MOMania

By JSP

May 13, 2008 7:53 AM | Link to this

Are you serious?

People that own pets are pet owners NOT parents.

Benefits? He!! NO!

Completely ludicrous!

By momtoAlex&Max

May 13, 2008 8:21 AM | Link to this

OMG Theresa! I am blushing to the tips of my ears! I was pretty riled up when I wrote that, but I never expected to be quoted. Well, at least, here I am in good company, although feel free to flame me here as well.

hides under rock

By insulted

May 13, 2008 8:33 AM | Link to this

The suggestion is insulting. I am a father of 3 teens and an owner of 2 dogs, to suggest that the challenges and responsibilities are even remotely comparable is insulting. The high water mark for political correctness will be the demand for equal recognition and protection of pet ownership by and among those that cannot have or who’s lifestyle does not result in procreation (gay men). the backlash will be swift and certain.

By LargeFamily

May 13, 2008 8:35 AM | Link to this

I think same treatment is a great idea. I can not have children with my lifemate and the government refuses to allow us after 13 years to have the same rights as a couple married yesterday. Our 4 dogs are our children and my employer is aware that if there is a “puppy problem” at home that I will be out of the office for the day. It is also wrong for hotels and Atlanta events to not allow pets when my poms are much more behaved than a majority of the children I see in public.

By Thor

May 13, 2008 8:38 AM | Link to this

Theresa must be running low on topics: ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

By jct

May 13, 2008 8:42 AM | Link to this

Good morning all,

I read the Pet Blog on that day. I want to make a clarification. It was employer’s offering pet insurance, but the EMPLOYEE had to pay the premiums.

In a world of changing demographics, it is good business. It cost the employer nothing but is a big ‘give me’ to employees. The employer can negotiate a ‘good’ rate because of the volume of employees who may choose to use the service.

Also, as far as leave issues. Of course, there are always a few loonies who want paid leave for pets but the majority of folks on the blog wanted to take already accrued leave for vet visits. People should be able to use accrued vacation leave or PTO any way they wish, without judgment.

This is why when I take vacation to take care of my pets, I just request the day off with no explanation. It is not everyone’s business to know why I am off.

This should not be about rights, but respect. What right’s do parents have anyway?

By motherjanegoose

May 13, 2008 8:50 AM | Link to this

I am Mom to a new 11 week old schnauzer, due to the fact that a neighbor ran over our dog 3 weeks ago as it took off to chase a stray. It was 2 feet off of our front lawn ( my daughter was screaming at the driver) and the truck broke it’s little neck. Did I take a bereavement day…NO. Am I taking maternity leave with the new puppy NO. I LOVE my pets. We had a Cocker for 11 years, a Lab for 13 and little Lucy for only 1 1/2 but they are not children. I do laugh at the fact that grooming a schnauzer costs me more than my haircut and sometimes it seems like they are kids.
Another question…why is it that cat owners do not think they need to abide by the leash law here in Gwinnett County. I walk my dog with baggies and these cats are pooping all over my yard and ripping down birds nests and eat the babies. I am sick of it! Any tips?

By new mom

May 13, 2008 9:05 AM | Link to this

I’m having flashbacks too, momtoalex&max, I got into that debate that day too. It got ugly…and there are really some hateful people out there who worship their pets and despise human babies/children. They consider parents to be evil ‘breeders’. And the fact that they don’t see anything wrong with that really scares me.

I really don’t feel like reliving this topic today…talk to y’all later!! :)

By Theresa

May 13, 2008 9:18 AM | Link to this

hey momtoalex — my boss actually sent me the quote the day it ran in the pet blog —

Thor — I’ve got loads of topics — I think it’s an interesting issue how some people treat their pets like they were kids — I’m sure some people would like maternity leave and the such — I think if we didn’ t have kids our little doggie woud be getting some pretty fantastic treatment —— and even wtih three kids our dog gets haircuts three times more often than me, is getting allergy shots, and has pillows all over the house from which to perch — also he’s often on antibiotic (he has allergies and gets staff infections on his skin when he scratches it) — I am routinely giving the dog antibiotic twice a day in cheese and hot dogs -

By Jeff

May 13, 2008 9:21 AM | Link to this

Where to start?

I guess I’ll start by saying that momtoAlex, JSP, and insulted are spot on and I’m glad LargeFamily is gay and has no plans to procreate, for a variety of reasons but particularly the INSANE view that animals are in any way, shape, or form comparable to humans.

Simply put: I like animals. I think most of them are crazy, but some of them can be cool. And most of the craziness turns out to be rather humorous, so I don’t mind it. But to think of an owner as a parent is INSANE. The two are in NO WAY comparable. (And T is one of the crazies that thinks of her mutt as her child.)

Quite frankly, those that feel the need to get their affection from animals have a mental disorder and should see a therapist, and I’ve told T this to her face several times. They no longer know normal human connection.

If an animal threatens me in any way, it dies. No questions, no hesitation. As hesitant as I am to use any force, particularly the lethal variety, on humans, I am the exact opposite with animals.

As for how I feel about momtoAlex’s original quote, I’d say it is gentle but spot on.

By ATLOrig

May 13, 2008 9:24 AM | Link to this

I noticed that this is usually not a Hetreosexual issue. Even chioldless couples who truly love their animals know they are not replacements for real children. Dogs can live in the wild at 2 years old, how many toddlers would survive.

By motherjanegoose

May 13, 2008 9:29 AM | Link to this

Therea…sorry Thor is being such an nut. Some people do NOT realize that every topic has a different audience….you just throw it out there and see what happens….gee is that your job? LOL I am off to work now and will check in later.

By Ebaby

May 13, 2008 9:49 AM | Link to this

Just after my baby was born, my cousin came to visit and kept comparing parenting to owning a puppy. I was almost always very annoyed at her comments. I worked with a guy that when his dog was on his last laps had to miss work to console his grieving wife. I think these people lost perspective. I think its ok to love your pet but no need to go overboard. Maternity leave- please! Its hard enough to convince politicians to protect our rights as parents to bond with our newborns, it doesnt need to be belittled by being compared to bonding with a pet.

By DB

May 13, 2008 10:06 AM | Link to this

Oh, HELL no! I’m sorry, for a minute, I thought this was comic relief, until I realized that some people were serious! Don’t get me wrong — I’m a huge animal lover, as evidenced by the dog, cats, ferrets and fish currently in residence. But these animals, while all beloved, are ANIMALS, and by their very nature, are only punctuation marks to our lives. To equate them with human children is, IMHO, a sad commentary on the quality of life of that person, if they get along better with a dog than with human friends and family. I recognize the innate human need to love. But to equate the love for a dog with the love for a child? I respectfully say, “Bull.”

Since I don’t believe employers should be providing health care (it’s a BENEFIT, not a right, group insurance is, imho, one of the reasons for spiraling health care costs, but that’s another topic), I surely don’t think they should be paying for pets, either. While an employer may have a stake in keeping YOU healthy, why should they care if your dog needs their rabies shot? And why give you TIME OFF when your cat has kittens four times a year?!? Your co-workers are supposed to cover your butt at work while you’re home cooing over newborn puppies?!

Most vets have weekend hours, and many have evening hours. There are some people who get docked pay if they take time off to take their human child to a doctor — why does a dog get priority?

Many hotels don’t allow pets because there is a sizeable portion of the population for whom pet dander, etc. cause an allergic reaction. Those that do usually set aside only certain rooms for pet owners. I think it’s reasonable to assume that when one checks into a hotel, they won’t spend the night popping Benadryl because of the dog that slept on the bed the night before!

By Jess

May 13, 2008 10:17 AM | Link to this

Owning a pet comes with a ton of responsibility. And although it isn’t nearly as much as a child would require - you guys are acting like it requires nothing. You DO have to take them to vet visits and care for them.

And after loving a family pet for a dozen or so years, and finding out that he’s at death’s door - you bet your fanny I’d be there with him, taking time off of work. It’s a cold hearted person who thinks that’s silly - the type of person who needs never to own a pet, or have a child.

By Captain

May 13, 2008 10:26 AM | Link to this

Large Family….use this test to see if it is a good plan. Try explalining the program to your grandparents and see it you can do it with a straight face and get them to agree. If not…..then can it.

By Cynthia

May 13, 2008 10:36 AM | Link to this

I do not plan on having children…not that I “can’t,” I just don’t want any. I have instead chosen to adopt animals from high kill shelters and in all honesty, they are my children. Are they human? of course not. But, they are still a huge time, financial and mental responsibility. And they mean the world to me. If my dog or cat is sick, I am not coming into work…if they need to go to the vet, I’ll be late. I personally see myself as having the same rights as human parents in my life. I doubt I’ll get a tax break for them but in terms of my friends, work and others understanding, yes…I expect that. My animals, too, are not half as unruly as most human children I see and I’m not half as miserable as most human parents I see. I’ve just chosen another road in life and yes, these are my children and I AM their mother.

By Dennis

May 13, 2008 10:44 AM | Link to this

I have insurance for my pet, 28 a month through banfield, its the greatest and I would rather spend insurance on him, since mine is free through work.. yep free, the government hasn’t gotten a hold of that.. yet

By JSP

May 13, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this

Jess, I have no issue with people/co-workers using their earned time off in any way they choose. If they want to take time out of their earned vacation to care for their pet. Go for it, its your time to do with as you choose.

BUT maternity leave and employer paid insurance for pets is nuts. Where does it end? The pet hamster? Gold fish? How about welfare benefits? After all, the dogs got to eat too.

I had pets my entire childhood and most of my adult life. And I have children. They are not the same. People that say they are the same are the people I find “silly.”

By Ms. M.Thomas

May 13, 2008 10:46 AM | Link to this

I do not have any children but I have a cat that I love VERY much and it angers me when I tell my boss my cat is sick. I get laughs and giggles like its a joke, so now I just lie about why I need to take off.

By new mom

May 13, 2008 10:47 AM | Link to this

I would like to speak on behalf of myself (as a mom and pet owner) and lots of my friends, who are also moms and pet owners.

I think most people understand that those without children, whether by choice or not, love their pets. It’s natural to want to love and care for something, and when an animal is all you have, that animal gets that affection. For us, our cat was our ‘baby’ until our daughter was born. However, we never considered ourselves ‘pet parents’. Honestly, the cat (somewhat) filled that void until she was born. Now that she’s here, and the bond we have with her is immeasurable, we look back on how we treated our cat and laugh at ourselves. It’s not that we really thought he was our child, but he was all we had at the time.

We still have our cat, but he’s the one who isn’t adjusting well to our baby (even after us trying every piece of advice out there!) I think he realizes in his little cat brain that our human child is higher up on the food chain, and he’s having to learn how to be more of a ‘pet’ now. Our 8 mth old baby girl loves the kitty—and we are already trying to teach her the proper way to pet him, when to leave him alone, etc.

For me, it isn’t the ‘loving the pet’ that I take issue with, it’s the attempts at making pet ownership and parenthood equal. And if you do have children one day, you will understand. (and yes, I used to hate that when people told me that!! especially as we were trying to get pregnant!)

I guess I coudn’t stay off the blog, could I? ;)

By JJ

May 13, 2008 10:50 AM | Link to this

Ya’ll are cracking me up today……

By Fed up Marietta

May 13, 2008 10:59 AM | Link to this

Insane! What next, fish aquariums, birds, how about my Ant farm? Just another example of the entitlement mentality of the average AmeriKan. Ask government and the public to take care of you and all your needs off the backs of tax payers. You need to take a pet to the vet? Go on the weekend. If an employers ‘wants’ to offer insurance, or is flexible (Called flex time) on hours then great. If they are not then too bad. Pets ARE NOT children, no matter how much you might be off your rocker to think so. And to the “life partner” person: Get a life! Your ‘inability’ to have children is NOT anyone’s problem but your own, either because you are in a Homosexual relationship and/or one or the other is infertile. Try adopting. But stop your whining and complaining and your endless desire for ‘Special’ treatment.

By JSP

May 13, 2008 11:00 AM | Link to this

quote by Cynthia, I personally see myself as having the same rights as human parents in my life.

Be your pets Mom, that’s cool. But you aren’t a parent. You are a pet owner.

And that’s your choice, you are entitled to it. More power to ya!

Just don’t pretend you are a parent. You are not.

When was the last time you had to do homework? Take the pooch to little league? Spend hours in the yard perfecting that swing? study for the CRCT? How many times have you had to remind that little one, “chew with your mouth closed. “Elbows off the table!” “Wash your hands after you use the bathroom.” “Wipe your butt good!” “Look both ways before crossing the street.”

Maybe if you’d step out of the kennel you’d find some humans that aren’t miserable.

By new mom

May 13, 2008 11:01 AM | Link to this

One more thought on the ‘rights’ issue:

Everywhere I worked, every employee received the same amount of time off, whether sick time, vacation, etc. I, as a childless worker, never used the amount of sick time that my working mom co-workers did due to their kids.

We scheduled our cat’s vet visits during evening or saturday hours. I could not justify missing work because of a cat. There was one emergency we had with him, I came in several hours late after an emergency trip to the vet, and used some of my time off. I think it was considered vacation, since he wasn’t a child, but as a reasonable person, I understood. And was just thankful that my boss didn’t care!

After all, in Georgia, no one is guaranteed a job and can be fired without a reason. It’s just the way it is, and those of you who are demanding special rights might want to be careful that you don’t lose your job in the process.

By sixdogs

May 13, 2008 11:03 AM | Link to this

Pets are an ‘option’. You can have one (or more) or have none. KIDS are options TOO! I’m not saying that my company needs to pay for pet insurance, but, I would sure like to be able to claim the money I spend on their vet/MEDICAL every year against my flex plan or on my itemized deductions! Or be able to claim them as a dependant deduction! What’s wrong with that? Like I said — kids are allowed as exemptions and it is our choice to have them, right?

By LM

May 13, 2008 11:04 AM | Link to this

Wow, what a hot topic. I was reading the blog the day this topic was brought up and visit another bolg where people tend to view their pets as children. Like with any extreme thinking group there are always people who take it too far, IMHO.

I have a teenager and three dogs in the house. There are times when I enjoy the dogs more than the teenager. They give unconditional love and are happy to see me when I get home. Both the teenager and the dogs take a lot of work, cleaning up after, doctor visits, food and myriad of expenses and time. The love I have for my child is so much greater then the dogs.

My mother loves me, I have no doubt. But I also know she loves her pets more than she likes humans. Her pets are not her “kids” but she would rather spend time with her pets than with another humane being. I am not hurt by her thinking, I understand why she is the way she is. She also would not expect her employer to adjust his views just to be “PC” with her views.

By W's mom

May 13, 2008 11:18 AM | Link to this

Hey.. most company’s provide benefits for same sex partners, live in partners, so why not. My dogs are cleaner and better behaved than most children. They deserve benefits. I have to pay the same amount on my insurance for one kid as the person with five, so why not add my dogs?

By Lynn

May 13, 2008 11:23 AM | Link to this

With 9 Lhasa Apso puppies nearing the six week mark, I need a day off!! On topic - use your personal time for your pets and no one can complain. That simple.

By new mom

May 13, 2008 11:32 AM | Link to this

W’s mom, That is a very unusual company to charge the same insurance rate, regardless of the amount of people being covered. Everywhere I’ve worked, my husband has worked, and, well, everywhere else I have ever heard of, the rates vary for employee, employee + 1, then ‘family’. Until we had our baby, we each had separate coverages at our own employers since the ‘employee only’ rates were by far the cheapest. Now that I stay at home with our daughter, we pay through the nose for the ‘family’ coverage. However, I wouldn’t go as far as to say we ‘deserve’ it—that’s the problem with our society today. We have the option to purchase insurance and do so, but would rather the system be set up so it’s removed from companies’ involvement, and we could just shop for it like we do car or homeowners’ insurance.

Someone always ends up paying in the end…wouldn’t it be nice if everyone just paid for ourselves, and stop expecting our employers or the government to take that responsibility? That’s just my opinion :)

By Babs

May 13, 2008 11:33 AM | Link to this

The broader issue is that often people with children get away with more at work. Being late, leaving early, taking long lunches to deal with kids health care appointments, sick kids at home, going to a kid’s school function. In strict environments, or for hourly employees who clock in/out this is not as big of an issue, but in flexible environments, folks without such “excuses” do not get all that time away from work and are often left to make-up for the parents who are away. For those of us without children, whose pets are their children, we expect the same level of respect when there are real problems. One of my dogs was recently partially paralyzed. Believe me, a partially paralyzed (due to back/disc problems, but otherwise healthy young) dog can be just as STRESSFUL and time consuming as a healthy 6 year old child.

By Lauren

May 13, 2008 11:35 AM | Link to this

MotherJaneGoose, you can’t require leashes for cats. I am sorry that the cats are bothering you but cats are not dogs. They hang themselves if left on porches with leashes. Just silly. Regarding dog owners—Dog owners on my street use my yard all the time as their dogs’ toilet. They let them pee on my mailbox and as long as they poop on the strip of grass by the mailbox (separated from the yard by sidewalk) they don’t pick it up. And as soon as they get to the park across the street off goes the leash. Dog owners are so rude!! They take their dogs to outdoor restaurants and tie them to the grate and expect me to eat while their dog licks his privates. Yuck!!!

By quixotical

May 13, 2008 12:04 PM | Link to this

I think benefits are only appropriate if you actually birthed the puppy.

It’s amazing what they can do with medicine these days.

By Jim

May 13, 2008 12:05 PM | Link to this

Pets are not human beings and do not have the same human rights as people. However, they are our PETS we love and they should not be mistreated, but treated humanely. We should not be caring more for animals than we do children and people all over the world. There’s something bad with treating pets better than people or at the expense of poor care for a child because you think more of your dog. Something is very wrong with that.

By mb

May 13, 2008 12:19 PM | Link to this

I think if your dog weighs as much as mine (130lbs), I should be able to claim him as a dependent on my taxes… I don’t have any human babies of my own (not sure if it will ever happen), but he’s been my baby for the past 11 years. Can a girl get some tax relief at least?!

By Jeff

May 13, 2008 12:21 PM | Link to this

Domesticated animals once served a purpose in the house. Dogs were bred for both hunting aids (even the smaller ones - weiner dogs are GREAT for getting into various small burrows) and personal/familial defense (even most animals know not to mess with a p!ssed off German Shepherd, and if a pack of Siberian Huskies is in your backyard, you probably don’t have to worry about most any predatory animal there). Cats were around as pest control. (Rats, annoying birds, etc).

The kids may have gotten attached to the animals (Old Yeller, Where the Red Fern Grows), but the adults knew that the animals were there for a purpose and if they weren’t fulfilling that purpose they might very well wind up in the stew pot (particularly if it was a poor family).

And now we have people putting CLOTHES on their animals and trying to say the animals are children…

Maybe the Mayans were right. Maybe it IS time for human civilization to be exterminated. We’ve certainly devolved quite far in the past couple hundred years or so.

By JJ

May 13, 2008 12:21 PM | Link to this

Lauren, next time you see a neighbor with a dog peeing or pooping on your lawn, go out and say something to them, or just stand in your yard. Better yet, I would walk out there with a plastic bag, and say “here”, please clean up after your pet. If that doesn’t work, scoop up the poop, follow the “walker” and place it in his yard.

By Gobsmacked

May 13, 2008 12:24 PM | Link to this

A child is a PERSON between birth and puberty, according to the dictionary. Your pets, no matter how loved, are NOT children. You are NOT their mother.

It’s reasonable to expect someone to miss work to take a pet to the vet but either make the time up, use vacation time or be docked pay.

ATL Orig - most of the “my pet is my child” crazies I know are straight, it’s not just a gay thing.

By FCM

May 13, 2008 12:28 PM | Link to this

My parents’ dog is the most spoiled 3 year old on the planet…my father brings him chicken biscuits home from Chick-fil-A!

I told my parents’ that I will be monitoring them for other proof that they need serious ‘help’ or that I need to shop for a ‘home’…they of course laughed…

They are pets! I have already worked with people who took off work because their animals are sick…its called personal time…no FMLA should not cover pets.

By Jeff

May 13, 2008 12:30 PM | Link to this

Gobsmacked/ATL Orig:

T is - so far as I can tell - straight, and she is one of the crazies.

My aunt - married to her husband for about as long as my parents have been married, so I’m assuming she is straight - is also one of the crazies.

I’ve also known quite a few gays that were similarly crazy.

So while I don’t think sexuality has aanything to do with it, I DO stand behind my earlier assertion that those that feel the need to get their affection from animals have a mental disorder and should see a therapist. They no longer know normal human connection.

By Jeff

May 13, 2008 12:47 PM | Link to this

FCM:

Just ‘cuz I haven’t heard recently: How’s the job thing going?

By DAinGA

May 13, 2008 12:47 PM | Link to this

To you all, you are right…pets are not the same as children. In may respects they are far better.

As a pet owner, all I ask is that if I have sick or vacation time accured, that I be able to use it if I have to take my pet to the vet. I don’t want or need the government to garauntee me this right, I just want it to be ok with my employer. Why is it ok for a Mom (or Dad) to take a paid day off because Junior has the sniffles, and yet if my dog is running a fever, I have to take time off unpaid, time I have earned no less??

And please parents, get off your high horse. The planet has far too many children as it is. You are not doing anything noble by adding to the problem.

By Nate

May 13, 2008 12:53 PM | Link to this

We force employers to do too much in this country. We’re supposed to be a free market capitalist nation remember? If a company wants to provide these benefits (my old company did) to attract employees, more power to them. The role of government shouldn’t be to tell people how to run their business.

By Thor

May 13, 2008 12:56 PM | Link to this

I interviewed with a company once which offered pet insurance! Although I did not get the job, I really liked the idea! This company also allowed you to bring your pet to work on Friday.

BTW, NewMom - I congratulate you on having the ability to stay home with your child, however I think via your thoughts you are not considering how most people live. Average household income in the USA is $48k - half of all households earn less than that. Take your insurance bill and calculate the impact it would have on $48k. Obviously your husband is earning a very good living and your family is doing well. Just consider the income statistics for most households, be glad you are where you are, and try to remember that the vast majority of Americans are earning a lot less than what your household brings in.

By Leon

May 13, 2008 12:57 PM | Link to this

I have two beautiful cats that I have had since they were 4 weeks old and it is going on 10 years now. I had one for 15 years but she passed away. My babis yes I said babies because that is what they are to me go everywhere I go when on vacation. I call ahead to see what hotel will accept pets and if they don’t then I stay in one that does. I never wanted children (my preference) because it cost to much money to raise a kid today and if I cannot give a child everything that I did not have when growing up then I had rather not have any. I was very luck to have two wonderful parent that were able to provide what they could for me such as food, clothing, being able to go to school and a few little extra things but not a whole lot and I learned at a very young age how much stuff cost and what we could afford and what we couldn’t. Kids today don’t respect anythihg they get they just want, want and want. That is why I decided not to have kids early on in life. I don’t have anything against kids I love my sister children and brother kids and their kids but at the end of the day they go home. As for insurance I do have insurance on my cats thru the Vet that they belong two not exactly a life insurance policy but a medical policy that cover everything that they need when they go to the Vet. It comes thru the Willingness Plan (check your vet). I do think that it would be nice to be able claim a little bit on our taxes when you have a pet because it does cost money to raise a pet maybe not as much as a kid cost but we still have to spend money to care for them. My cats don’t ask anything of me except to love them and they return their love to me. I thank God everyday for given me my two beautiful cats to love and when they pass away I will adopt two more because I have so much love to give to a pet. God bless all the Pet lover in the world.

By FCM

May 13, 2008 1:01 PM | Link to this

Actually the Tax Deduction on children was put in place to encourage a population expansion….These days we are more populated than we probably need to be. However, tell me which people are going to give up that deduction? Nope, like many other ‘government solutions’ (oxymoron I know)that one is here to stay.

Even Bob Barker encourages you to spay or neuter your pet.

By Jeff

May 13, 2008 1:02 PM | Link to this

DainGA:

You’re talking to the wrong dude here. I don’t believe in taking animals to the vet. If it dies, you can get another one and you’ve lost nothing.

By FCM

May 13, 2008 1:05 PM | Link to this

@ Jeff, thanks for asking…I have not got an offer yet….I do have some interviews lined up, and a couple more that I am expecting to get calls on in the near future.

Right now I am just praying for God to help me get an offer on any/all of the 4 main ones that I would like…and of course I would like to have had those offers 2 weeks ago ;o)

By DAinGA

May 13, 2008 1:23 PM | Link to this

Wow Jeff, if you are a parent, that’s kinda scary. Then again I think children are best when baked in an over at 350 degrees for 3 hours with a light white wine sauce, so to each their own.

And to FCM, your right the tax credit for children was put in place to encourage a population expansion. No one will stand up and say we have too many people on this planet, so let’s do away with it, even though it is the right thing to do. So why not give me a credit for adopting a shelter pet? Just as valid as the one for kids.

By FCM

May 13, 2008 1:24 PM | Link to this

@ New Mom….Don’t be so hard on your friend….there really are many similarities between small children and young animals…the difference is that children (if correctly parented) will grow out of it!

Ruth Graham said that all parents should take a dog obedience course before raising a child.

:o)

By Stacey

May 13, 2008 1:26 PM | Link to this

Sorry, I am not one of those “Pets are people, too” believers. I know not everyone can have nor want children and consider their pets their children, but come on! My husband’s company offers insurance for pets but maternity leave because the dog had puppies is down right ridiculous.

By FCM

May 13, 2008 1:32 PM | Link to this

@DAinGA…how about we let you have a one time deduction for spaying or neutering your pet?

By Wanda

May 13, 2008 1:34 PM | Link to this

My pets deserve as much of my time and other people’s whining human kids. People want to leave work to drive human kids to every crazy thing they can make up and an excuse to get out of work. When my pets get sick, I am leaving to take them to the vet. When I brought home a semi-feral kitten that needed special care, I needed time to get things set up in the house for her. I am not sitting here working day after day while other people wander off for one thing after another when my pets need something. If they do not like it, I was looking for a job when I got this one. I have had some very expensive vet bills in the past few years and agree that I would like a turn at some of the tax deductions other people get for their human kids. And yes, I like my pets much better than I like most people and my pets are better behaved than a lot of the spoiled kids people bring to restaurants, etc. to ruin other people’s meal.

By Anda T

May 13, 2008 1:39 PM | Link to this

This has to be the silliest conversation I’ve ever heard of on a blog, or in real life. I couldn’t get maternity leave to have my son because I didn’t work a year at a company, and there’s someone that wants it for a puppy!? Not only does this lady not realize that most maternity leave is UNPAID, it’s not required of companies that have less than 50 employees. I’m sorry, lady, but puppy training is what vacation time is for. Same with sick pets, you have “personal” days for a reason. I’ve used mine when I stayed up all night to nurse a cat back to health after eating plastic wrappers. It’s the same when I take my son to the doctor, it’s a personal day. We don’t get extra or special days to do what you have to do. How you spend your personal time is up to you. You have the same benefits as most people with families, use them as such. We’re certainly expected to do so.

By Jesse's Girl

May 13, 2008 1:41 PM | Link to this

As far as the insurance goes..this is just another way for the insurers to get money. Plain and simple. Now….if you run a business as a breeder, then yes, I can see doing something like this. Your animals have become your investment. But asking your employer for time off to care for sick pets? Are you kidding me? This is beyond ridiculous! I am an animal lover and would do just about anything for my Chocolate Lab. But she definitely takes a back seat to work and such. Like my granny always said…”I don’t trust a house without a front porch and I don’t trust folks who never marry and treat their pets like kids.” I tend to agree….

By csbg001

May 13, 2008 1:41 PM | Link to this

I can’t wait until we start hearing about government sponsored pet care.

John McCain - your anti-hamster candidate.

Hillary Clinton - your blue collar pro-puppy pundit.

Obama- on the fence about free health for felines?

By csbg001

May 13, 2008 1:42 PM | Link to this

I can’t wait until we start hearing about government sponsored pet care.

John McCain - your anti-hamster candidate.

Hillary Clinton - your blue collar pro-puppy pundit.

Obama- on the fence about free health clinics for felines?

By DAinGA

May 13, 2008 1:49 PM | Link to this

FCM, that works for me, as long as I can get it without having to itemize.

By Csquared

May 13, 2008 1:52 PM | Link to this

This is a joke, right? i don’t get the fuss. if you have accrued time off, just take it. Do you have to provide PROOF you were sick? I certainly don’t with my three kids and wouldn’t hesitate taking the time if my wife’s cat needed some care. I’m not about to explain the reasons i’m taking my earned time off to my employer. and no animals, despite how much you might love them, cannot ever be accorded the same rights as humans.

By population growth

May 13, 2008 1:54 PM | Link to this

DAinGA and Wanda — While your pets may be better behaved that some whining children you have encountered, your pets will not grow up to be productive members of our society. Even a whining adult with a crappy job contributes to our society through the taxes they pay. Your pet may give you happiness, but it will never pay taxes. The child tax credit was introduced to encourage population growth so that this country will have a working taxable population in the future.

Uncontrolled population growth is a problem — but not in western countries, which is why many western nations have population growth incentives like tax credits. You don’t see tax credits like these in countries where population growth is growing too quickly. Population growth is not an American or a western problem. It’s a Third World problem. And that’s really sad, because it’s not the Third World children’s fault. But no one wants to stand up and say that.

By nurse&mother

May 13, 2008 1:56 PM | Link to this

Are you kidding me??? Let’s allow the government to keep giving us rebates and handouts because we (uncle sam) have so much money to give. I suppose the reason why our dollar isn’t worth as much anymore is because other countries essentially own us. But let’s keep dolling out money for everyone (and now we’re going to include pet deductions!). I love pets and have pets, but that is insane!!

Thor-I bet most of the folks that you are talking about don’t have to worry about insurance, because Uncle Sam is paying for it. The children are on Peach CAre or Medicaid. If they parents don’t have Medicaid, they are probably the ones who won’t pay for their medical bills when they show up to the ER.

Just a side note regarding insurance-Major carpet mills (close to where I live) actually encourage their largely hispanic employees to not take insurance and tell them that the government will pay for them (just so they don’t have to pay out for benefits). How sad that big whigs cannot see beyond themselves to see what is best for our country. This (along with other things) is draining the system. It is very sad that my employer will not offer me benefits because I am part time, but the government will pay for sorry moms (who won’t work) to keep having babies. I don’t expect my work to provide my insurance, but neither should the government pay for those who won’t work (excluding those that can’t find a job).

Sorry for straying off topic.

By Whitney

May 13, 2008 2:06 PM | Link to this

I believe that pet owners should get a few benefits, like to claim animal expenses on taxes (not for as much as real children but vet expenses and whatnot) and I can see ‘maternity leave’ only if you breed, but even thats a long shot. I happen to work at a very pet friendly place and am allowed to use my vacation days for my pets needs or to take an extended lunch to run to the vet, etc. But still, the only real benefit I had was I got a 1/2 day to spend time with my beloved dog before we had to put him down.

So no, its wishful thinking but its ludacris. (But I would like a $300 stimulus check for each of my pets please!)

By eb

May 13, 2008 2:19 PM | Link to this

First…no, it’s crazy for someone to expect the same benefits for a pet as they do for a child.

However…I don’t think that parents should get all the benefits that they do either. If an employer allows a parent to leave early to go watch a child in a play, then someone without a child should be able to leave early to go do something non-child related. A person without a child should be treated no differently than someone that has one…that includes any time off, monetary compensation for the expense a company is putting toward the child’s health insurance, tax deductions, etc.

By FCM

May 13, 2008 2:23 PM | Link to this

@DAinGA….as long as you only claim it the one time I don’t care if its itemized or not…a simple QA on the electronic form…have you had a pet s/n this year? If y date? cost?

The credit makes sense…we have a over population on pets so lets put this in to dicourage it…of course Sonny probably won’t let it go to referendum….s/n got to be as sinful as my drinking a beer on Sunday.

By JeremiahWright

May 13, 2008 2:23 PM | Link to this

God, what a stupid blog.

By Csquared

May 13, 2008 2:33 PM | Link to this

all any employer should do is treat parents and non-parents alike. I don’t see not giving you time off to run an errand any more than me not taking time off to see my kid in an awards ceremony. BUT the operative feature in this is that 1) it doesn’t adversely affect the company operations 2) that it’s equally applied. This would of course be during the time you’re normally at work. Otherwise, as I said, if it’s your time the employer has little control over what you do with it.

By Thor

May 13, 2008 2:34 PM | Link to this

Hi Nurse&Mother,

Your last comments regarding insurance was a great reminded as to the reason why Bastille Day occurred.

By KJ

May 13, 2008 2:53 PM | Link to this

Yes - I think it would be a great benefit to offer. Remember that benefits are perks to attract good employees. I think it’s a great idea. I have spent a lot of money caring for my dogs and would love to get that kind of a perk. This has nothing to do with comparing health insurance to pet insurance. They are two separate benefits. Similiar to your 401k, pension and health insurance are all different benefits (perks). Bring on the pet insurance and pet leave. I love the idea!

By mystery poster

May 13, 2008 2:55 PM | Link to this

If you call yourself “mommy” to a pet, you seriously need a biology lesson.

By Stacey

May 13, 2008 3:05 PM | Link to this

I agree that if (and only if) an employee has the available leave time, they should be able to use it to care for pets provided they follow whatever protocols the company has for using general leave time. Heck, if you want to use your PTO because you are mourning the death of your favorite soap opera character, more power to you!

By motherjanegoose

May 13, 2008 3:32 PM | Link to this

Theresa…YOU GO GIRL!

All together now:

THOR DOES NOT HAVE A CLUE ABOUT WHICH TOPICS ARE GOING TO APPEAL TO THE AUDIENCE…see 8:39 post I will no longer even consider his opinion LOL.

This is what I like about Theresa…sometimes her topics do NOT pertain to me and I leave them alone but others are still active. She can hook different folks in every day!

By tim

May 13, 2008 3:33 PM | Link to this

This women should be fired for wasting your space and wasting our time

By DB

May 13, 2008 3:51 PM | Link to this

I keep hearing a refrain through all of this: “All the money I spend taking care of my pet …” Does anyone realize what a racket vets have going on? One of my animals developed a condition that one vet wanted $1,600 to operate on. They tried to make me feel extremely guilty if I did not cough up the money for this operation, and actually went so far as to say, “Well, if you cared about your ( ), this would be a no-brainer.” I did a little more digging, and found a different, wonderful vet who evaluated the entire case and recommended a $35 alternative to make the pet comfortable for the remainder of its lifespan (remaining expected lifespan - less than 1 year, but she hung in there, happy and bouncy, for another 16 months.) I’ve chatted with vets who shake their heads over people who will spend close to $5-6,000 on a cat with cancer. Even the VETS are amazed what people will spend.

It’s your money, it’s apparently disposable income — do with it what you will with my blessing. Even Leona Helmsley thought more of her dog than she did of her kids, and we all know what a sweet, caring woman she was. But a tax break because you want to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on an animal with an average expected lifespan of MAYBE 12-15 years? Is that even sane*?

And to those of you sniffing at overpopulation of humans — I’d be more interested in your comments if you hadn’t spent hundreds of dollars on a purebreed, instead of tackling the ANIMAL overpopulation issue and adopting from the orphanage (where ALL of our animals have come from).

And, with pets just as with human children — if you can’t afford the care, DON’T HAVE ONE. Don’t expect anyone else to help you out. Either pay up or kwitcherbitchin’!

By Wanda

May 13, 2008 3:52 PM | Link to this

By population growth-Maybe you have not heard of welfare. Lots of people have human children who grow up to be a drain on society.

I take in homeless pets and I do not ask anyone for help with their care, but I am tired of talking to people who say they or their children are having more children and the state is providing medical care, food, etc. for another generation that is being taught the same way of life. If we are just passing out money then as a tax paying citizen they can send some my way.

If I need to spend a day at home or at the vet with my pets, I will. If they do not like it, I will box up my stuff. These people are not anyone to me. I spend my time here and go home to my pets who rush to the door to greet me. If a company could make more money moving away, you would not even be a passing thought. That is not where my loyalty is. A lot of companies might have happier employees if they made them feel a little more secure that their jobs were not heading out of the country. What would be the problem with a company setting up a system by which employees could buy into a group rate pet insurance? We show up and keep their businesses running when we could go to any other job any time. It would be cheaper to provide a few perks than to train new employees on a revolving door basis.

By new mom

May 13, 2008 3:54 PM | Link to this

Thor, I do recognize that my husband does better than average and I am very thankful for the opportunity I have to stay home with our daughter.

My point about insurance is that if it’s separated from employers’ benefits, it would have many positive effects:
1) the costs would go down, because the consumer could shop around and get the best plan they could find, like we do currently with car or homeowners insurance.
2) without the tie to an employer, you wouldn’t have to change insurers when you change jobs.
3) If you aren’t happy with your insurer, you ‘fire’ them and find another.
4) if you are unemployed or self employed, you will have a much better chance of finding reasonably priced insurance. 5) companies would save the money that most spend on HR upkeep for insurance matters, and the amount they spend subsidizing the plans, and could conceivably pass these savings to the employees or shareholders. Or not, that would be their right.

I actually think that everyone’s insurance costs would decrease over time if health insurance would stop being a “benefit”. Those with pets could find their pet insurance coverage they desire, just as we would find the best coverage for our family.

Unfortunately, I doubt this idea will get far, too many people think it’s the employer’s duty to provide such “benefits”…or the government’s.

By misspiggy

May 13, 2008 3:54 PM | Link to this

Anyone who says that being a pet owner is remotely similar to being a parent needs to talk to someone who has lost a child (a REAL child - not a pet!) Pretending that you are a “parent” to an animal is totally offensive to those who know what being a parent involves.

By Charles

May 13, 2008 3:58 PM | Link to this

I think you’e an idiot for even posing this question. What a waste of space…you get paid for this?

By JJ

May 13, 2008 3:58 PM | Link to this

Tim No one forced you to come over to the MOM blog and waste your time…….

She’s not wasting my time, I enjoy this blog……

By new mom

May 13, 2008 4:00 PM | Link to this

re: population growth…

I have read articles recently that speculate that today’s baby boomers and retirees will be affected by the smaller amount of younger workers contributing to social security, considering current life spans. To those out there who complain that there are too many kids out there—you may just eat your words someday, when you are old and gray, social security dries up, and you wonder where all the ‘young whippersappers’ are to foot your bill. :)

By insulted

May 13, 2008 4:00 PM | Link to this

motherjanegoose, you think for 1 second that teresa is smart enough to be able to plan these train wrecks she calls topics? she’s a hack, she showed her true colors with her drought buster blog. She avoids giving anything remotely considered advice, instead she references other writers daily. She never takes a stand on anything, she will use SAHM as a topic and describe how shes a SAHM, then she will write something about working mom’s then all the sudden shes a working mom. this topic today is an example of how crappy she is as a writer when she doesnt directly reference another writers story (in this case she referencing a reply). she should be fired, but not for this topic, she should be fired for being a hack!

By Charles

May 13, 2008 4:10 PM | Link to this

Hey, JJ: Tim and me just wanted to point out the silliness of the question. I mean, how serious is it?

By covered

May 13, 2008 4:28 PM | Link to this

Off Topic New Mom I pay for my own insurance, even though the company I work for offers insurance. I pay almost $700 a month to cover myself and one child. I make less than $31K a year. I’d love to see a drop in my rates but know that will not happen anytime soon.

By momtoAlex&Max

May 13, 2008 4:30 PM | Link to this

To insulted: no one is pointing a gun at your head and forcing you to read this. Go find something else to do. There are quite a few of us that enjoy being here.

By new mom

May 13, 2008 4:45 PM | Link to this

to covered— that sure is a alot to have to pay, but it sounds like you do what you have to for your child. Of course I don’t know your situation, but lots of companies who offer insurance offer plans that are ‘bare bones’ and in a sense, force you to shop elsewhere for decent coverage.

And no, I don’t see rates coming down anytime soon either, not until the consumers (not employers) are the ones in charge.

That was quite a tangent I got us on, huh? ;)

By insulted

May 13, 2008 4:55 PM | Link to this

momtoalex&max, you misunderstand, I enjoy it more than you and your friends. It’s really bad media, and nothing is funnier than reading or seeing really crappy media. You cant drag me away from Walker texas ranger or one of the last episodes of Happy days or news with Katie couric, its all the same to me and its really bad and its fun to watch/read. so noone has to put a gun to my head, but shes still a hack, just like potsie couldnt act and couric is an embarassment.

By insulted

May 13, 2008 5:01 PM | Link to this

oh yea, and way to go off the board and pick Max as a name, thats straight out of central casting. Hip, succinct, I’m seeing a soccer boy haircut, a skeateboard and a really bad attitude, but dressed to the nines. Sister name is…..sophie! central casting!

By Jeff

May 13, 2008 5:14 PM | Link to this

Why not give pet parents the same rights? They can bark once if they want an abortion, twice if they don’t, and we can take the food away from the males for being “irresponsible”.

By motherjanegoose

May 13, 2008 5:18 PM | Link to this

Insulted… Theresa is the one cashing her check off of all of us and who cares if you like it or not…we don’t.

I was introduced to this column when I was the topic July 2006 as I had complained about dozens of kids being rowdy at the pool and running all through the lobby of the hotel soaking wet and dripping water ( an accident waiting to happen), while their parents kicked back wine coolers. These are every day topics…not novels.

Her columns has been around at least that long, so someone at the AJC thinks enough of her and keeps her on. Since it is not you…go bark up another tree.

Guess what? I do not like Mac Donald’s but they obviously have a following and are making a profit. Does not matter to me!

By Thor

May 13, 2008 5:19 PM | Link to this

ZZZZZZZZ… Huh? Close to 100 comments on this wacky subject? Darn! I’m suffering from dumb male disease again! Theresa evidently knows her topics rather well, and I loved to be proven incorrect!

By new mom

May 13, 2008 5:30 PM | Link to this

ha ha…and Thor, you are STILL on this blog, after yawning back early this morning ;)

Never underestimate the ability of us ladies to discuss a subject to death. Or try to talk sense into those crazy people out there….we are tenacious :)

By population growth

May 13, 2008 5:51 PM | Link to this

Wanda — Of course I have heard of welfare. Since you brought it up… I agree that welfare is a very flawed system rife with abuse.

However, not every child born into welfare will remain in welfare. Even if a large number never leave the system, at least some percentage of those children will go on to be taxpaying citizens.

Not one pet will ever grow up to be a taxpayer — which is what