pets and people

[cellio]

Recently I've heard several people express puzzlement over people who would refuse to evacuate an unsafe situation without their pets. Here, let me try to shed some light on that.

This is a hot-button issue for many; if you keep reading you might be offended. Ok, you've been warned.

My cats have been members of my family for years. Each of them has intelligence, a clear personality, and a demonstrated capacity for affection and love. (No, it's not just that I'm the food-bringer, because sometimes my husband is the food-bringer and yet they mostly ignore him.) They are sentient creatures that have formed personal bonds with me, and vice-versa. Time together deepens that bond, and we've had a lot of time together.

They are every bit as much members of my family as a parent's kids are to his. I'm not saying that pets are surrogate kids; I'm saying that the relationship can be every bit as strong. I would no more willingly abandon my cats than a parent would willingly abandon his kids.

In addition to that bond, I have an obligation to my pets every bit as strong as a parent's obligation to a non-independent child. Pets are not toys that you toss aside when they become inconvenient. I've taken on an obligation for the length of each pet's life, a period of time that is, by the way, comparable to the one parents accept when they choose to raise children. (Except that the teenage kid can probably obey an order to "run out of here right now"; the cat can't.)

So here's the part that may offend some parents. If I'm in an emergency situation and I can choose between saving a random pet and saving a random baby, I will save the baby. However, between my pet and a random baby, I'm taking my pet. I'll do what I can to mitigate, including telling everyone I encounter on the way out "hey there's a baby in there", but I will fulfill my family obligations first. This is not heartlessness; rather it is the opposite, not abandoning those closest to me because they have become inconvenient.

On a practical rather than philosophical note: leaving a pet behind in that kind of situataion is a death sentence, while leaving a kid is increased risk. 'Cause they're going to go in after the kid, but too many people will refuse to do so for "only" a pet.

Comments

[sekhmets-song.livejournal.com]

Not only am I not offended, I completely agree. More than with a child, I chose to bring my cats into my home, make them depend on me and my husband for everything. I limited their choices by taking them in and feel I owe it to them to do everything I can to make them safe and well.
I've heard the argument that cats don't feel any real affection for their owners and that it's just the food relationship. That's a crock. My husband does all of the food duties for our boys and the cats have no stronger bond to him than they do to me.
I watch my cats get upset when I am upset, try to cheer my husband up when he is sad, try to sooth me when I am sick. I have seen them cry when we leave (after doing their best to "fool" us into staying home) and show some level of resentment when return after a long absence (and then give into the temptation love all over us in joy that we have "finally" come home). The relationship and love between them and us is very real and very deep. I feel sorry for the people who don't understand this. They have missed out on something truly remarkable.