4 of 10

No

Write now Article Tools

How can anyone even consider the possibility that putting a pet's life in danger is teaching a child "responsibility" of any kind? A parent who could even think of such an atrocity needs to learn a lesson in responsibility themselves ... and to add a touch of humanity in that lesson, as well.

Pets are living, breathing creatures with personalities and feelings. Yes, they feel. They feel pain. They feel hunger. They feel fear. They feel happy. They feel sad. They can experience depression and concern for others (especially for humans, who obviously do not deserve that level of respect from any creature - especially if they can actually consider using a life to "teach" a child so-called "responsibility" when all they are really accomplishing is to teach them how to abuse animals without remorse and to pass on the idea that animals are dispensable). Animals, no matter how large or how small, are deserving of a greater level of dignity than to be used and abused by kids or by idiot parents who rear them.

Pets deserve to be loved and cared for. If a parent is bent upon teaching their child the responsibility of caring for a pet, that child should be strictly supervised by a competent adult who knows enough of what the pet needs, and to be sure that the pet is provided with such things to meet all its needs. And by "competent adult" I mean someone who actually would never be so selfish, so stupid, or so inhumane as to use and abuse any creature for any reason at all, let alone trying to "teach" their clone to harm living creatures and to be demented enough to believe that they are doing good in the process.

Pets can and often do teach us very valuable lessons about life. They can be used to teach children how to love and care for a dependent, but only if the safety of the creature is ensured in the process. To send a child a message that abusing a pet - either directly through physical taunting or harm, or indirectly through neglect - is okay for any purpose (including for the purpose of "teaching a lesson") is not only doing a pet harm, it is doing ultimate harm to the upbringing of a child. The child only learns that a pet's life is worth nothing more than the price of a lesson; and that attitude will follow them everywhere they go for the rest of their lives. And the abuse will continue and perpetuate future lessons of abusive "responsibility" years later when that child has children of their own and they pass on their philosophy of teaching responsibilities to their own kids. The cycle continues until someone is sane enough to stop it and say: "This animal is a living creature. It is part of our family. And, its needs will be met." THAT is a lesson in responsibility that is worth teaching a child, and it is the only lesson that IS worthy of the word "responsibility."

Anyone who jeopardizes the health and wellbeing of a pet of any size just to give their offspring a lesson is not only insensitive to the world around them, they are seriously deprived of the mental capacity for understanding what it really means to be "responsible". And, in that case, they are the wrong person to be teaching anyone ANY lesson in life. They need to back up and learn that lesson themselves!

Learn more about this author, Mary Pagay.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Should a pet be used to teach a child responsibility even at the cost of the pets life??
We want to hear your view. Write now!