Welfare check in pet food aisle 4

Yes...typically a person on assistance wouldn't have the funds to do much in the way of entertainment ( cable, internet, movies, etc.), and the animals are a great source of that. Also, I've known a lot of people who ended up on assistance for a few months due to something unexpected...health problems, a job ending, etc. They certainly shouldn't have had to kill or get rid of their pet(s) because they wound up on food stamps for a little while. Good question though!

Those people are also human and have human needs, sometimes it is important to them to have a pet just like their more fortunate neighbours. People fall on hard times and in an evolved and civilized society we have an obligation to support them even if in some cases they brought on their misfortune themselves. I am sure most people on welfare have lost some of their dignity as a result of being on welfare. There is no need to deprive them further by placing further restrictions regarding pets on them. Extreme cases however, such as 5 dogs and 20 catc etc. should be investigated by the humane society.

That is a very good question, and 1 that I have asked myself over and over, every single time I go to the store and buy my dogs their feed. Should I spend $15 a month on my 2 dogs.... or $400+ a month on my 3 kids? Hmmmmmmm Do I want to get rid of my kids so I don't have to spend so much money on them every month? No. Do I want to get rid of my pets because I spend about $40 a month on all of them? No. My kids would be devastated if I were to get rid of the animals, especially the 4 year old. Those are her 'puppies'. She does everything with those dogs. All day long she is off and doing something with dogs at her side. Possible benefits to the kids by having the pets: Interaction with animals, perhaps 1 of my kids will grow up and do something with animals, maybe become a vet, like I wanted to do when I was younger. Learning to be gentle with animals. Will this benefit them when they get older and have to learn how to be gentle with other people as well... possibly! Physical activity. (Or maybe I should spend $600 of the states money on a PS3 so the kids can sit on their butts in front of the tv...) Responsibility. The older 2 kids do their chores in the afternoon after school. The 4 year old gets up every morning and feeds her dogs. She then gets dressed to go outside and get water for HER ducks. (yes, ducks, she wanted them and she cares for them) She has learned to do this on her own without daily reminders. This is her responsibility. And she loves doing it. I have seen so many people run to the pet store and get their kids pets because the kids PROMISE to take care of them and within months, the parents are doing it, if they don't just give away the animals anyways. (Yes, this is where we got our animals from, all unwanted pets, I never paid for a pet in my life!) 1 last thought, my personal experience.. If the state had any say over the way I live my life with my kids, and whether I choose to have pets to make them happy, then they would allow women the RIGHT to have their tubes tied when the WOMAN feels she has enough. Where I live, the STATE says we do NOT have a choice on that form of "birth control". My state says a woman must be 26 years of age in order to decide if she has had enough children or not. How is that right?? If I am on state benefits with the 1st child because I can not afford insurance, therefore I am not going to be able to afford raising a child why should the state say that if I get pregnant again that I don't have any choice but to have more kids? (And yes, all 3 kids were unplanned, unwanted pregnancies, and yes, we used protection AND the pill... before someone jumps down my throat for that.) So, I guess, now that I have given my 2 cents worth on this subject.. because I am mentally/physically unable to work outside the home, therefore I get state aide. And my husband DOES work, therefore he is actually paying for the animals food. Should I get rid of my pets, (that are loved and cared for in our home and not previous homes), NO!

Hmm... interesting question... How about Yes and No. No first: Well, if they can't support themselves why should my hard-earned tax dollars go to supporting thier PET. Now, I know that they can't use the food stamps to buy the pet supplies directly, but they should probably be using all their cash funds on the neccessities for themselves and their own survival. On the other hand: Some studies show that people with pets lead a better lives than others and become more productive members of society. So, if owning a pet could eventually lead to them bettering themselves (yeah, that sounds foolish if you put it that way) then maybe it's not such a bad idea. Good luck in your quest.