by Stephen Murphy

Created on: August 14, 2009   Last Updated: August 15, 2009

Pets are important, and no one doubts that. Having a dog or a cat can help reduce stress for an individual, and help bring together a family. They teach responsibility to young children; many people treat their pet as one of the family. Everyone is saddened by the loss of a family pet and when Gina, the puppy yellow lab has run away from home. Gina can send entire neighborhood in a frenzy looking for her; friends, neighbors, and people walking down the street will scour the area for hours. However a universal rule requiring some sort of microchip to be placed into any animal, regardless of the intention, is not the solution. No, not all pets should have microchips implanted to help prevent getting lost. Not every pet needs a tracking device; this is leading to a frightening trend in our society which relies too much on technology not fully proven safe or cost effective.

It is unrealistic to think that every pet needs a microchip placed in them. Think of Nemo, the fish who swims in a bowl or small tank his entire life. He is not going anywhere, and he doesn't need to be tracked by a microchip that would be a significant size for his body. What about Brian the gerbil? We all have costs that we have to maintain with our pets, and this is just one more cost to put a microchip in a pet that really doesn't need one. Brian the gerbil lives in a cage and does not need an extra cost burdened on his owners if they so chose.

With current technology, it is entirely possible to put a microchip in every pet we own. But how much do we really know about this new technology? Some studies suggest there may be a link to cancer and cell phones. Asbestos is now linked to cancer was widely used as insulation in homes. What if these devices, started with good intentions, however small, however non intrusive, can be linked to cancer or birth defects either in the animal or even humans ten, twenty, or thirty years down the road? There are second and third order effects that come with a seemingly small decision and even though it may look great in the short term, a couple of extra minutes searching for a Misty the black cat and you may find her a lot closer than you think.

Lastly, almost everyone has good intentions; a small seeming harmless rule about a microchip in a pet may have long term consequences. A microchip in a pet will lead to a microchip in a child, later an adult. Soon everyone will have a microchip and people with access will be able to tell your exact position. While it may not come to that for some time and may never be used in a bad way, if access is given to the wrong people it could be great information value to a person who means someone in your family harm.

We should use technology to our advantage, we do have good intentions, and there are pets in this world where you may want to put a microchip in to make finding that pet easier when they run away, or someone else to identify Sally, your family's most beloved calico cat, but to think that all pets should have a microchip in them is not be the best choice in the long run.

Learn more about this author, Stephen Murphy.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.