mastiff lover just to let you know you are often better off using your cc vouchers for deals- days out or whatever, rather than just for shopping. you can also join the x-mas club where your vouchers are only sent out in november (just before xmas) to help with the shopping. you can also add extra money into the xmas club at different times to to help save more.

a relative offered to put us up temporarily - condition being that he wouldn't take our dogs - so we lived in the car for nearly 2 months

There is no way on this earth I would put my dogs before my children and subject them to living like that. Ever.

What an extrodinary thread.

Many of the posters will still be paying out £22 per class at championship shows whilst scraping around finding ways to run their households - even to keep a roof above their head.

Am I the only one who thinks we live in a crazy world?

There is no way on this earth I would put my dogs before my children and subject them to living like that. Ever.

The poster did say she didn't have children when she lived in her car.

I have ot say, although it is not quite the same thing, I have wondered what i would do if I weren't allowed to keep all my dogs, as we live in military housing, and although we have permission to keep three dogs here, some people suggested we were not allowed, which got me thinking. The thought of not keeping one of my dogs, and having to chose which one I wouldn't keep is, well, unthinkable! I couldn't, and wouldnt' do it, and if it came to it, I would move out of army housing, which would have huge financial implictaions, and quite possibly mean moving away from my husband.

In the awful event we ended up homeless, my children would be able to stay with my Grandparents, although they wouldn't allow the dogs there, so dogs and I would have to find alternate accomodation.

> Many of the posters will still be paying out £22 per class at championship shows whilst scraping around finding ways to run their households - even to keep a roof above their head.
>

You know its not compulsory to go to shows just because you own dogs... ;-)

Jackson - am I right in thinking then that if the worse came to the worse & you had to move out of current accomodation because of your dogs, you would LEAVE your husband & have your parents look after your children whilst you & your 3 dogs find somewhere else to live.....really? is that honestly what you would do?

I'm not married but with a long term partner & don't have children...I do however have a lab who I adore however but under no circumstances would I jepordise my relationship or if I had them be separated from my children just to keep my lab.  Don't get me wrong I would exhaust all options before I gave her up to a rescue home & I would be distraught but surely your family should always be more important, after all (please don't have a go at me I know pets are a huge part of peoples lives! she is a massive part of my life) they are humans!!

Your response Jackson if I have read it right as in all honesty shocked me!

Doesnt shock me.. if keeping my dogs meant i had to temporarily live apart from my partner, I would do it.

When I got each and every one of my dogs it was on the understanding that they were with me, forever.

Forever is not until it becomes inconvenient... forever isnt until it becomes too expensive or awkward..it is forever.

I dont see anyone saying they would rehome their children before their dogs, but that they wouldnt MAKE a choice between dogs and children. they would sort things so that both were adequately provided for.

As for me and my partner... well if he doesnt care enough for the dogs that hed put up with the temporary inconvenience of us living apart.. hes not the man I think he is.

As for teh comments on real poverty..

Hmm. Try two people, two cats and a dog living  on less than £75 a week total income.

This is my best friend... she made some mistakes a few years ago, then she had to change job and she is now retraining as a hairdresser. Doing one day at college and getting under £75 a week... her rent arrears, if she paid what the council want her to pay, would be more than she brings home.

I see her in tears most weeks with letters from the bailiffs, she fell foul as many do, of the 'consolidate your debts blah blah' adverts a few years back, she got some stuff (sofa, fridge) on ridiculous credit terms when with a now ex partner... who then upped and left her with all the debt..

Her current partner is doing his best but is struggling as a 28 year old with no real education, his only real value to an employer is his clean driving licence.. and a huge 18 month gap in his employment record, to find work.

No one wants a 28 year old with no qualifications or experience (hes worked in a camera shop and got quals from that, and worked in warehouses, and hes got an HND in popular music, which is effectively worthless in the real world).. not when they can hire a 16 year old, pay them very little and treat them as if they are still in school.

Some people on here could try paying for everything they do and have in a week on just £75 and tell me if thats not real poverty...

Currently I buy their dog food.. and he is insured to drive my van, which means he can take up the opportunity of random shifts watching motorway 'free breakdown' cameras... I'm not rich by any means.. but I know just HOW easily any one of us.. yes even those of you with two good incomes, two cars, nice house with sensible mortage... can end up in a shop doorway. That line between normal and homeless is VERY fine people... unbelievabley so.

Not something you believe until you have been there, as I have.. hopefully no one on here will have to experience that because it truly shakes you up and removes that sense of security you once had.

Gembo, that isn't quite what I am saying.

If I couldn't keep the dogs where I live now, I would find alternate accomodation for myself, dogs and my children, which would probably mean living apart from my husband. I wouldn't LEAVE him, just not live together. However, that doesn't seem such a big deal to me, as we sometimes have to live apart due to his job anyway.

If (and it's purely hypothetical) we ended up homeless with nowhere to live, the only place being my Grandparents, where the dogs would nto be able to stay, then yes, the children woudl stay with my Grandparents so I could stay with the dogs, wherever that may be, until something was sorted out. It's simply not likely to happen though, so as I say, purely hypothetical. The children woudl be fine, the dogs woudl be fine,, so I really don't see the problem personally?

The ONLY reason I would rehome my dogs would be if it were in their long term best interests, and even then it would be an absolute, absolute last resort after all other avenues had been explored.

lets face it everyone on here who has pets would do there very best to keep them, however other factres sometimes have to be dealt with.
eg, putting your kids 1st (as you would if you have them) or losing jobs, partners etc.
If we had to make that awful chioce then its help we need not judgement.

Well I've just lost my house - due to a marriage breakdown.  We'd just re-mortgaged and my ex walked out taking our son with him and clearing the bank account.

The house was on the market for 8 months and in that time I worked lots of overtime and scrimped and saved to try to pay and keep a roof over my head.  But it just wasn't possible and was recently re-possessed.  I also have other debts (taken out in my name cos ex had bad credit rating) and the re-mortgage money was supposed to be clearing those off too - but obviously they didn't.  I havn't paid them for 3 months and am now facing being taken to court.

Thanks to my parents I managed to find a house to rent and was able to keep my 3 dogs and 3 cats.  I pay my rent and my parents pay for my food and petrol.  My son stays here 3 nights a week, but unfortunately my ex isn't allowing him to stay here any more than that.  My solicitor is dealing with it all and it will end with a court battle for custody.

My ex is also claiming the family tax credit - saying he is main carer of child.  Childs school, doctors, dentist and child benefit is all registered in my name.  He also receives housing benefit and council tax reduced too.  I've been told I'm not entitled to anything at all. 

One of my dogs is due to have a TPLO on Thursday this week.  I've had to beg the referral vets to claim direct from my dog insurance and explain my whole situation to them and luckily they have agreed to do this because of my circumstances.  If not I have no idea what I would have done.

I work full time, I don't smoke, I don't drink and I don't go out, other than walking my dogs.  I eat basic food, but make sure there is a decent meal for my son when he is here. 

I don't think I'd still be sane if it wasn't for the unconditional love that my dogs give me.

wow that's a lot for you to deal with )))))bighug((((
and it is just as i was saying.
No matter how bad i think i have it there is always someone in a wrose sitution ( yourself ) and it puts things it perseptive doesn't it.
I'm gald you have your dogs for comfot..
bless you.
xxxxx

massive {{{hug}}} shadows mum, hope you get things sorted out ok.

    > Many of the posters will still be paying out £22 per class at championship shows whilst scraping around finding ways to run their households - even to keep a roof above their head.
    >

You know its not compulsory to go to shows just because you own dogs..

i think the poster meant that people say they struggle to live, cut back on clothes, food, heating, don't spend much on the kids, dont smoke drink etc, may live on benifits or a very low income, etc, but still manage to find the money for champ shows etc. Or at least thats how I read it.....and to be honest, if you can find money to fund an expensive hobby then really you are not broke, you simply chose to live that way which is the difference. The expensive hobby can be stopped, much the same as smoking or drinking or expensive toys/clothes etc, can bes topped,  to me being broke means there is nothing left to cut out and day to day living is almost impossible.

And I send a huge (((((((((((((((hugs))))))))))))))) to shadows mum too.

I would say that people like me who are not well off still have enough of a margin, in our affluent and wasteful society (we do have a welfare system) to choose to cut out some things, some consider essential, going out, holidays, Pay TV, smoking drinking, bus fares if they can walk etc, in order to have that hobby so they have something to counterbalance the daily drudgery/loneliness.

Shows are expensive, but you can do as few as you can afford or as many as you can afford, and still be part of the Social network which keeps many of us going along with the affection of the animals themselves 24/7.

I prefer to only buy clothes when they wear out (still have and wear stuff I had 10 years ago, like going out shoes), eat nutritious but cheap food, and wear layers when it is cold in the day rather than put the heating on.

The topic is whether the Credit crunch is forcing people to give up their pets, and in the Vast majority of cases it would seem they don't have to, they prefer to rather than give up something else.

> The topic is whether the Credit crunch is forcing people to give up their pets, and in the Vast majority of cases it would seem they don't have to, they prefer to rather than give up something else

Precisely ! and that just proves that the animal doesn't mean as much to them as it should. To me, and to most 'true' dog owners, or should I say owners who hold their animals in the highest regard, your dog is as important as any human member of your family. No way in a million years would you choose to give up your child - why would you do that to your dog? You choose to have children - they are for life regardless of the changes for good or bad that life throws at you. You choose to have a dog - shouldn't those same principles apply?
If you cannot say that your dog is as important as any other family member, maybe you shouldn't have a dog!!

> Precisely ! and that just proves that the animal doesn't mean as much to them as it should. To me, and to most 'true' dog owners, or should I say owners who hold their animals in the highest regard, your dog is as important as any human member of your family. No way in a million years would you choose to give up your child - why would you do that to your dog? You choose to have children - they are for life regardless of the changes for good or bad that life throws at you. You choose to have a dog - shouldn't those same principles apply?
> If you cannot say that your dog is as important as any other family member, maybe you shouldn't have a dog!!

This is in your opinion not fact :-)

> Precisely ! and that just proves that the animal doesn't mean as much to them as it should. To me, and to most 'true' dog owners, or should I say owners who hold their animals in the highest regard, your dog is as important as any human member of your family. No way in a million years would you choose to give up your child - why would you do that to your dog? You choose to have children - they are for life regardless of the changes for good or bad that life throws at you. You choose to have a dog - shouldn't those same principles apply?
> If you cannot say that your dog is as important as any other family member, maybe you shouldn't have a dog!!

Totally agree!

That is how it should be but for a lot of dog owners they are just showing, breeding, ego machines. Easily disposed of when they're of no use or too much trouble.

Yes Angels2, this is only my opinion :)
Would it be a fact that, if you ( and I don't mean you personally :) ) could give up your dog before giving up the often unnecessary and luxurious items in your life eg, holidays,tv, drinking, smoking etc then you are not much of a dog owner?  or put it another way - if these things are far more important in your life than your dog, then, in my opinion, you cannot call yourself a good dog owner because youy would only be a good dog owner when it suits you...

> 'true' dog owners, or should I say owners who hold their animals in the highest regard, your dog is as important as any human member of your family

Well I cant be a 'true' dog owner then. Given your criteria I shouldn't be allowed to own a dog because I happen to believe that my son is more important than any of my dogs. How shocking!

Toolz, I'm not saying and have never said a dog should be more important than your children, just as important and you actually highlighted that in the quote! I'm actually saying you should give up unnecessary luxuries when the financial going gets tough instead of your dog! I'm sorry if I did not make that clear :)

> Would it be a fact that, if you ( and I don't mean you personally :-) ) could give up your dog before giving up the often unnecessary and luxurious items in your life eg, holidays,tv, drinking, smoking etc then you are not much of a dog owner?  or put it another way - if these things are far more important in your life than your dog, then, in my opinion, you cannot call yourself a good dog owner because youy would only be a good dog owner when it suits you...

Yes I would agree that if you gave up your dog before luxury items of course you couldn't really claim to love your dog.......but my children are still more important than my dogs, this doesn't mean I don't love my dogs or make me a bad owner as I would give up everything else for them :-)

> When I got each and every one of my dogs it was on the understanding that they were with me, forever.
>
> Forever is not until it becomes inconvenient... forever isnt until it becomes too expensive or awkward..it is forever.

me too theemx.  I would do anything to keep my dog as she is dependent on me and didn't ask to live in my household so it is my responsibility to do everything I can to make her life as great as possible.

No I very clearly understood that you said that my dog should be as important as my child
...........and I am saying that none of my dogs are as important. I feel that my child is much more important than any animal but this doesn't mean that I am in anyway an unsuitable owner..... nor does it mean that any dog of mine would suffer due to any hardships I may suffer.
Sorry to be pedantic, but this forum is read by a wider public and I would hate to perpetuate the opinion of many, that dog people are out of step with the rest of humanity !!

Must agree with you there tooolz. I do love my dogs too and do my utmost to meet their needs but they are in no way as important as my children. I hope my children all know they are considerably more important than the dogs, and I certainly love my dogs but there is no comparison, and that does not make me a bad owner ! In fact I am happy to say I love my husband more than the dogs too!!!!

I have to say I agree. I love all my dogs and they are all my babies but my daughter is my daughter and there is just no comparison if it came down to it. I gave birth birth to my daughter and she is my flesh and blood and while I love all my dogs and horses that love doesn't quite equal the love I feel for my little girl. Of course I would do anything I could for the dogs and I have no intention of ever giving them up without a fight but I would kill for my daughter!!

As for loving OH more than the dogs....I wouldn't go quite that far!!!!!!;-) :-D

> As for loving OH more than the dogs....I wouldn't go quite that far!!!!!!

Oh brilliant, a woman after my own heart :-)

I would say that my children (and partner if I had one) are the most important to me, but my dogs are probably equally important to me as other family members, friends etc, but more important to me than humanity in general or strangers.

I wouldn't give my dogs up though if a close family member wanted me to.

Must agree with you there tooolz. I do love my dogs too and do my utmost to meet their needs but they are in no way as important as my children. I hope my children all know they are considerably more important than the dogs, and I certainly love my dogs but there is no comparison, and that does not make me a bad owner ! In fact I am happy to say I love my husband more than the dogs too!!!!

Right there with you.

I'v gone to school with frends who always felt second to the animals, when they needed new school things, or shoes, or help with homework, the animals always had to come first, there was no spare money etc etc. As if their childs education and wellbeing were less important than the animals. :( Why have children if you are not going to care for them, stay with animals instead.

I wonder how the credit crunch will affect puppy sales? Whilst I'm sure there is still plenty of money out there, people are going to be less likely to spend it until things ease off again. (And the press shut up!)

The topic is whether the Credit crunch is forcing people to give up their pets, and in the Vast majority of cases it would seem they don't have to, they prefer to rather than give up something else.

Sorry, but where is the evidence of that statement? How could it be proven that the majority of dogs that are being rehomed for financial reasons are not exactly that? Dosen't the KC itself have a welfare dept where those that are falling on hard times can contact and the kc will arrange, with descretion, the rehoming of the dogs etc? Or has that stopped now?

I would say that people like me who are not well off still have enough of a margin, in our affluent and wasteful society (we do have a welfare system) to choose to cut out some things, some consider essential, going out, holidays, Pay TV, smoking drinking, bus fares if they can walk etc, in order to have that hobby so they have something to counterbalance the daily drudgery/loneliness

There are many people that are like you, their choice of TV or sitting in a pub nursing a pint (its actually cheaper to nurse a pint all night in the warmth than stay in if you don't have kids to consider) have holidays, smoking, which is just as essential to them to combat the drudgery of everyday living as your show/breeding hobby is to you. They would consider your hobby wasteful and extravagent and not essential, just as you feel their lifestyle is such. Its just a matter of opinion, what the money from welfare is spent on. To each his own. :)

> There are many people that are like you, their choice of TV or sitting in a pub nursing a pint (its actually cheaper to nurse a pint all night in the warmth than stay in if you don't have kids to consider) have holidays, smoking, which is just as essential to them to combat the drudgery of everyday living as your show/breeding hobby is to you. They would consider your hobby wasteful and extravagant and not essential, just as you feel their lifestyle is such. Its just a matter of opinion, what the money from welfare is spent on. To each his own. :)

I would totally agree with the perception of what makes life worth living in the above. but the difference is when you choose to keep animals your dealing with sentient beings, when you choose to give up an allotment or stamp collecting, football, having a pint, buying new outfits, etc your not affecting living creatures welfare, other than those who gain a living from your interest.

Just wanted to say thanks for all the hugs!!  Its nice to come on here and get moral support.  My work colleagues just tell me to get rid of my dogs as they are more trouble and expense than they are worth.  They could never be further from the truth.

If you had bothered to read my post properly Calmstorm, you would see that this happened before I had my daughter ;-)

But I am not ashamed to say that should it happen again for whatever reason, then I too would choose to live apart from my OH and daughter if it meant caring for my dogs - until such time that we could all live again as a family. IMHO it's like saying if you had a financial crisis then you would put your children into care. It's absolutely no different with my dogs, they didn't ask me to take them on - so why should they suffer because I have been irresponsible enough/not made provisions to keep them?

my dogs are just as important to me as childern would be if i had them.
But of course kids would and should always come 1st with people who have them its only right.
The bond a Mum has with her kids is unbreakable (or so i am told).

>> As for loving OH more than the dogs....I wouldn't go quite that far!!!!!!
> Oh brilliant, a woman after my own heart :-)

Mine too!  I am single at the moment, but I know damn well that any man interested in me seriously will either understand and accept that my dogs are my priority, or will have to get lost LOL!  The one man right now who does want me actually understands this - alas, I don't feel the same way!!  Typical :-P

> I wouldn't give my dogs up though if a close family member wanted me to.

I wouldn't and I haven't - my dad has suggested/asked me/told me numerous times to rehome my oldest and youngest two, and I have flat refused each time.  He seems to be under the illusion that because they are rescues, and I haven't had them from pups like the other two, that they are less important to me but it simply isn't the case.

I did read your post and I did see it was before you had children but my point stands.

IMHO it's like saying if you had a financial crisis then you would put your children into care

Then our opinions will remain to differ because I do not rate animals as highly as my children. I would not chose to upset my children by living apart from them.

if the choice was did I care enough for my dog to find it another home rather than starve it or make it face a bleak future, by not being able to afford medical care etc, then yes I would love it enough over my own feelings for it to find it a new home. Would I want an elderly, artheritic dog to have to freeze in a car midwinter...no I wouldn't. I would do the best I could with it and if that meant another home or worst case the dog was very elderly and needed to be pts I would do that. because I love my dog, and if I couldn't care for it correctly then I would do something for it.

of course its different with dogs, they are not human children we have given birth to, they are animals.

I would totally agree with the perception of what makes life worth living in the above. but the difference is when you choose to keep animals your dealing with sentient beings, when you choose to give up an allotment or stamp collecting, football, having a pint, buying new outfits, etc your not affecting living creatures welfare, other than those who gain a living from your interest.

Who says those that are giving up their dogs are doing it on a whim? Who says all these things havent already been given up? Its a bit cruel for anyone who finds themselves in this situation to make claims that may not be true. The people giving up their dogs due to finances may never have even contemplated it before the belt tightened. maybe those with just one dog can cope, but the multi dog house, breeders, show people, may not be able to cope which is something that was discovered a while ago and a welfare number was issued by the Kc to help those who thought their dogs were n bad conditions and needed help, and rehoming. This is not a new thing, its gone on for years even in the higher archy of the dog world, hense the Kc's help.

There are worse things than death. And worse things than keeping an animal without being able to look after it. True love can be giving up something to give it a better life.

of course its different with dogs, they are not human children we have given birth to, they are animals.

That is the point I was trying to make too!! Of course I love my dogs, I wouldn't have them and work so hard for them if I didn't but I gave birth to my daughter and she will always come above anybody else and that includes my partner I'm afraid. The dogs do come a very close 2nd but if it was a choice and it meant either my daughter would have to go without food and a roof over her head or I would have to rehome a dog I'm sorry to say my daughter would win. There may be people who don't understand this but that is just the way it is for me. Of course I wouldn't give up any of the dogs without a fight and like somebody else said I have been told time and time again by my Dad to get rid of the dogs and horses as I would have loads more money. There is no way on earth I would without me being absolutely desperate.

Yes, Calmstorm I will agree that we differ on this subject and I disagree with you, you couldn't have read my post thoroughly as you would have quite clearly seen that children's welfare didn't come into it at that time.

Nor was I advocating putting your children into care but just using it as an example.

As we have already established, my dogs are on the same par as my daughter. Nor would I choose to upset my dogs by living apart from them.

I made an informed decision based on the facts at that point in time and in hindsight, my decision was the right one. They certainly didn't starve and medical care - had it have been needed would have been provided, no matter what - Thankfully my dogs were not elderly or suffering from any other ailments that beset them at the ages they were.

>because I love my dog, and if I couldn't care for it correctly then I would do something for it.<

At the time, I did care for my dogs correctly and of course if I had felt that I couldn't have then, yes I would have done something about it ;-)

My post was about responsibility and so far I have demonstrated this with my child/dog commitments and will continue to do so. As the saying goes ' a dog is for life not for Christmas - or any other time when you feel like it! My commitments also extend to keeping our employees in work and paid regularly, I would not under any circumstances jeopardise them anymore than I would myself.

>of course its different with dogs, they are not human children we have given birth to, they are animals<

Yes they are animals but they still deserve the same care, attention and love as children - human or otherwise - IMHO, giving birth to them doesn't come into it - you take on the commitment and responsibility of them then you do your utmost to serve that commitment.

Having worked in an Animal Rescue sanctuary I have seen the devastation bestowed upon the victims (dogs) - Believe it or not most of them are in there because of marital break ups, couples having children - so the dog has to go - and people dying or just plain neglect where the people (for want of a better word) are just bored with their dog or those that purport to not be able to afford them anymore - you know the one's, they smoke, drink and gamble!!!

At the end of the day (how I hate that expression) it's all about how seriously you take your responsibilities in life.

I do not rate animals as highly as my children. I would not chose to upset my children by living apart from them.


Have to agree, family is very important, what message does that give to your children and husband that you would prefer to live with your dog than with them, just because they are pysically ok, i.e roof over their head, food and a bed at a relatives or friends does not mean that mentally they are ok with it, nothing is supposed to ever come before a mother and her child, I love my girl to bits it would break my heart but she would be at a friends, a relatives, or perhaps an arrangement could be made with a rescue or the RSPCA to look after my girl until I could have her back if there were a possibility, but seperting from my children and my husband never! To me that is a failure as a human being, as a mother and as a wife.

I will happily take on my friends two dogs if she needs to come and stay with me, but I have the room and she only has 2 dogs.

But for instance my mother has 7 dogs, at present, her mortgage is paid for etc, she is financially secure, but hyperthetically what if she were suddenly to find herself in financial woes and needed to come and live with me, would I wish to take on her 7 dogs, no, I wouldn't sorry but I wouldn't, as much as my mum loves them she would have to condense, most probably to other family members being so many of us, :-D but that does not make me a bad daughter, and many people especially with more than 2 dogs may find themselves in similar situations.

'Yes they are animals but they still deserve the same care, attention and love as children - human or otherwise - IMHO, giving birth to them doesn't come into it - you take on the commitment and responsibility of them then you do your utmost to serve that commitment.'

No it may not be giving birth to them that counts, but children's needs should always take precedence over those of dogs in my opinion . If in dire financial straits there are many things I would consider before rehoming my dogs but NO way would I be parted from my children. There may actually be occasions when it is less selfish to give a dog a better life with someone who can afford to feed it well, pay vets bills etc. However to let your children go is totally different and luckily most people in this country recognise the rights of the child over those of dogs.    

Sorry can't paste properly but my reply was to Hairypooch's post.

My boys would be completely heartbroken if we got rid of our dogs, no matter what the reason, I'm quite sure the boys would never forgive me.

They would much rather sleep in a different place than me in order for us to keep the dogs (I've just asked them!!), they would not feel it was them being hard done by. As dogs are part of the family, getting rid of them effects the kids aswell.

'getting rid of them' wasn't what I had in mind anyway (sounds very heartless put like that) I had more in mind letting my two go back to their breeders while we tried to sort ourselves out in a desperate situation. My children adore our dogs too and would similarly hate to part with them.   

I do not rate animals as highly as my children. I would not chose to upset my children by living apart from them.

Have to agree, family is very important, what message does that give to your children and husband that you would prefer to live with your dog than with them, just because they are pysically ok, i.e roof over their head, food and a bed at a relatives or friends does not mean that mentally they are ok with it, nothing is supposed to ever come before a mother and her child, I love my girl to bits it would break my heart but she would be at a friends, a relatives, or perhaps an arrangement could be made with a rescue or the RSPCA to look after my girl until I could have her back if there were a possibility, but seperting from my children and my husband never! To me that is a failure as a human being, as a mother and as a wife.

My children absolutely know that I love them and that they are extremely important to me. they are well adjusted, outgoing and confident individuals. My husband also knows how much I love him and I cannot imagine living without him. However, both my chidlren and husband know and understand that as well as a mother and a wife, I am my own person with my own interests and other things in my life apart from them, that are also hugely important to me.

My children have often stayed with my Grandparents for holidays, or while my husband and I go on holiday on our own, and are not upset about it, why should temporarily living aprt from us and staying with family members be so different? Why on earth would it upset them? Surely the fact that it wouldn't shows my success as a parent?

My children have often stayed with my Grandparents for holidays, or while my husband and I go on holiday on our own, and are not upset about it, why should temporarily living aprt from us and staying with family members be so different? Why on earth would it upset them? Surely the fact that it wouldn't shows my success as a parent?

I wouldn't chose to holiday away from my children when they were young, why would I? I didn't have children and then expect to continue to live the single no responsibilities lifestyle. With children comes a different, selfless lifestyle, if you don't want them with you, don't want to put their needs above yours and animals...then why bother?...IMO.

Yes, time away with extended family is good for them, but not for extended periods, at least not for me and mine. They are very confident teens, have happily gone off to adventure holidays alone cadets etc....but at an age when they understood time lapses. And not at a time of heightened family emotions, depression...suffering that comes with debt. At such times I would want to be there to reasure them all would be well, not go off and live elsewhere just because of a dog.

if it dosent affect the child, then why not put the dogs out to foster or find them new homes, they should be good natured family dogs eaisily able to adapt to change if bought up the same as your children.

I can'tr speak fro why you might or moght not do something, only myself, and the reason I chose to go on holiday without my children is that it gives them the opportunity to go 'on holiday' with their Great Grandparents (my Grandparents also sometimes take the children on holiday without us), it give myself and my partner much needed time alone together as my chidlren are from my first marriage, and we do not live near any family members who can babysit the odd night, so prefer to do things the way we do. My circumstances have changed since I chose to have children, and we have all adapted accordingly, but I absolutely do not live a 'single, no responsibilities lifestyle'

It wouldn't affect my child negatively to stay with much loved relatives, but I wouldn't send them to stay with someone I or they didn't know. Equally, I wouldn't do that to my dogs.

We have been to the brink many times but always manage to get back up and live to fight another day. As far as my dogs are concerned, they are not negotiable. Many years ago, before we had our daughter we had to sell our house because we couldn't afford the mortgage due to redundancy and a relative offered to put us up temporarily - condition being that he wouldn't take our dogs - so we lived in the car for nearly 2 months whilst we got ourselves sorted. So having been there and done that, I can see no reason for anybody to re-home their dogs unless in absolute dire straits i.e. not even a car to live in. There are jobs out there, however menial to keep the wolf from the door

I didn't actually say you had children then, but your post reads as above. I simply said I would never subject my kids to living in a car. ever.

As we have already established, my dogs are on the same par as my daughter. Nor would I choose to upset my dogs by living apart from them.

Your ideas of parenting and mine obviously differ. Upsetting my dogs would be minor to upsetting my child....

They certainly didn't starve and medical care - had it have been needed would have been provided, no matter what

if you had money for vet bills?

s they are animals but they still deserve the same care, attention and love as children - human or otherwise - IMHO, giving birth to them doesn't come into it - you take on the commitment and responsibility of them then you do your utmost to serve that commitment.

of course they deserve good care, time and commitment. And likewise, children come into your life and your lifestyle changes, they take priority,   you take on the commitment and responsibility of them then you do your utmost to serve that commitment..........absolutly.

Believe it or not most of them are in there because of marital break ups, couples having children - so the dog has to go - and people dying

And the problem with this is? Surely it is better for the dog to have a new home if, after a divorce both owners now have living conditions/lifestle/housing that by their nature mean the dog can no longer live with either. Just maybe after having a child the mum has a bad case of PND. Can't cope...unless you have experinced this you have no idea how debilitating it can be. People die..what happens then? Not every family can take in, or want to take in, someone elses or another dog. 'The dog has to go' is such a cruel statement about a family who may have no other choice. Making someone who feels like **** already, full of sadness, guilt, shame, stress, and only wants to do what they think is the best for the dog now they can no longer keep it; feel even worse by thoughtless comments is cruel in the extreem.

These dog boards are read by all sorts of people, including those that buy puppies from you. One of the things about a responsible breeder is that they will take back any puppy they have bred for whatever reason including change of home circumstances. In fact, your contracts insist on it. Your true feelings about people who return puppies is certainly in print on here.

At the end of the day (how I hate that expression) it's all about how seriously you take your responsibilities in life

Very true.

To those posters who consider human children no more important than dogs.

I wouldn't be so very confident that your children 'understand' that they are no more important to you than a dog.
They have no choice, as children, but to put up with the status quo. A child being brought up in a family considers it's upbringing to be 'normal'. Only when grown up and independent do they review their family life and judge it.
These children may grow up with issues -  after all their mother loved her dogs as much as them.
Sounds like a topic for a day-time chat show.

Carrington, you say "But for instance my mother has 7 dogs, at present, her mortgage is paid for etc, she is financially secure, but hyperthetically what if she were suddenly to find herself in financial woes and needed to come and live with me, would I wish to take on her 7 dogs, no, I wouldn't sorry but I wouldn't, as much as my mum loves them she would have to condense, most probably to other family members being so many of us,  but that does not make me a bad daughter, and many people especially with more than 2 dogs may find themselves in similar situations. "

To twist things slightly, what would be your position should it be that your mother needed you to take care of her - if she were suddenly incapable of physically looking after herself/her dogs?

It is a situation that any of us could find ourselves in - and I'm interested in how that perspective seems to posters.