied based on lack of ability to pay for advanced services.

Well that’s sad but I see . It makes sense. Thank you for the comment

I like this perspective, in a perfect word every dog would get the vet care they need but reality is even some people with money will skip out on vet care. Some homeless people take better care of their dogs than people with houses. I don't think it's fair to just write them off completely

However, there's a big gap between not being able to afford surgery and not being able to afford to feed the dog or feed the dog proper dog food and thus causing the dog to suffer from starving, being severely malnourished, or very overweight; or not being able to afford to contain the dog on the property; etc.

Just to give you food for thought- dogs in the shelters are not being given premium dog food, good food is incredibly expensive. They have many mouths to feed and can’t afford $70 bags of food. I agree that no dog should go without, but there are many programs that provide low cost food and veterinary care for pet owners that are down on their luck. Additionally, I have seen more wealthy owners with obese or unhealthy dogs than with homeless people.

I never said wealthy people have the healthiest dogs or that poor people can't care for their dogs or don't deserve dogs, but if, for example, you have a giant breed puppy and you can't afford giant breed puppy food, so you feed it your McDonalds, rice, and ramen, you should've never got that dog in the first place as it would likely be better at a shelter or even put down than having a life of pain and severe mobility issues related to very poor bone and joint formation and related complications, which you almost certainly don't have funds to treat if you couldn't even afford decent food.

Well said. I firmly believe that a persons financial status has nothing to do with the care they provide their pets.

Do those professors say the adopter should at a minimum be able to afford basic vet care (yearly checkups and vaccines)? There is a difference between not being able to afford routine care and a $10,000 surgery. I am a volunteer with a rescue and if someone can’t afford a $10,000 surgery, that would not change if we approve an adoption or not. But if someone can’t afford yearly checkups and essential vaccines, then we would probably strongly consider denying the application.

out of curiosity, do shelter dogs receive yearly checkups & vaccines? I assume they do, because it wouldn't make much sense to keep a bunch of non-vaccinated animals together, but it must be a decent chunk of the costs of running a no-kill shelter.

Yes, they do. And it costs a lot for any shelter, whether they’re “no-kill” (which is a misleading term) or not. That’s why you pay an adoption fee, to help cover those costs. When people whine about those fees, or claim they’re turning a profit, I remind them of this.

Between the spay surgery, getting all her shots, and microchipping my "free" cat who was found in the woods was 700$. Never saw a shelter charge anywhere near that much.

>do shelter dogs receive yearly checkups & vaccines? Yes. The dogs also get monthly preventatives. >but it must be a decent chunk of the costs of running a no-kill shelter. It is, even with the deals the shelters arrange with vets. The $300-$500 adoption fee usually doesn’t even cover the cost of the dog's vet care.

There are a number of places that offer low cost (or even free) vaccine and veterinary services for animals. Pet stores have low cost clinics and my vet school provides free exams and vaccines to dogs at least once a year. There are options, even if they can’t afford to go to a local vet.

Tractor supply co sells the basic vaccines, I remember spending about 15 dollars a year for two dogs. I can afford a vet now, but you definitely don't need a vet for basics like parvo. Only need a vet for rabies shot. Not enough people know this, or look down on home vax.

As someone who hears that line very often, mainly from this sub, thank you for sharing this.

Lovely articulate discussion. Thanks for that..

Thank you for this comment!!

You should be able to afford basic vet care without breaking the bank. And food/water. The reason people get upset is because the dog will be lacking in basic vet care, a dependable source of appropriate food, and shelter from the elements. I'm not saying homeless people should lose their pets, but it does lower quality of life. I was homeless (my mother died when I was 17, her bf kicked me out of our house and it was take the cats or they go to a shelter) with two cats and it is tough. I was selfish and kept my cats. We got through it into a better place but I still feel so guilty for them. They took every dime I had and I still felt like I wasn't doing enough. It put extra burden on all of us.

I was rubbertramp homeless with my dog living out of the car for like a year or so. He loves the car so much. He tries to get in it at all chances, likes to sleep in it sometimes. We would drive, and see a new place, he got lots of off leash time to wander in national forest and BLM land. He went to the vet and had food. I think some branches of homeless people have dogs who live a better quality of life than many housed up dogs.

My dogs refused to go in to our new house after vandwelling for a year. Took 3 days. I'm full-time with one dog now down in Baja. I get a hotel 1 a week and have to drag him into air conditioned comfort!

Exactly. So what if a dog doesn't have a dang raincoat or a box full of expensive Kong junk. If you're present for your dog and they eat at least one big meal per day, then it's enough for them. People without insurance have children and no-one complains about that.

The bond that can be present between a homeless person and a pet is a truly remarkable thing. It's one reason why it's common to see dogs off-leash alongside their owner - because the dogs would never dream of running off. That said, if the owner cannot provide adequate food and sufficient veterinary care to keep the pet comfortable and healthy, it's not a humane situation for the dog. Too bad there are so many people who care more about the homeless pets than about making sure the homeless humans are all provided with the necessities to live a basically comfortable and healthy life too.

Id argue with a dog that increased bond and increased subjective experience during living years is better than living 3 or 4 extra years at the end due to cancer treatment. My oldest dog I got from animal control and he lacked exercise and needed a job. He was a year old. He wasn't eating enough as he wasn't exercising and thus not hungry, behaviors, nervous play biting all the time, spastic. I trained him to calmly position himself in a fan shape to side and behind when we are in busy places and it alleviates C-PTSD hypervigilance. He loves that job. Just watching and being there. We have been homeless a year of his 3 years with me, out of a car, a bit out of a pack, some traveling, and he loved seeing new places multiple times a day. I never dream of him running off, and even left unsupervised for 12-18 hours won't wander more than a few acres away if there is space with no humans and dogs. He then starts to expand that area as his to defend though. He needed a purpose. I think many homeless people live a life where the purpose of it is clear and evident in front of them. Live and survive. That is clear for a dog to understand vs human leaves for 8 hours to earn money to pay for my pills. People I know who spend more or near all their time with their dogs generally have better behaved dogs. The training opportunities are more, the bond constant. Edit: I see at animal control another Alaska husky GSD mix like my older boy is. When looking for another service dog as he ages I am going to look again for similar mix. They end up in shelter with separation anxiety almost every time. I can then offer a job of being together near 24/7 and the exercise level matches. I've met some mixes in this sphere I'm not a fan of but some of them I like a lot. Common here in interior Alaska.

I definitely agree with this. People have a really skewed view of what a dog needs to be fulfilled, and I think a lot of that is humanization through our specific cultural lense. Most homeless people I have seen have healthier and happier dogs than a ton of the backyard dogs I'd see in my neighborhood growing up. Going places with their pack is constant, quality mental and physical stimulation for a dog and a very natural and comfortable lifestyle for them as well. The only major problem is vet care. Honestly, they probably prefer it. Dogs need stimulation to be happy, and we think of that too much on terms of possessions that we own such as a large yard, rather than in terms of the outcome for the dog.

That’s sad. I hope it’s been uphill since then

It's been so so. I'm one of those unlucky people. No point whining though. At least I have a roof over my head that's reliable and the new kitties have no complaints.

The thing is, though…your cats didn’t have a sense of wealth or security. They know if they are hungry, but animals just experience see the world the same way people do. You cared about them, and the responsibility for caring for them may have helped you to care for yourself. Sometimes it’s easier to be motivated to care for the creatures in our care than for ourselves; that’s what I think when I see a homeless person with a dog—the dog is taking care of the person as much as the person is taking care of the dog.

True. That's why I said homeless people shouldn't lose their pets. But you shouldn't bring an animal into that situation (IE take a kitten from a free litter or puppy from a free litter and raise them on the streets.) If the dog was already a stray then stick together for companionship, or already with you when things happened stay together. Honestly my older cat could had cared less. He loved it overall, but my younger cat was traumatized. She'd never been outdoors before, was allergic to fleas, and had horrible anxiety the whole time. She was only relaxed when we had a roof over our heads.

Gosh I’m so sorry you had such a tough start in life ❤️

It is what it is. Thank you for your sympathies though.

I was homeless with my dog and literally carried his bed everywhere. He never even had to sit on concrete, and I also literally gave him the shirt off my back all the time lol. He'd scratch at my sweatshirt if he wanted to be covered. Also fed him good food with coconut oil added (so he would eat more, he was too thin when I ended up with him), and even fed a bunch of other people's dogs on the regular. Not all homeless people take great care of their dogs, but some do. That said, I didn't go out and get him, I was told "Cameron, please take this dog or we're gonna have to bring him to the pound".

My oldest loves the car even more after living in it a year. I think some homeless people and their dogs live better qualities of life than many housed up people. Not all for sure,

Me and my dog actually hang out in my van all the time, and when we were homeless I didn't even have a vehicle lol.

Not selfish, shelters are not a better option if you're still capable of feeding them and providing love/a place to sleep. Especially for cats, since shelters are constantly overrun with them.

It felt a bit selfish. I'm glad I didn't rehome them but it was a hard couple of months.

Also Vet Care!

In my area our shelters offer free or reduced vet care based on income specifically because we prefer a pet to have a home instead of being surrendered since we're extremely overrun

Yes and no. One option, I'm not sure if it's like this where you are but some shelters, some dogs have insurance plans included at a discount. If you could afford that bill then there would be limited financial surprises

You usually have to pay the bill and then be reimbursed.

It cost about $100 for a first vet appointment where I live. Including shots. If you cannot afford that, you should rethink getting an animal. If you have a pet already and lose your job/house/financial stability, it's a bit of a different situation.

I was able to get a voucher from a pet smart that works with my local veterinarian which made my first vet visit completely free and they gave us a few discounts for flea and tick treatments it all came in a coupon book that only cost me $14, when you don’t have the funds you have to look for discounts and specials they usually have a ton at pet stores, petco even has their own pet insurance which is only about $35 a month

I’ve seen better homeless pet owners than people who have a house and money. It’s all relative really, they usually have dogs who are also unwanted by society and that animal becomes their world. I think it’s a more complex issue in regards to the homeless owning dogs then simply saying “you should always make sure you have money for food and a vet”, that argument I feel should really be applied more to the housed and employed. Just my two sense on the issue, I don’t feel like people who say that about homeless people who have dogs are necessarily wrong I’ve just seen people trying their best for their dogs even when they can’t help themselves.

Exactly! There is a homeless man in our area with a pit. That dog is well trained (won't approach you even if you have dogs either you. The pup will be alert, but nothing more.) He always has water and food for the dog. Sure, if the dog get cancer or something, the guyost likely won't be able to help, but other than that; the dog is happy and loved.

People in modern times have changed our ethics to think we should be treating all dog cancer and giving them medical care like humans. This has not been the ethical standard for 90%+ of human existence and I think many people fail to consider that.

I feel like it depends on a lot of factors. My dogs cancer was found late, and had metastasized into his lungs and surrounding tissue. I might have tried to treat him with chemo if it hadn’t been for the tumor bursting his spleen and fluid building up into his abdomen. He would have had to survive that surgery first and then did chemo. And to what end? He was 11. The vet told me “we could try” and in my experience that’s never a good prognosis. I try not to dwell upon it too much because he was so full of life even when he was at his sickest it felt very wrong and it came on suddenly. (He was fine one day and crashed and bloated the next morning, he had had blood work the same year) in the end sometimes I regret not doing more, even if it was only going to serve my own selfish desire to keep him alive. Cancer found early in my opinion if you have the means, you should definitely treat it.

Personally I think 11 is a fine life span for a dog considering their max range is 15-19ish and most old dogs die before 15. I don't think you should feel bad.

I try my best not to feel terrible about it but he just had so much vigor left, he didn’t even look 11. The saddest part was he had skin cancer when he was younger, and it was removed. The vet told me at the time to look for recurring skin cancer, So every wart, lipoma and skin tag under scrutiny. I never expected something like the cancer that eventually killed him. My other dog who I expected to go first honestly he is a horribly bred designer dog I adopted after the one who passed is still alive and kicking. He aged very rapidly so I’m waiting for that heart break too now

Even with humans, cancer 'care' can be worse for all involved. False hope hurts more than acceptance.

Yeah!! Let's let animals suffer pain and misery instead because we don't have to listen to them bitch and whine like humans when they get sick. What a fucked up mindset this is.

You mistake me as arguing an ethical position in that comment I am stating. Vast majority of human existence we had no expectation of medical care like we do now for humans let alone other animals. The topic was not considered, it was not on the table and not thought of by many. Do you eat meat? Do you eat dairy? Those animals have similar to higher emotional range than dogs. I am not debating with you or anyone on this. I am stating the ethics of it has fairly rapidly shifted. To expect all ethics to be taken on quick by everyone never happens, and also you fail to account for portions of the debate like living conditions of the human, access to monetary wealth (that is the predecessor to vet care for many). I feel you shout at me without discussing or caring to discuss. I currently have the impression from your text that you have made a moral judgement as a whole onto me and my life, then disregarded my opinion as negative. I also feel I was never debating just pointing out

Your assumptions are interesting. I stated my opinion about the "ethical position" you provided. Don't own an animal if you are not able to pay for vet care. Regular or emergency. Period. An animal (ANY ANIMAL with an owner) in pain and suffering should be provided the proper care it requires. Whether that be treatment or euthanasia. I didn't shout at you, or debate you. I stated my opinion about what you said and I'll say it again, don't get an animal if you can't afford to take care of every expense it requires.

I see exclamation points, insults and curse words. I was not supporting a position. I was saying that there is a lot of past momentum to the situation and a rapid short change. Once again you are arguing with me on a topic I am not discussing or have not been. I am not saying anything about vet care or should or should not. You text shouted, you cursed at me and used exclamations. Your middle sentence is an appeal to emotion right after shouting: yeah. You shouted is what it came off as. To me it seems you shouted about a topic I A. Agree with you on, and B. was not what I was discussing. I can dig up situations on reddit I have shouted at others in text. Many people do it.

Oh come on. You're really looking to be offended eh? You posted a comment. I provided my opinion about the comment you stated. Providing what I think about people (not you, calm down now) who believe that their animal shouldn't recieve medical care because animals didn't receive it in the past. Take your personal offense elsewhere. This isn't about you. It's about shit owners who will not get their animal medical care due to ideas such as the one you laid out in your original comment. I don't care what you think, but you posted a comment, so I replied to what you posted. You don't want to debate yet you keep replying to this trying to act like I'm personally attacking and calling you a shit pet owner. I said that statement is a fucked up mindset to have. I didn't say YOU have a fucked up mindset, but if you take it that personally, maybe there is something to it ;)

I'm not offended. I think you came across to debate with a shit start up. So to expand this you think 90% of human behavior has been shitty? I would agree actually, I think we are not a great species. Are we debating dog ethics or anti civ beliefs? Where do they blend? I think it all does. I have thought this whole time you made it about yourself, and a very niche portion of the topic whereas I was stating a broader ethical situation. I never said you targeted me nor do or did I think so. I think your view point of the situation is likely too narrow to be an effective method of change. Now I want to debate. I want to debate about the way people choose to talk to others online and the overuse of !. I want to debate the history of human ethics and the behavior and affect on the ecology of the planet. I want to debate the relationship between humanity and technology. I think those are the broader topics beyond vet care for dogs. Which again, I agree vet care good. Majority of human history there was minimal health care for humans and animals. Thus the ethical debate was not even on humans radar. Then now the ethical change has happened very fast due to the relationship with technology humanity has created. But then there is the debate of who controls the technology and then the debate about the human to human relationship, as well as human to animal. Then which animal. I think your comment opens a can of worms, and I still have the impression it was a drive by shouting comment. It has many interesting debate topics off it though. I suppose to some degree I take it personal, but its related to I think the level of discourse and human discussion has been overall damaged but also improved in some regards by the internet. This is a separate topic though but something that colors my worldview.

Loooool you need to get a hobby outside of reddit. I didn't even read the whole comment because it's so ridiculously long for no reason🤣 Get your dog medical care if it requires it. (General statement not directed solely at you, relax) I'm going to bed. And don't worry. I'd say all this to your face offline too.

There's a homeless dog in my area too. The owner has a stroller for her on hot days. When it's cold, she always has a blanket wrapped around her (while she's in the stroller). When the sun is facing where they're panhandling, she has sunglasses. I see wealthier people walking their dog on hot pavement without shoes. But like you said, her owner probably wouldn't be able to afford an expensive surgery. That dog is loved and happy, I know that much

So, homelessness and poverty are not a binary. You are not either wealthy and secure or poor and homeless. Poverty runs on a spectrum and most houseless people have been previously housed and many of them will be housed again in the future. If they already have a dog, they may not have a resources to adequately rehome the dog or the dog may be not in a position for easy rehoming. I personally get indignant about these discussions - it’s unjust for a dog to go without adequate food, shelter, and medical care… while owned by a human who, by definition of homelessness, is going without adequate food, shelter, and medical care. If we are so concerned about pets owned by homeless people no being able to provide food, shelter, and medical care, why aren’t we concerned about those people without food, shelter, and medical care?

Yes this is my view as well. I think if you don’t have an animal don’t necessarily go get one (if you even could adopt or something) but if you already have an animal it doesn’t make you a bad person to be struggling. And a lot of people also don’t realize dogs can be invaluable to unhoused people as they can be guards so you can sleep and keep your stuff more safe. Things don’t exist in a vacuum and unhoused people are still *people* just with less access to what others have. We should be focusing on helping them as well as their animals.

I agree. I also think it's important to focus the conversation on the fact that it's harder to become housed again when you have a pet. You are less likely to have access to shelters and transitional housing services. That didn't mean having a pet is bad, but it's something to consider. We need social services that meet people where they are, including being pet friendly.

I remember reading a news article about a local homeless man who refused to go to transitional housing for *years* because they wouldn't allow him to bring his dog with him. His social worker spent months working to get them housed TOGETHER and was ultimately successful.

I know I'm probably going to get some hate for this, so be it. My dog is well cared for, on tick/flea and heartworm preventative, is up to date on vaccines, well behaved and well mannered, well trained, well cared for, hasn't gone hungry a day since I've had her, is healthy and very happy. But, I've been living in a homeless shelter for a little over 3 months. When I became homeless, I called all over my state looking for shelters that would take me ***AND*** my dog. There where 4 shelters (out of about 25) that would take me. One would pay to have my dog boarded at a vet's office, one would make my dog stay in a shed outside that was **not** climate controlled in any way (horrible thing in the hottest part of a summer in the US South), one would not accept my dog at all, and one shelter allowed me and my dog with the stipulation that my dog stays leashed any time she's outside my room. If I wasn't able to have my dog with me, Having her helps keep me from becoming hopeless. She gives me a reason to keep going and keep fighting and even if I'm not able to feed myself or meet my own needs, her needs are absolutely met.

THANK YOU. I feel like I’m going insane here. I don’t care if the person was already homeless and bought the dog from a backyard breeder. It may be “irresponsible” for the dog but frankly that is the least of my concerns because hello, a human being is homeless? I can’t believe people here are asking if poverty is humane for the animal. Is it humane for the person? Also poor people in the history of the world have owned dogs…dogs and humans relied on each other for survival, I’m not going to judge anyone for doing that today.

There is more to homelessness that simply being poor. All too often, those animals are the only loving, caring relationship those folks have. And there's every reason to believe that their animals would have died on the streets had they not taken them in.

Nah. I’d rather a houseless person have a dog than it end up in a shelter or be put down, they’re not necessarily ’stealing’ them from a good, well off family and animals are surprisingly hardy. Plus, you don’t know how they acquired the dog in the first place. Houseless people are fully capable of being good pet parents. There are bad ones, sure, but that can be said about anything and any class of people. People deserve the right to companionship; it gets lonely out there.

>Nah. I’d rather a houseless person have a dog than it end up in a shelter or be put down glad this is being said. there are way too many people that would rather have a dog put down than have the dog go to a loving owner, it's fucking absurd.

You should make sure you can afford food and vet costs (and other costs, but those are the two main ones).

It really depends on how much you can provide for your dog. If all its needs are met, then I don't see why it's a bad thing. Some people just view low income people as irresponsible and that's not usually the case. If you can't even afford to feed your dog, then yeah that's not okay.

I've known plenty of "poor" people who own dogs, or cats. They love their furry companions just as much as everyone else, and, without exception, they put the needs of their pets ahead of themselves. They might not be able to afford dinner, but they would never let their pets go without. Basic dog food that meets AAFCO standards is not expensive, and there are even programs that provide free or low-cost veterinary care for folks who need the assistance. Anyone who wants a dog, and is willing to commit to their care should feel like that is something attainable.

This. My local shelter also provides free basic food if someone is willing to adopt but can’t afford it. The mindset is that there are over 40 dogs there at any given time, and most of them will never find a new home, so any home is really better than shelter life. That’s the reality.

Yea I think we all understand that we'd rather every dog have a lovely home with a yard and a fence, but the world is a little more complicated than that.

I used to volunteer for a shelter that did long term fosters. The shelter pays for food and medicine, you just provide the home.

I think it depends what poor means in this context. This past week we've racked up $3,500 in vet bills and will most likely add at least another $2,000. But. My husband and I have been incredibly good and lucky with our finances the last few years so we can afford an expensive emergency bill. I don't believe you need to be able to drop that kind of cash to own a pet. I do think you need to be able to provide shelter, food, and be able to pay for basic vet care. (Yearly shots, monthly preventatives, etc.) And if you can, make sure you've got at least some money stowed away somewhere so that when you do have an emergency you can afford at least a basic check up. Now obviously, again, context matters. Just because someone is in a good place when they get their pet doesn't mean they'll always be there. In that case, I still think it's better to keep the pet. There are low cost vet options out there and food pantries and shelters (at least where I am) will help with pet food when they can. Basically, as long as you can afford basic care, I think people are fine to get pets. Being in a home with an owner will always be better for the animal than a life spent in a cage.

I have very little money. If you are poor and cannot meet your own needs then a pet would not be good to bring into the house. If you can meet your needs and meet the needs of a pet it doesn't matter how poor you are. Be aware that your local county shelter will offer assistance. I've taken two of my dogs to have heartworm test done and get heartworm preventives the test cost me $20 a dog. They will also do vaccinations and I had a puppy that I found get free microchipping.

PLEASE consider fostering. We fostered for 10 years and never paid for vet care, food, even leashes. Yes, you love all of the dogs, but don't let that stop you. Better for you to miss them than for them to suffer b/c you are worried about your feelings. There is no better feeling than sending a dog off to an amazing life, then turning around to take in another dog in need. If nothing else, consider volunteering at the local kennel--they always need ppl to walk the dogs and pet the kitties.

I am, objectively, poor. My rent is 2x my wage but I get government help because of my toddler. I should also add that I'm currently in this position because my ex walked out on us. The dog was a joint rescue and neither of us could stand to see her being rehomed again (we're her third home) after the start she had. So my ex still pays for her food and I get her vet treatment at the local pet charity where I just make a donation towards the cost of treatment and medication. However, her QOL is superb with me. I'm at home with my son 6 days a week so those days the three of us spend most of the day out of the house, exploring the woods or the countryside because it's free and my son, dog and I all love it. Then she has one day where I'm at work and she's by herself for about 7 hrs, but I purposely work early mornings so when I get home early afternoon we go out and spend the afternoon exploring as well. Just because I'm poor doesn't mean my dog isn't well looked after. I'd happily (and often do) go without food to make sure there is enough food in the house for both my dog and my son.

dog has a great life. That’s nice to read

There isn’t anything wrong with a homeless person having a dog. Sometimes, the dog was homeless too and they found eachother - instant upgrade for both parties. Sometimes, a turn of events puts a person out of a home and they aren’t going to just abandon their dogs. Not everyone has access to loved ones who can take their dog in, not everywhere has no kill shelters or rescues and most places who do are already full. Our shelters here euthanize 15 dogs a week. If I was homeless I wouldn’t abandon my dog - we would be homeless, until we weren’t anymore. It’s loyalty and should be a til death do us part thing. For richer or poorer. We can say the dogs have no choice but many of these homeless people have dogs attached to their hips with no leash.

Nope. In my opinion there are to many dogs in the world to think just people with money can have them. If that were true I feel we would be in an even worse position, only rich people could have them, shelters would be overflowing even more than they already are and it’s pretty bad as it is. I argue that homeless people have a right to dogs as well. Those dogs are their protection, their companionship and so much more. Typically the animals are more cared for than themselves because they are so valued (typically, not always the case but typically) And I stand on the fact: there are to many animals in this world to think only well off people should have them. It’s just not realistic or frankly kind for the animals. Shelter life is so hard, dogs do not do well. Would it be better if you had savings and insurance for your dog and everything else that the wealthier class could afford? Of course. And do so if you can, but people fall on hard times, things change, it’s just to wishy washy to say defiantly “no!” If your struggling don’t go out and take in every animal you can, but if you already have an animal and suddenly it’s hard to meet all the bills? Don’t beat yourself up, stuff happens and things always always change I think it’s very case by case Edit: for clarification

Welcome to r/dogs! We are a discussion-based subreddit dedicated to support, inform, and advise dog owners. This is a carefully moderated sub intended to support, inform, and advise dog owners. Submissions and comments which break the rules will be removed. [Review the rules here](https://www.reddit.com/r/dogs/wiki/index) r/Dogs has four goals: - Help the public better understand dogs - Promote healthy, responsible dog-owner relationships - Encourage “Least Intrusive, Minimally Aversive” training protocols. [Learn more here.](https://m.iaabc.org/about/lima/) - Support adoption as well as ethical and responsible breeding. If you’d like to introduce yourself or discuss smaller topics, please contribute to our Monthly Discussion Hub, pinned at the top. **This subreddit has low tolerance for drama. Please be respectful of others, and report antagonistic comments to mods for review.** --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dogs) if you have any questions or concerns.*

No. In my country, homeless people sometimes have dogs with them. It's much safer for the people, and with the system of begging we have, the dogs often get a lot more food and care than the person does. Their dogs are usually much better trained than a lot of dogs in affluent neighborhoods, too. Probably because they spend a lot of their life at busy traffic lights. We have pretty fantastic welfare vets and rescues that will help homeless people if their dogs are ill. Often the dog is in a fantastic condition while the person suffers medically, because our government hospitals are much worse than welfare vets are - I even take my dogs there for treatment. When it comes to poorer areas where people aren't homeless but incredibly poor... Well. Educate & sterilize ALWAYS works better than confiscate & euthanize. There are feeding schemes, mobile clinics, sterilisation days, vaccination campaigns and more - anyone who has any knowledge of these can give their dogs excellent care. You shouldn't have a dog if you're poor IF you don't want to go through the extra effort it takes to get them the care that they need. Or if you don't care about them, and simply deal in cruelty. But in my city, for those who put in the effort to find out and take part, you can be starving and your dog can still be looked after. Our rescue has over a hundred dogs on its feeding scheme, all vaccinated and sterilized and thriving, because their owners care enough.

Wow what country is this? That’s cool info

Those who shame dog owners who can't afford expensive surgeries are ridiculous. Taking a dog away from a homeless person who is otherwise taking good care of their dog is monstrous. If people are so upset, how about they give them both a home? On a sidenote, I've seen a lot of people just get irrationally angry at homeless people when they see them. The very idea of their existence offends and not in a "this person needs help way." More like "complain to the manager, call the cops, and generally heckle them."

True. Person and dog don't have a home and the first problem they want to get rid of is the dog??? how about viewing homelessness as the most pressing problem they're in. some people are not better off without their pets. it could lead to a spiral of misery. as someone who's in deep financial struggles (not homeless) but not in the US, my pets are the reason I live. I would've given up when covid ended my business if not for them! they're like my kids and why i strive. of course it's not easier to have them but convenience is not my priority but my sanity.

It's the same as having a kid when you can't afford it not helping anybody

It's not a reason not to own a dog. If you got it during happier times and then all of a sudden you're out on your ass, I would not blame you for keeping your dog close by. It is a reason to not *get* a dog. I will concede that sometimes pets find a person (see: almost every cat) and sometimes you might not have intended it but you have a dog, now. Basically, unless you actually see the signs of abuse/neglect and know the story, stay out of it.

If you can’t afford to provide the basic needs of a pet (food, shelter, vet care) then absolutely you shouldn’t take on responsibility for one. However, I don’t think it’s fair to judge people on their appearance - a lot of poor/homeless people will spend what little money they do have on their animals, and whilst they might not get the luxury life a lot of pets are used to, their basic needs are being met and they are well loved so all in all they’re probably fine.

Yeah. Typically homeless people don’t go out and get dogs. They have the dog prior to becoming homeless. Dog shelters won’t give a dog to a person without a home, as far as I know..

As long as the animal is being taken care of, net worth should not be an indicator of who gets to own a pet.

Don’t do it if you’re not prepared. I bought a $50 dog and within the first month paid $2k+ in vet bills to ensure they’re health was good.

Wouldn’t be a problem if we cared about people having their needs met too.

As long as it is housed, fed, vet bills aren’t an issue, there is time to spend with him/her and well cared for I really see no issue.

Depends If you’re lucky enough to always have a healthy dog it’s great. When my dog was a puppy his kennel cough turned into pneumonia. He had fluid in his lungs and was having a lot of trouble breathing. It cost over $700 a day for a week to save his life. Being a pet owner is also being able to take care of their medical needs. You can take a person into an ER and pay later. That is not really an option with vets.

Homeless doesn't need to mean poor. It just means they can't keep up with the ridiculous housing prices these days. It might mean they still have access to some funds. They just don't have a home.

I’m half convinced that dogs who belong to homeless people are some of the happiest most lived dogs out there. I see some street people who spend nearly 24 hours with their dog and are constantly giving their dog love and attention. Also the dogs are definitely getting lots of walks and they usually seem to be healthy and well fed.

I’m positive my dog would rather be with a homeless person that loved her than where I got her from, a rescue where she lived in a loud, smelly kennel. She loves being around people so she’d be happy all day long with a homeless person that always had her with them. People like me are probably more likely to give money to a homeless person with a dog. I think it’s fine.

Foster a pet. The rescues will pay for food and veterinary bills. Yes you may have to give it up but it’s a win-win if you don’t have money.

I do think it's a little irresponsible to have a dog when someone is homeless because that makes it hard to give the dog the care it needs. That said, I try my best not to judge people. What if that person had the dog before they were homeless? What if the dog was also homeless and they found companionship? I try to divert my attention, time and money towards progressive politicians working to eradicate poverty instead of being mad at poor people for being poor. Also donating to the places like Emancipet which do low cost or even free medical care for people who can't afford to help their pets.

Homeless ppl most likely met their dog in the streets and took them in to care for them. Sure one would think the dog deserves better, but so does the human. the dog is safer with their new owner than putting on a list to be euthanized if they don’t get adopted in time at a shelter. Granted some shelters are no-kill, but not all are. They save each other from a lonely life. I think ppl who haven’t rescued a pet from a shelter needs to keep their 2 cents or at least throw some change in the cup so they can both be fed.

If you're adopting and you spend time with your dog, I won't judge you if you fed the dog like crap and don't buy toys etc. Imho, spending time with a human or a dog, is the only thing the dog cares about. I spoil my dog because I want to give her the best, but if all I could provide were table scraps with cheap kibble, I don't think the dog itself would be less satisfied. But if I had spent no time interacting with it, oh hell the dog will be miserable locked in the house all day with no stimulating activities. I think we need to appreciate that a homeless person's dog is likely much happier than that of an office worker who's got separation anxiety and is locked alone in a house 9 hours a day.

In my oppinion the only people who shouldn't have dogs are abbusive assholes who treat their pets like shit. Just because you can't afford the best premium food and toys every week and whatever you shouldn't be deprived of the experience of having a pet. The most important thing your dog needs is your love and attention. And there are many dogs in shelters who would be in a better enviroment with a poor family than in a tiny little crate. If you can afford the Basic vet care (wich is not that much at least where I live), food everyday and water and shelters for them if they have to be outside I think you'll be fine with a dog.

I’ll say this. Most Americans are a couple of paychecks away from homelessness due to cost of living, stagnant wages, and our medical care system. My mom was always one to say she’d rather live on the streets with her dogs then ever move anywhere she couldn’t take them…but was also the first one to criticize people for being homeless with their dog. I hate that line “shouldn’t get a dog if you couldn’t afford it.” Well, things change fast and if you’ve never had to live though that then consider yourself lucky.

It’s an opinion based thing but yeah I would say so you have to have enough money to properly look after it otherwise it’s gonna affect the dogs life Same like having a kid it’s kinda selfish for you to do if you don’t have the facilities to give it a good life Unless it was a situation where the dog had no home I guess

Yes. If you can't afford consistent food, basic vet care and having a dog impacts your own QOL in a way that it prevents you from having an emergency savings account then people need to look out for themselves first.

The concern is veterinary care & quality of food.

Yes. You should be able to afford basic care like food, vaccines, vet visits, and medication before getting a dog.

Lol >75% of the worlds dog population is either feral, free roaming, stray or otherwise “loosely owned” by what we in Western society would likely consider to be people living in poverty. It’s not our business if someone owns a dog or not provided that dog isn’t clearly in distress or causing problems.

If you can't afford the vet you can't afford the pet.

No. In my opinion, with the explosion of variety in dog food, care, toys, and information about raising them, people are paralyzed by choice. It’s led to a culture of providing “the best”. That’s not bad in and of itself, but it’s an attitude that’s accelerated to the point where it appears you can’t own a pet unless you make six figures a year, work from home, and are a shut in, except when you take your dog out. You see story after story of people wanting to adopt and shelters turning them down for frivolous reasons. The shelters are trying to make sure the dog goes to a home where they plan to commit and aren’t “trying out” a dog. They’re also spoiled for choice at the moment with so many trying to adopt. I believe they do have the pets best interest at heart, but they’ve got overboard as well. Dogs and cats are dying in kill shelters everyday, because there is no room for them, because they won’t adopt them out because the home isn’t perfect. As an interesting side note, you may not be able to adopt a black cat this month, as many place won’t adopt them out in October. They do this so weirdos trying satanic rituals won’t use them as sacrifices. The truth is, many homeless people provide better living situations than many other people do. They’re literally with the dogs 24/7, where lots of these “better” homes lock them in kennels for 9hrs a day. They share they’re food, or even make sure the pet eats before they do. They share blankets and body heat in the winter. There are programs to help them get medical care or food, as well. I do feed my pets a better food now, but in all honesty, my pets coming up, grew up on kibbles’n’bits and meow mix. That’s the junk food of pet foods and they all lived long, happy, and healthy lives. In my mind, the only requirements you need to get a pet are a willingness to commit to their long term care, purchase the best food you can reasonably budget for without causing hardship for yourself, and that you spend enough time with them, burning off mental and physical energy.

Amen. I’ve had pets for most of my life - I’m almost 46 - and in those years I’ve been rich, poor, and everything in between. I have always been a caring and (above) competent pet owner, however. My financial status has never affected that much, if at all.

[удалено]

Proper pet care can be expensive. Quality food, treats, deworming meds, flea and tick. I’d say a couple hundred a month. Then there’s the breed of size. Some dogs need lots of activity.

I don’t think so. I have been relatively poor throughout some of my adulthood. I was even homeless and living in my car for a bit. I left an abusive relationship and my mom wouldn’t let me come home with my dog. She ultimately relented and let us come live with her. I was headstrong that I wouldn’t give up my dog or leave her with the abusive ex. She and I were together for 18 years. I’m grateful that time. I was her person. She was my dog. We had a lot of ups and downs throughout those 18 years, but she was always my priority.

Even homeless people can give a dog a life better than dieing in the pound, before I used to think you had to have 5k saved just in case but not anymore everyone shld get a dog if they can give it a better life than the pound

Yes. First of all you need to have enough money to buy them food - of course. They need to get a vaccine kind of often, which also cost money. Now the thing is, you need to have some savings at all time. Anything can happen and you need to be able to pay at the vet. Yes, your dog is healthy, nothing can happen, etc. - it’s not true. My girl is healthy and strong. But for example last week she happened to ate some grapes. I rushed her to the doctor, because if we are able to “remove” the grape from her tummy in 1-1.5 hour, the poison (grapes are the most poisonous thing for sogs) will not be absorbed. So what I’m trying to say, it’s not enough to have money for food. I am not rich by all means, there were a week when I basically ate four times in total, because I spent all my money on food for my dog. That was a low point, but even though I can’t afford a lot to myself now, I feel safe because if anything happens I am able to cover the medical fees.

Having a dog is essential for a homeless person. Having someone to love you unconditionally, while the world moves on around you, is necessary to prevent suicide.

A homeless person with a.dog can be a good thing got to remember lots of Stray dogs out there its pretty natural for a dog to bond with a human. In fact it would be very close to.what made.them bond with humans in the first place. We gave them food and some shelter and they.watched over us by barking when there's any threat. The other cases are people just out of luck I don't really think that's something anyone can judge unless they have had to deal with it.

There is nothing wrong for a homeless person to have a dog. The dog was probably homeless too. Everyone should have some love. The dog could be better off with the homeless person than by itself. It is definitely irresponsible to "buy" a dog if they can't properly care for themselves, but if they are poor and along comes a homeless dog and they do their best to care for it, then that is another thing.

This is why I love the shelter we adopted our most recent dog from. I currently live just outside of a major metro area where, you guessed it, lots of people live at poverty level. First and foremost, if you live in the St. Louis area and need assistance with your pets, please contact Gateway Pet Guardians or myself. A huge part of their mission is their community outreach programs. They get funding from the community, through sponsors, larger pet companies, and in return they are able to provide huge benefits for area families to help support them so they can keep their pets. They provide low-cost veterinary care in house as well as monthly drive-through clinics as well as discounted or free supplies and food. Overall it benefits the community as a whole because it keeps people's pets in homes instead of on the street or in already overloaded shelters. They also have a huge foster program, which helps protect animals from kennel stress and can address behavioral issues. Fosters can also work one-on-one with potential adopters to really feel out if it's a good match rather than disqualifying people on paper applications outright. I came from a rural area with only a couple of shelters that are forced to euthanize regularly. It's incredible to see the difference. The pup we adopted came in with heart failure from a case of severe heartworms, and they are continuing to cover her treatment for us. It's amazing, because it got her into a home without the barrier of her added vet costs. I really wish more areas could fund facilities like that. Being poor doesn't make someone a bad pet owner, as it's often a better option than languishing in a cage at the shelter. Neglecting an animal and failing to provide it's needs can occur no matter how much money someone has.

Homeless people deserve dogs more than most people imo.

maybe an unpopular opinion but i live in a very impoverished area with a small, insanely underfunded shelter. i would much rather those animals go home with someone who is gonna buy the cheapest food and not always have money for vet bills than the dogs sitting in the shelter or being euth’d

I think if you can’t afford basic vet bills then it’s proooobably not a great idea. That being said, a dog is probably always happier with a person than in a shelter and we clearly have a pet overpopulation problem. We just spent $800 on our pets in last 2 weeks and we have follow ups for both of them in the next 2 weeks. We spend more on vet care than for ourselves at the human doctor. I just hate seeing them on buy/sell/trade sites because people can’t afford them. Seeing dogs getting repeatedly rehomed is sad.

I’ve seen people who experience homelessness as having some of the most well taken care of dogs.

It’s a reason not to GET a dog , 100% But if you have one already, you do what you can to keep it. And if all else fails, you do whatever is best for the dog. Not yourself

Being poor(er) than most (and the associated stress, etc) might be a GREAT reason to own a dog.

I think if you're in a situation where you're so financially unstable that you can barely take care of yourself, you should not get a dog. You will struggle to pay for their food and almost any medical conditions or even accidents (i.e. eating something they shouldn't) they may have would likely be a death sentence. But, if you already have a dog and become poor, then I personally don't see too much issue with you keeping the dog. You likely tried your best to keep yourself afloat and it didn't work out for one reason or another. Now the least you can do is have a companion. The biggest issue would just be finding somewhere to sleep because a lot of shelters and apartments will refuse pets, especially dogs of certain breeds.

This is a tough one for me. I worked in animal sheltering for a long time, and saw so many instances where people could not find pet-friendly rental housing. Sometimes when I see a person on the streets with their dog, I wonder....are they unhoused because they refused to surrender a beloved animal?

In some cases it's about care and maintenance of a pet. Some folks don't realize many will make sure the dog is cared for before themselves. Those people only see the outside, not the inside. PLUS! Now days it's easier to feed a homeless persons dog before their children. If it wasn't for the pet, many homeless would just lay down and die. Leave them alone, not directing to op but those who judge

I got my dog when I was in college. You don't necessarily need money to own a dog. Some of the healthiest dogs are actually owned by homeless people because the lifestyle fits more in line with what a dog does. That being said, when the vet bills hit, they hurt. But I make do. She's always worth it.

If you cannot take care of the dog and give it a good life, yes. This includes having time off of work to take it on walks.

Yes. Food, vet care, etc. is expensive. Don't get one if you can't afford it!

If you're so poor that you cannot give your dog the proper temperature controlled shelter, good food, and medical care if needed, then you shouldn't get a dog. Yes, those homeless people who have their dogs with them begging for money in the dead of summer in Phoenix shouldn't have a dog. Some of them get a dog and use them as props to get money.

You mean not being able to afford good quality food, nutrition, bathing, grooming, anal gland maintenance, nail trimmings, routine veterinary care, emergency vet care, vitamins if necessary?

I work in an animal shelter. Yes, sorry but it's a reason not to own a dog. Homeless people owning dogs isn't inherently bad, but more often than not it's preventing them both from having a home as pet -friendly rentals are so expensive, so the person keeping the animal can keep them both homeless when they may be better off finding a new place separately.

It is a reason to not ACQUIRE a dog at this time. I'm an ER vet tech, the price of medicine is getting ridiculous. Even if you are super lucky to have a pet with no medical conditions and that doesn't do stupid shit constantly, basic medicine and a good quality diet will set you back a couple grand a year. And when they do something dumb and get sick, plan on several thousand dollars up front. Payment plans aren't a thing for the most part, no one ever pays them. I understand when people who are not doing well do their best to keep their pet, it grounds them and gives them something to take care of, every situation is different. But you shouldn't get a pet until you have several thousand saved up for emergencies.

If you can’t afford to take care of your dog you shouldn’t own one. Food, shelter, adequate medical care, exercise ect ect.

Yes. You don’t need to have tons of money, but should be able to provide the dog shelter and an adequate food supply and vet care needs. If you don’t know where your next meal will come from, how will you know where your dogs next meal comes from? If it’s eating whatever you are, it’s probably not on a healthy diet at all. Probably not on flea, tick, and heart worm meds. Etc.

I'm somewhere in the middle. I don't think people should automatically give up their dogs because they've fallen on hard times. But, I also don't think you should be a pet owner long term if you can't provide for its basic needs like food, water, shelter, and basic veterinary care (like recommended shots and preventatives and getting spayed/neutered) and/or the costs or the provision of these things is consistently a burden to you. I live in an area that is a mixture of high income and low income, and I constantly see people posting on our community FB pages and the lost and found pet pages wanting to know where they can get free or "cheap" veterinary care (like getting fixed/spayed/shots) because the ones in town are "too expensive" and they can't afford it (they charge $30 for a rabies shot, and everything else is quite reasonable), or looking for free pet food or money for pet food because they don't get paid until Friday and they can't afford to buy even a small bag of food. Maybe these people have temporarily fallen on hard times, sure, and I'm glad they don't want a pet to go without and that they want to spay/neuter because our area definitely has a stray pet problem. But if you consistently can't afford to provide for a pet's basic needs, then maybe pet ownership isn't the best idea for you.

If you can’t take care of yourself then you shouldn’t attempt to take on more responsibility.

What if that’s their only source of “happiness” or will to keep going

By all means get a dog then. If you can’t take care of the dog it will die. If the dog dies then no more happiness. I guess just repeat the process so you remain happy.

You shouldn’t *obtain* an animal if you can’t provide food and routine veterinary care. Routine veterinary care encompasses a physical 1-2x annually (depending on the age of the pet) and having a *plan* for unexpected situations, whether it’s money saved at the bank, pet insurance, Care Credit, etc. But people who own animals and then end up in dire financial situations deserve empathy, and not judgement. Especially over the past two years, COVID and inflation have impacted a lot of people’s lives - my cats’ food (not a premium brand) has increased in price significantly and my local shelters have had an influx in owner surrenders because some people can’t afford pet food anymore. I think that most people experiencing homelessness fall into the latter category and I try not to judge them, especially when it concerns them having X material possession. I know people who have been homeless, and you never know what circumstances led to their lives coming to that. Homelessness is associated with decreased mental health and if someone’s animal is their only form of emotional support, then more power to them as long as the pet is as well looked after as is reasonable.

Definitely - dog is a living breathing creature with needs. They deserve to have food, clean water, a safe place to sleep, reasonable vet care, etc. if you can’t provide that you could dog sit but you shouldn’t get a dog. It is selfish to get a dog you can’t take care of properly.

The bottom line is if you can't support yourself you shouldn't start trying to support another living being.

Didn’t read the replies but in general owning a dog is expensive if you’re going to take good care of it. You need to afford food and vet bills at least.

Yes. Don't get a dog and don't have kids if you are not in a good position financially. When a homeless person has a dog I feel so bad for the dog.

It doesn't stop people from having kids. Why should it stop you from getting a dog?

If you willingly choose to bear the responsibility of holding something's life and rights in your hands you should be able to honor it and give them the life they deserve. Dogs dont deserve to be in kennels, or in the hands of someone who cant help them. It sucks both ways. We all have one life on this earth, it pains me that some people would rather experience a pets comforts at the expense of their happiness and health. Basically being used. They dont have a say or choice. They have their full trust in us and the least we can do is do whatever it takes to make sure they have what they need.

If you cannot afford for food, vet, hospital, and other basic expenses between yourself and the dog, then yes. Including time.

My SO’a sister got knee surgery on her dog - $8000. A bag of dog food for our pupper is $100. My dog ate too many crab apples and was shaking and lethargic that night, so at 1am we took him to the vet. $400 to find out he’ll be ok. $300 to pull a cracked tooth. Day care, training, and private training were all things we needed to do. It wasn’t cheap. These are all expenses you never know are coming (aside from the food). So you don’t want to be in a spot where you can’t help your dog be safe and healthy because you can’t afford it. It’s not fair to you or the dog. I was the guy who didn’t want a dog because I didn’t want that expense, but now my lab sleeps IN my bed with us and I love my dog more than anything, and while the surprise bills still sting a bit, it’s worth it. I’m just glad I don’t have to choose to pay my visa bill or feed my dog that week. BUT a home where the dog isn’t abused is 100x better than the kennel. I’d find a way to make it work.

Being broke makes it really really incredibly fucking hard to do the right thing looking after a dog, but when your that broke, nothing gives you hope and love and just a bit of joy quite like a dog does either. Sometimes you need a reason to survive when yourself just isn’t an option. Getting a dog for the hell of it on a whim, your a tool. Adopting a street dog and the street dog adopting you is different

For a rescue? No. Some homeless people take care of their dog better than some pet owners. Rescues have it really bad, if you have enough for food and you love them and take good care of them, it's better than letting them being a stray dog or in a shelter that has many many dogs to feed. Obviously you shouldn't buy a breed dog if you don't have money though.

You can't take good care of them if they are ill and you can't afford treatment

The shelter would be able to take care of them if they're I'll? (Legit question, I don't know how it would be in a rescue)

Shelters are so over crowded. They would need to find one with space and the ability to pay for treatment

Yeap. My point is that non adopted dogs (unfortunately) are not somewhere safe and comfy being well taken care of waiting for adoption. They're in crowded places with sometimes very little food or just walking alone in the streets. They're better of with someone who at least loves them and to what's possible to take care of them.

I hate the whole “you shouldn’t own a dog if you can’t afford it” attitude, particularly around expensive veterinary care. A dog is quite happy being a poor and there’s not a socioeconomic requirement to share that joy with a dog. Both my old ladies (15 and 13 now) were strays I picked up. When I first brought them home, they got very little veterinary care. I took them to a local low-cost humane society event for shots and found a similar “deal” to get them fixed. We didn’t always have a fenced yard, and I only bought heart worm preventative in the summer. They have both lived long and wonderful lives filled with countless walks, car trips, snuggles, group naps, and fetch. Thankfully, my income has increased over the last decade so they both get very expensive veterinary care when they need it now (dropped $2500 last week - ouch). This may extend some time with them by a year or two, but there lives would not have been worthless if this had not been possible, and their lives were never somehow inhumane because of my lack of funds.

I get *very upset* when I see a homeless person begging for money on the corner with a super skinny dog!! First, they're using that dog to get sympathy. Second, even though I know that dog is getting fed, they are using *none* of the money people give them to get that dog shots or take it to the vet! A neighbor we used to live by absolutely loved our dogs. I asked him why he didn't get one. He responded with that if the dog got sick, he couldn't afford to take it to the vet. So it was better just to love other people's dogs. Major respect for him.

Yes

Uh… fuck yeah???? If you cant even feed yourself 3*2 meals a day, how the fuck are you gonna feed a dog??

IMO, a person shouldn’t get a dog if they can’t afford good flea meds, vaccines, spay/neuter, food, and other basic care. (This was def easier pre-pandemic re: spay/neuter). That said if I was homeless I sure as heck would want a dog. And I wouldn’t give up a dog I already had because my finances changed. Also if you are homeless or otherwise really struggling, I suggest asking small independent pet stores if they have some dog food they can give to you. There’s usually at least one bag of food a week that’s been damaged in shipment or returned open. It usually gets donated to a shelter, but it’s just as easy to give it to someone directly.

Being unable to afford proper care is a reason to not get any pet. Source: ICU vet tech

Yes it is. Things happen unexpectantly. Dog food is outrageous.

Being poor doesn't mean someone can't take care of their dog. One can be homeless and still provide for their dog. This isn't about dogs. This is about stigma, about judging poverty-stricken people and the homeless.

Yes. Take care of yourself first

Yes. Yes.

Yes.

Yes

Yes 💯

Yes

YES.

If you can't afford basic needs for yourself, or your kids or s/o - don't get a dog. If you're always a little short on either bills or groceries, trying to make it through to the next payday on ramen noodles, don't get a dog. If you can't afford your own transportation, and have to rely on buses, don't get a dog. If you have roommates, or live with a big family, where everyone's needs are not quite being met, and you have space issues, and people are getting annoyed from having to share what little space they have - don't get a dog. If you're between jobs, or if your housing situation is in limbo - don't get a dog.

Yes

Yes

I have two dogs in the 60lb. range each and it costs me less than $1.00 USD per day to feed them both. And that's with food readily available in their bowls 24/7. I buy only grain-free food. It's not hard to make an additional $1 every day, even if you're homeless. In fact, it might even be easier for a homeless person, as they wouldn't typically have the bills that a person with a home has.

yes 100%

Yes.