The Dilemma of Homeless Individuals and Their Street Pets.
Most street pets live uncertain lives despite all the hype. Our streets have long been plagued with homeless people, prompting the UK Government to announce new plans to tackle this pressing issue – often alongside them will live a “faithful dog or cat”, like Bob from “I Am Bob the Ginger Cat”, which led many people to accept and even consider such relationships beneficial and acceptable – yet do they exist in reality?
Street pets have been romanticised
Although some charities insist having a pet is essential to the survival of homeless individuals, many other studies show it doesn’t provide vital companionship and lifelines that homeless people desperately require. At times these pet-centric organisations create the illusion that street pets lead secure lives despite all the hoopla from animal-loving organizations promising they are well cared for by owners or that dogs simply enjoy having them around as companions.
Most dogs I’ve observed appear dejected, bored and neglected of any stimulus; rarely have I come across one who appears satisfied with its life. Why, then, is so much money raised for their care and effort put forth to look after them?
People might assume homeless individuals shouldn’t keep pets, but oftentimes these individuals truly care for and cherish them as family members.”
All major dog charities have responded quickly with services to help animals in need, earning them positive publicity in return. Blue Cross provides Street Vet services; Dogs Trust runs its Hope project; PDSA helps; RSPCA Inspectors also give assistance on the street; while several private charities were recently formed to aid “homeless persons’ PS pets”. Animal charities are raising large sums through neutering and vaccination schemes, drop-in basic care centers, mobile vet surgeries, temporary foster placement services and street visits but this seems excessive; do homeless humans benefit more from this than the animals?
RSPCA Inspectors conduct random checks on animals owned by homeless people, giving out leaflets of veterinary charities offering free neutering, vaccination, microchipping and treatment as well as leads, collars, bowls, coats and food to these pets owned by these individuals. While people might think homeless people shouldn’t own animals, many do love them and treat them well enough that it begs the question if all these handouts to ensure adequate care are necessary?
Focusing exclusively on what would benefit people rather than considering what might be in the best interests of animals can lead to unfortunate results.
Many will argue the benefits of companionship to homeless people; alleviating loneliness and having someone to talk to and be responsible for are undeniable; however, in reality the benefit is only accruing one way: captive animals such as dogs and cats which do not fend for themselves are subjected to such treatment while given a choice, most would opt to be snuggled snug in warm environments with someone providing for all of their needs.
Are charities missing their target? Although their work is commendable in its aim, due to owners living a lifestyle of vagrancy they simply can’t provide adequate oversight over every animal’s welfare. Street Vet can only search for people living rough with their dogs in London, Bristol, Brighton Plymouth and Cambridge. As such, they seek more donations in order to put more veterinarians on the streets helping more people and dogs in need, providing additional support for homeless dogs who otherwise might go without proper veterinary care, while at the same time noting on their website that “veterinary care can be hard to come by and impossible to afford”. Such statements only serve to illustrate that dogs are suffering neglect from owners unable to fulfill their legal responsibilities as caretakers.