essay about keeping pets

• Writing Correction
• Online Prep Platform
• Online Course
• Speaking Assessment
• Ace The IELTS
• Target Band 7
• Practice Tests Downloads
• IELTS Success Formula
• Essays Band 9 IELTS Writing Task 2 samples – IELTS Band 9 essays
• Essays Band 8 IELTS Writing – samples of IELTS essays of Band 8
• Essays Band 7 IELTS Writing – samples of IELTS essays of Band 7
• Essays Band 6 IELTS Writing – samples of IELTS essays of Band 6
• Essays Band 5 IELTS Writing – samples of IELTS essays of Band 5
• Reports Band 9 IELTS Writing – samples of IELTS reports of Band 9 (Academic Writing Task 1)
• Reports Band 8 IELTS Writing – samples of IELTS reports of Band 8
• Reports Band 7 IELTS Writing – samples of IELTS reports of Band 7
• Letters Band 9 IELTS Writing Task 1 – samples of IELTS letters of Band 9
• Letters Band 8 IELTS Writing – samples of IELTS letters of Band 8
• Letters Band 7 IELTS Writing – samples of IELTS letters of Band 7
• Speaking Samples
• Tests Samples
• 2023, 2024 IELTS questions
• 2022 IELTS questions
• 2021 IELTS questions
• 2020 IELTS questions
• High Scorer’s Advice IELTS high achievers share their secrets
• IELTS Results Competition
• IELTS-Blog App

IELTS Essay, topic: keeping pets to live a more enjoyable life

• IELTS Essays - Band 5

Some people believe that having a pet such as a cat or a dog helps old people to live a more enjoyable life and to stay healthier. How do you think old people benefit from having a pet? Do you think there are any problems related to old people who have pets?

In conclusion, it is true that obstacles still exist for elderly people in adopting pets, but the benefits of this topic its . For such reasons, instead of , further support would be far more beneficial.

You have made an attempt to accomplish the task response. However, there are quite a few mistakes in the essay – the main problematic areas are grammar, sentence structure and word choice. In addition, the length of the task response could be reduced. This task response needs to be worked on and improved. Revise grammar and work on your sentence structure. Avoid writing more than 280 words to save time and reduce the number of mistakes, and remember to always proofread your work once you’re finished. Overall, this looks like a Band 5.5 essay

Click here to see more IELTS essays of band 5

Related posts:

• IELTS essay, topic: Is it acceptable that enormous sums are paid for pieces of art when many people around the world live in poverty? This is a model response to a Writing Task 2...
• IELTS essay, topic: Many university students nowadays live away from home and their parents (advantages/disadvantages) This essay topic was seen in a recent IELTS test...
• IELTS essay, topic: Many people try to achieve a work-life balance but fail (reasons and solutions) This essay topic was seen in a recent IELTS test...
• IELTS Report, topic: Process diagram describing the life-cycle of the car (from IELTS High Scorer’s Choice series, Academic Set 2) This is a model response to a Writing Task 1...
• IELTS essay, topic: Should school children be given homework (opinion)? This is a model response to a Writing Task 2...

1 thought on “IELTS Essay, topic: keeping pets to live a more enjoyable life”

Pingback:  IELTS Essay Samples of Band 5 | IELTS-Blog

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Home — Essay Samples — Life — Pet — Overview of the Benefits of Having Pets

Overview of The Benefits of Having Pets

• Categories: Pet

About this sample

Words: 1413 |

Published: Oct 2, 2020

Words: 1413 | Pages: 3 | 8 min read

Table of contents

Introduction, works cited, improving health, making new friend, being more responsibility, having security.

• American Pet Products Association. (2016). Pet Industry Market Size & Ownership Statistics. Retrieved from https://www.americanpetproducts.org/press_industrytrends.asp
• London, K. B. (2018). The Physical and Psychological Benefits of Dog Ownership. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27(3), 187-191. doi:10.1177/0963721417748426
• Kruk, J. (2018). How Does Exercise Reduce the Risk of Breast Cancer? Current Oncology, 25(3), e325-e327. doi:10.3747/co.25.4034
• Oaklander, M. (2017). Science Says Your Pet is Good for Your Mental Health. Time. Retrieved from https://time.com/4728315/science-says-pet-good-mental-health/
• Vieira, M. (2018). Pets and Mental Health: Enhancing Well-Being and Building Resilience. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 514. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00514
• Dumain, T. (2019). Stroke Prevention: What You Need to Know. Health Essentials from Cleveland Clinic. Retrieved from https://health.clevelandclinic.org/stroke-prevention-what-you-need-to-know/
• Thakur, A. (2021). 10 Benefits of Having a Pet at Home. The Times of India. Retrieved from https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/life-style/relationships/pets/10-benefits-of-having-a-pet-at-home/articleshow/82166879.cms
• University of Western Australia. (2015). The Role of Pets in Human Societies: Implications for Human Health and Well-Being. Retrieved from https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/wa/pets-make-people-healthier-ng-864a670fd8740e063c71d9253e3d7751
• Cowan, L. (2017). The Benefits of Pets for Children. Bright Horizons. Retrieved from https://www.brighthorizons.com/family-resources/e-family-news/2017-the-benefits-of-pets-for-children
• Forma, A. (2020). Dog Saves Boy, 4, from Cougar Attack in Canada. National Geographic. Retrieved from https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/dog-saves-boy-cougar-attack

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Heisenberg

Verified writer

• Expert in: Life

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 762 words

4 pages / 1835 words

2 pages / 712 words

1 pages / 535 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Pet

Cats and dogs have long been considered man's best friends, but the age-old debate of which pet is better rages on. While both animals have their own unique qualities, cats have been proven to be superior pets for a variety of [...]

Pet ownership is a common practice across cultures and societies, with animals like dogs, cats, and horses providing pleasure and companionship to their human owners. This symbiotic relationship between humans and their pets has [...]

Dogs are more than just pets; they are loyal companions who bring countless benefits to their owners. From guarding the house to relieving stress, dogs play a significant role in the lives of many people.One of the primary [...]

Animals have been a part of human society for centuries, serving various purposes such as food, transport, and labor. However, beyond these practical uses, animals have also provided humans with physical and psychological [...]

At one point or another during childhood, children have wanted a pets, whether it was a puppy, bunny, lizard, etc. After numerous attempts at pleading and pestering parents to allow the child to get this “pet”, some give in. [...]

Lopata, L. (2020). Dogs Have Been Humans' Best Friends for 20,000 Years, According to Artifacts. Mental Floss. Retrieved from https://www.akc.org/dog-breeds/why-dogs-are-mans-best-friend/

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

Why owning a pet is good for body and mind

Pet ownership should be recognised as a public health strategy due to the profound benefits for individuals, families and communities, says Steven Feldman

In his article ( Want to truly have empathy for animals? Stop owning pets, 4 February ), Troy Vettese discounts the significant benefits that pets bring to the lives of billions of people worldwide. Scientific research shows that human-animal interactions can have a powerful impact on mental, physical and social health for individuals, families and entire communities.

In fact, the benefits of pets are so profound that Vettese should consider making a full U-turn – we should have more pets and we should view them as a low-cost, high-reward public health strategy .

Pets can buffer stress and help address social isolation. Health professionals are increasingly recommending pets and incorporating them into the long-term management of mental health conditions. Think about the cost of heart disease and obesity. Research demonstrates that pet owners have lower blood pressure, are more likely to achieve the recommended levels of daily exercise and are less likely to be obese. In addition, children with pets are more likely to be physically active.

Pets benefit from their close relationship with people just as much as we do. Pet owners consider their pets to be an important part of the family, and are willing to make significant lifestyle changes for them. According to a survey , 61% of pet owners would change housing to accommodate a pet, and 45% would change jobs to have increased time with pets at home. Most importantly, international research conducted in nine countries shows that strong bonds result in better veterinary care for the pets we love.

Environmentally, pets help prevent waste, reducing agriculture’s footprint . Ingredients produced during human food processing that would otherwise be discarded are safely used in pet food.

Scientific research tells the real story. The right headline should be: “Get a pet for good health at both ends of the leash!” Steven Feldman President, Human-Animal Bond Research Institute

• Health & wellbeing
• Mental health

Most viewed

Essay on Care Of Pets

Students are often asked to write an essay on Care Of Pets in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Care Of Pets

Feeding your pet.

To keep your pet healthy, give it the right food. Just like us, animals need a balanced diet. Find out what your pet eats and how often it should eat. Always put fresh water for your pet to drink.

Keeping Them Clean

Cleanliness is important. Bathe your pet when needed. Brush their fur to stop knots. Clean their living space often to stop germs and bugs.

Exercise and Play

Pets need to move and have fun. Take dogs for walks. Play with cats using toys. Exercise helps pets stay fit and happy.

Visits to the Vet

Regular check-ups at the vet keep your pet healthy. They can get shots to prevent sickness. The vet can also help if your pet feels unwell.

Love and Attention

Spend time with your pet. Pets need love just like people do. Cuddle them, talk to them, and make them feel part of your family.

250 Words Essay on Care Of Pets

Taking care of pets means giving them the right food. Just like us, animals need to eat healthy to stay fit. Pets usually eat special food that matches their needs. For example, dogs often eat dry kibble while birds eat seeds and nuts. It’s important to feed them the right amount and not too much, so they don’t get overweight.

Pets also need to stay clean. For animals with fur, like cats and dogs, this means regular baths and brushing. This keeps their coat shiny and skin healthy. Some pets, like fish, need their homes cleaned instead, like changing the water in a fish tank.

Just like we go to the doctor, pets need to visit the vet. The vet checks if they are healthy and gives them shots to prevent sickness. It’s also where you go if your pet seems sick or hurt.

Pets need our love. This means spending time with them, playing games, and giving cuddles. When pets feel loved, they are happier and can even live longer.

Safe Living Space

Lastly, pets need a safe place to live. Dogs need a yard to run in or walks to get exercise. Smaller pets like hamsters need cages with enough room to move and play. Keeping them safe also means making sure they can’t run away or get hurt in the house.

In short, taking care of pets is about feeding them right, keeping them clean, taking them to the vet, loving them, and giving them a safe place to live. When we do all this, our pets can be happy and healthy companions.

500 Words Essay on Care Of Pets

Introduction to pet care.

When you have a pet, it is like having a new friend in your home. Pets can be dogs, cats, birds, fish, or even rabbits. They bring joy and fun, but they also need love and care just like we do. Taking care of a pet means you have to feed them, keep them clean, and make sure they are healthy and happy.

One of the most important things in pet care is giving your pet the right food. Different animals need different types of food. For example, a dog will eat dog food, while a fish needs fish flakes or pellets. It’s not good to give your pet too much food or the wrong kind of food because it can make them sick. Always make sure they have clean water to drink, too.

Keeping Your Pet Clean

Cleanliness is very important for pets. Dogs need baths, and their living space should be tidy. Cats clean themselves, but their litter box must be cleaned regularly. Fish tanks need to be cleaned so the water is clear and healthy for the fish. By keeping your pet and their home clean, you help them stay away from sickness.

Pets need to move and play. Dogs love to go for walks and run around. Cats enjoy playing with toys and climbing. Even small animals like hamsters need a wheel to run on. Playing with your pet is not just fun for them; it also helps them to stay fit and not get too heavy.

Just like we go to the doctor, pets need to go to the vet. The vet is a doctor for animals. They give pets check-ups to make sure they are healthy. They can also give pets medicine or shots to keep them from getting sick. It’s important to take your pet to the vet regularly.

Pets need your time and love. They feel happy when you pet them, talk to them, and spend time with them. When pets are ignored, they can become sad or behave badly. Always try to make time to show your pet that you care.

Training Your Pet

Training is also a part of pet care. Pets like dogs need to learn where to go to the bathroom and how to behave. Training helps pets understand what they should and should not do. It takes time and patience, but it helps you and your pet live together peacefully.

Taking care of a pet is a big job, but it is also very rewarding. When you take good care of your pet, they will be healthy and happy, which makes you feel good, too. Remember, a pet is not just an animal in your house; it’s a member of your family and deserves all the love and care you can give.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

• Essay on Carbon Footprint
• Essay on Carbohydrates
• Essay on Hobby Gardening

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Newsletters

Site search

• Israel-Hamas war
• 2024 election
• Kate Middleton
• TikTok’s fate
• Supreme Court
• All explainers
• Future Perfect

Filed under:

The case against pet ownership

Why we should aim for a world with fewer but happier pets.

Share this story

• Share this on Facebook
• Share this on Twitter
• Share this on Reddit
• Share All sharing options

Share All sharing options for: The case against pet ownership

Some days, when the doomscrolling becomes too much, I switch up my social media consumption to something I call petscrolling. It’s the act of swiping through an endless feed of Instagram reels featuring resilient three-legged rescue dogs hiking in the woods, feisty yet charming shop cats, and the occasional potbellied pet pig splashing around in a kiddie pool.

The internet is awash in this feel-good content starring some of the 250 million animals — nearly one for every person — who populate American households. It all reinforces the inherent goodness of the ancient human-animal bond, and lets us believe that where there are pets — whom most owners consider to be family members — there is joy, love, play, and hope.

There’s plenty of all that in my household, thanks to my sweet and spunky rescued pit bull mix, Evvie, one of many animals I’ve lived with during my lifetime. In the middle of 2020, she was picked up as a stray puppy in Greenville, North Carolina, before being passed through several foster homes. My partner and I took her home the day we met her, but only after hours of deliberation over whether I felt I had the time and energy to give her the life she deserved. (Evvie was young and full of energy, and I had just started at Vox.)

Evvie instantly added so much to our lives, and for a while, I assumed our relationship was reciprocal and that she gets just as much from our bond as I do. But recently I’ve begun to wonder if she’s a lot more bored and frustrated than I previously thought. That led me to read the stirring 2016 book Run, Spot, Run: The Ethics of Keeping Pets by author and bioethicist Jessica Pierce.

Pierce wants to show people like me the shadows beneath the sunny narrative of pet ownership, things like physical abuse , animal hoarding , puppy mills , dog fighting , and bestiality .

But beyond such extremes, Pierce’s work aims to direct our gaze to where more subtle, but far more common, forms of everyday neglect and cruelty lie. To Pierce, even well-meaning pet owners may have a lot to answer for: punitive training, prolonged captivity and extreme confinement, mutilations (declawing, ear and tail docking), outdoor tethering, lack of autonomy, verbal abuse, monotonous and unhealthy diets, lack of grooming, and inadequate veterinary care. (In 2016, about one-fifth of dog owners and half of cat owners didn’t bring their animal in for routine or preventive care, which is highly recommended .)

Add to the bill lack of exercise and socialization, boredom, and even abandonment. (Almost one-fifth of pet owners surveyed late last year said they were considering giving up their pets due to cost amid high inflation, which is generally not an option for other “family members.”)

All this is possible because, unlike children, pets aren’t really family members — they’re property without legal rights and few laws to protect them. And because abuse and neglect primarily occur in the privacy of the home, there’s little accountability for it. Even the most responsible pet owners, which I’d count myself among, are bound to fail to meet the needs of their animals due to other responsibilities and the inherent challenges of keeping a dog or cat in a world made for humans.

We may see ourselves as the best of animal lovers, but we very well could be inflicting suffering on our pets every day.

Pet-keeping “is like a sacred cow in a way,” Pierce told me. “Everybody assumes that pets are well off, and in fact, pampered … All they have to do is lay around in a bed and get fed treats every now and then and catch a Frisbee if they feel like it — like, who wouldn’t want that life?

“Underneath that is the reality that doing nothing but laying on a bed and having treats fed to you is profoundly frustrating and boring and is not a meaningful life for an animal.”

Animals in a human world

Since humans domesticated dogs (over 20,000 years ago ) and cats (over 10,000 years ago ), who some say are merely “ semi-domesticated ,” their roles have evolved largely from one type of work — hunting and guarding — to another: companionship. And counterintuitively, says Pierce, being a constant companion is a tougher job.

“Dogs are still working dogs; they’re just doing a different kind of work,” she said. “I think it’s actually much more dangerous and difficult work than any other kind of work we’ve ever asked them to do.”

We demand companionship with as little friction as possible, expecting our pets (especially dogs) to be docile and agreeable, and to adapt quickly to the human world, with its countless rules and norms that mean nothing to them. And then when they inevitably fail to do so at first, we deem their natural habits misbehavior in need of correction, or abandonment.

It’s telling that the world’s most popular dog trainer, Cesar Millan, partly relies on dominance and control to bring his subjects to heel. (Millan popularized the “dominance theory” approach to dog training, which has been debunked by scientists and criticized by the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior. A meta-analysis found that punitive training can increase dogs’ fear, anxiety, and stress.)

To serve the guard-to-companion evolution, a $136 billion pet industry has sprung up in recent decades to breed, transport, and sell tens of millions of animals a year — often in terrible conditions — and provide all the accoutrements of the modern pet, from food to toys to veterinary care to perfume for dogs . And just as Millan and his legion of followers bend some dogs’ behavior to their will, breeders have done the same for dogs’ genetics to make some breeds particularly agile , small, or cute — in other words, more attractive to humans. America’s current most popular breed, the French bulldog — and other flat-faced dogs, like pugs, boxers, and Shih Tzus — suffer from a variety of health issues because of how they were bred, leading journalist and Vox contributor Tove Danovich to call the Frenchie “a breed that’s been broken to accommodate us.”

And while approximately 30 to 40 percent of cats and dogs are acquired from shelters, not all of those adoptions work out — 7 to 20 percent are eventually returned, often due to complaints over the animals’ behavior. (Incompatibility with other pets, allergies, and cost are other top reasons).

Then there’s the estimated 97 million rabbits, birds, hamsters, gerbils, mice, fish, reptiles, amphibians, and other small animals kept as pets — mostly wild, social animals who spend their lives largely confined and isolated in cages and tanks. Their owners may love them, but their cramped and unnatural living arrangements are not so different from the pigs and chickens we raise for food.

A number of animal welfare scholars, like Pierce, are challenging the rosy picture that the pet industry — and pet owners, myself included — have painted around the domestic human-animal bond, and sometimes pose a radical question: should we end pet ownership? I’m increasingly inclined to think the answer could be yes — or that at the very least, there should be far fewer pets, and those owners should be prepared to put in the time and effort to provide them with far better lives.

The secret, boring life of pets

Before the cat dads and dog moms come for me, know this: I am one of you.

I’m an “animal person,” having spent half my life advocating for, and now reporting on, their welfare. I’ll always share a house with a rescued dog or cat. But Evvie’s needs, and my constant inability to meet them, have led me to question the whole endeavor of pet keeping.

As much as my partner and I lavish her with treats, walks, tug-of-war, playtime with other dogs , enrichment games, and less than legal off-leash romps in the woods outside our home in Silver Spring, Maryland, she spends much of her days with nothing to do but look out the window. We both work from home, which means there’s a fair amount of commotion and engagement to keep her stimulated. But despite that, Evvie is inevitably left to herself for much of the day — and she seems quite bored, with her extended periods of sleep followed by barking at me for attention (which she stops as soon as we play or go on a walk). And Evvie is comparatively lucky: in 2011, the average pet owner spent just about 40 minutes a day with their supposed family member.

Scientists have set up cameras to see what dogs do when home alone all day, and it turns out there’s a lot of yawning, barking, howling, whining, and sleeping — signs of anxiety and frustration. Charlotte Burn, a biologist and associate professor at the Royal Veterinary College in London, thinks our pets could also become bored when left alone for hours at a time.

“For most of us, [boredom is] a transient thing, and we can do something about it,” Burn told me. “But when you cannot do anything about it, it’s incredibly distressing. … Sometimes it’s thought of as a kind of luxury problem for animals, but actually, it may not be so luxurious if [an animal] can’t do anything about it, and it might be actually a massive welfare issue.”

Burn says there are two main animal responses to boredom. The first is drowsiness, brought on by an animal not having enough to do to stay awake, which looks to humans like staring into space, yawning, or sighing, even if the animal isn’t tired. The second is restlessness, even engaging in behaviors to help them stay awake. “They’ll try and escape their situation,” she says. “They’ll take risks, they’ll explore things even if they don’t like them, just basically to try and almost wake themselves up and make something happen.”

When we think about our pets, we naturally think about the brief time we spend with them — not their quiet, dull hours while we’re occupied with work, child care, friends, or errands while they’re cooped up. They might be excited when we come home not necessarily because they’re so delighted to see us, but because there’s finally an end to the silence that fills so much of their day.

“I think dogs are very adaptable, and become accustomed, often, to their lack of choices and autonomy,” said Alexandra Horowitz, a leading expert on dog behavior and head of the Horowitz Dog Cognition Lab at Barnard College, over email. “But I think that it’s not a good situation for them.”

Just how uneven the relationship is between pets and their human owners was demonstrated during the pandemic when, lonely and stuck at home, one in five households adopted a new pet. As new pet owners returned to work, however, their newly lonely pets struggled with the sudden change, showing high rates of chewing, digging, barking, escaping, pacing, hiding, and indoor urination and defecation.

Our pets might not be so bored if they just had some autonomy, but having a pet means regularly denying it. If Evvie’s hungry, she can’t grab a snack from the fridge. If she wants to play with another dog, I have to schedule it, or take her to the dog park (which for some dogs can be a blast and for others, overwhelming or dangerous , with some dogs dominating others, leading to stress and injuries). If she wants to explore the great outdoors, she has to wait until I have the time to take her for a walk — and even then, she’s tethered to a pesky leash, which I gently pull whenever she does something so harmless as stray too far into a neighbor’s yard to smell something that interests her or race ahead to greet a nearby dog or human.

As good as Evvie has it compared to most pets, she’s still a dog living in a world built for humans, and that means a life of constantly thwarted desires. The ability to meet her basic needs is entirely dependent upon someone else. Pets as we own them live in our worlds, not theirs.

What about cats? Cat behaviorists say they too can get bored . Few issues in the pet community spark as much debate as to whether cats should stay indoors or be given the freedom to come and go as they please in order to meet their needs for exercise, mental stimulation, and hunting, especially when that hunting results in the mass death of wildlife. (A 2013 paper estimates that cats in the US kill 1.3 to 4 billion birds and 6.3 to 22.3 billion small mammals annually, while wind turbines are estimated to kill a few hundred thousand birds to north of a million , each year).

The estimate has been contested , but even if it’s grossly off-base, it’s still a whole lot of death that’s a direct result of humanity’s semi-domestication and breeding of a once-wild animal. It’s also another example of a complicated ethical issue in which the welfare of pets is in conflict with the welfare of other animals (like killing animals for meat to feed pets).

So if we’re keeping more pets than ever, but many of the dogs are unhealthy and bored, the cats are either bored or cute little wildlife hunters, and the pet fish and birds are cruelly confined, what do we do about it? Some leading animal welfare experts say we ought to shrink the pet population and shift pet ownership from a casual hobby to a serious responsibility.

A world without pets — or one with happier pets?

Starting in 1979, Bob Barker of The Price is Right signed off each episode with a public service announcement: “This is Bob Barker reminding you to help control the pet population — have your pets spayed or neutered.”

1979 was a different time for cats and dogs in America; by one estimate, 7.6 to 10 million of them were euthanized annually around that time. While the national pet population has grown considerably in the years since, the number of shelter cats and dogs euthanized — while still depressingly high — has fallen to an estimated 920,000 per year. There are a lot fewer strays, too. For example, in the mid-1980s New Jersey had 160,000 cats and dogs roaming the streets, which fell to 80,000 in 2014.

The dramatic reduction came about as a result of increased pet sterilization at veterinary clinics, a rise in shelters and animal welfare organizations, and PSA campaigns like Barker’s and others from animal welfare groups — such as “Adopt, don’t shop” — all contributing to a cultural shift in how we get, and treat, our pets. But while 30 to 40 percent of cats and dogs are acquired from animal shelters, many of them — especially dogs — are still the product of breeding: whether at large-scale puppy mills , in which dogs are raised and sold more like livestock than family members, or from more informal, small-scale home operations.

But what if every prospective dog and cat owner were to actually follow the “adopt, don’t shop” motto and Barker’s plea to spay or neuter their pet? It would be a Children of Men situation for domesticated pets. The pet population would rapidly shrink before virtually disappearing altogether, ushering in a world unimaginable — perhaps not even worth inhabiting — for the most diehard cat and dog lovers.

Would that be so bad? For pet-loving humans, definitely. My relationship with Evvie is deeply enriching (for me, at least). I’m excited to see her each morning, to watch her run full-speed through the forest, roughhouse with other dogs, and wag uncontrollably each time I walk through the front door. Life without dogs would be far duller.

But keeping pets shouldn’t only be about me or you — it’s a relationship, and one in which humans arguably take much more than they give. And by continuing pet keeping as it’s done now — by breeding millions of new puppies, kittens, fish, and other animals each year — we’re making the decision that all the overt abuse and lower-grade cruelty and neglect is more than made up for by the joy wrought by the human-animal bond. I’m no longer so sure it is.

Gary Francione and Anna Charlton, a firebrand animal rights couple who teach law at Rutgers University, don’t think it is and have advocated for the abolition of pet ownership.

“Domesticated animals are completely dependent on humans, who control every aspect of their lives,” they wrote in a provocative essay for Aeon in 2016. “Unlike human children, who will one day become autonomous, non-humans never will. That is the entire point of domestication — we want domesticated animals to depend on us. They remain perpetually in a netherworld of vulnerability, dependent on us for everything that is of relevance to them.”

Because pets are property under the law, they argue, welfare standards will always be too low. We need to care for the ones in existence, but stop breeding new ones.

“I love living with dogs, but even I think that owning dogs can easily be considered morally questionable and may change in the future,” said Horowitz, the dog cognition expert.

I relate to Horowitz’s doubts, and find Francione’s and Charlton’s arguments persuasive, though given the popularity of pets — and the ancient human-animal bond — abolishing pet ownership is a political and cultural nonstarter. What might be more realistic is to radically rethink how we acquire and treat them, and just what we owe them.

When I asked Marc Bekoff , an ethologist at the University of Colorado Boulder who’s co-authored books with Pierce (and Jane Goodall), about whether we should phase out pet ownership, he said it’s perhaps a few thousand years too late to ask that question.

“In the best of all possible worlds, we wouldn’t have evolved to where we are now with dogs, because so many of the problems with dogs come down to selective breeding by humans deciding which traits they find cute or appealing,” he said, pointing to flat-faced dogs like the French bulldog.

He’d like to see puppy and kitten mills phased out amid a major cultural shift wherein people would only get a dog or cat if they have the time, money, patience, and energy to give them a good life. The motto would be: fewer pets with better lives. “You’re dealing with a sentient being who has very specific and enduring needs, and if you can’t fulfill them,” you should think twice, he said.

Pierce, a parent herself, has written about the importance of families with children thinking twice about getting a pet. Kids can be excited about a new pet one month and move on to another interest the next month — or just fail to take good care of the animal in the unique ways the pet needs (because they’re a child!). Families with children can also be more prone to neglecting their pets because child care, understandably, comes first.

While a lot of people call their pets “fur babies,” we’d be wise to think of them more as actual dependents, because they are. For most of human history, childhood wasn’t really a thing — children existed, at least in part, in service of their parents as additional labor. That has, of course, changed drastically over the last few hundred years, and with it, attitudes and habits around how we treat children. As part of that shift, though, the expectations for parenting rose as well, so much so that those expectations have become a major reason why people are having fewer or no children . Perhaps the same should happen for pets in the future. While the average pet probably has a much better life today than they did just 50 years ago, there’s still much room for improvement, but the demands would be such that fewer people would be in a position to become pet owners.

What pet owners should know

If you do decide to get a cat or dog, it’s imperative to adopt so as to prevent one more euthanasia among the millions of animals languishing in shelters, living lives that are likely worse than what they might experience even with a generally neglectful owner. And experts say it’s critical to understand that a good life is subjective — every individual animal is different — but it goes far beyond the basic requirements of sufficient food and water, protection from injury, and a walk here and there.

When surveyed , people are motivated to acquire a pet to fulfill their own emotional or practical needs: companionship, love, and affection, someone to greet them, property protection, or help while hunting. But taking a more animal-centered approach to keeping pets — focusing as well on what the human can give in the relationship — would go a long way to improving their quality of life.

For example, it doesn’t just mean taking the dog on a walk but letting them direct the route and giving them as much time as they’d like to smell , which is how they make sense of the world around them. For Bekoff, it also means ensuring they’re not left alone all day while their human is at work.

“Some people I know just leave their house at seven in the morning, they go to work, they go work out, or they go out for dinner, so the average dog is just going to be alone all day,” he said. “And then they get home and they’re tired, and they don’t walk them and they give them crappy food. Those people should not have a dog.”

While most veterinarians oppose letting cats free to roam outdoors, largely to prevent more cats from becoming roadkill, only six out of 10 are kept entirely indoors. Whichever side of the indoor-outdoor debate you choose, there are ways to give cats more of what they need. If your cat does have outdoor access, try giving them a colorful collar , which catches birds’ attention, gives them time to fly away, and can drastically reduce the avian body count. You can also try taking your cat for a walk on a leash (even if your neighbors might give you a double take).

“If you decide to keep a cat indoors, then you really have to work hard to compensate for what you’ve taken from them,” Pierce said. “[Your house] should look like a house where a cat lives, with perches and highways that they can walk across high up above the floor.” She recommends the book — this is the real title and author name — Total Cat Mojo: The Ultimate Guide to Life with Your Cat by Jackson Galaxy , whose YouTube channel includes videos on how to cat-ify one’s home.

Pets could benefit from more diverse diets , and there are also plenty of “enrichment” toys for cats and dogs. More importantly, enrichment games can be played with dogs to put their innate scavenging and sniffing skills to work. Good starting points for more animal-centered pet keeping include applying concepts like positive reinforcement training and cooperative care , and studying material from experts like Pierce, Horowitz, Galaxy, Bekoff, and anthrozoologist and cat expert John Bradshaw.

It’s harder for me to conceive of how one could ethically keep smaller animals, like birds , reptiles , rodents , fish , and amphibians . Unlike cats and dogs, these are naturally wild, undomesticated animals who are social and meant to fly, swim, or move great distances in a single day. As pets, they suffer in isolation and intensive confinement. It might be time we stop breeding them (or taking them from the wild, as some are actually trafficked wildlife ). We should give as good a life as possible to the ones who remain, through larger and more enriching enclosures, and eventually phase out of keeping them as pets.

For the animals we do have in our homes, we need to bring an attitude of give and take to the relationship, and we’re going to have to give a lot more than we’re currently taking.

“You’re really still asking these dogs or cats or other animals to live in a human-dominated world,” Bekoff said. “Cutting them some slack and giving them more choice and control or agency over their lives is a win-win for everyone.”

When my partner and I adopted Evvie six months into the pandemic, like so many others , I figured that a brisk walk or two a day, occasional playtime with other dogs, and brief games of tug-of-war between work meetings was enough to give her a good life. I’ve come to realize that’s the bare minimum.

I think a world with far fewer pets is a better one, though I know Evvie won’t be my last, so long as there are animals in need of adoption from shelters. But rescuing a dog or cat is just the start. Those who are mildly interested in acquiring a pet need to think long and hard about the steep responsibility that lies ahead, and us self-described animal lovers ought to do much more to live up to our stated values.

Will you help keep Vox free for all?

At Vox, we believe that clarity is power, and that power shouldn’t only be available to those who can afford to pay. That’s why we keep our work free. Millions rely on Vox’s clear, high-quality journalism to understand the forces shaping today’s world. Support our mission and help keep Vox free for all by making a financial contribution to Vox today.

We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via

Next Up In Future Perfect

Sign up for the newsletter today, explained.

Understand the world with a daily explainer plus the most compelling stories of the day.

Thanks for signing up!

Check your inbox for a welcome email.

Oops. Something went wrong. Please enter a valid email and try again.

The battle for blame over a deadly terror attack in Moscow

We’re long overdue for an Asian lead on The Bachelor franchise

The House GOP just gave Biden’s campaign a huge gift

Kate Middleton’s cancer diagnosis is part of a frightening global trend

The disappearance of Kate Middleton, explained

3 Body Problem, explained with the help of an astrophysicist

Photo by Brian Rueb Photography/Getty

The case against pets

A morally just world would have no pets, no aquaria, no zoos. no fields of sheep, no barns of cows. that’s true animal rights.

by Gary L Francione & Anna E Charlton   + BIO

We live with six rescued dogs. With the exception of one, who was born in a rescue for pregnant dogs, they all came from very sad situations, including circumstances of severe abuse. These dogs are non-human refugees with whom we share our home. Although we love them very much, we strongly believe that they should not have existed in the first place.

We oppose domestication and pet ownership because these violate the fundamental rights of animals.

The term ‘animal rights’ has become largely meaningless. Anyone who thinks that we should give battery hens a small increase in cage space, or that veal calves should be housed in social units rather than in isolation before they are dragged off and slaughtered, is articulating what is generally regarded as an ‘animal rights’ position. This is attributable in large part to Peter Singer, author of Animal Liberation (1975), who is widely considered the ‘father of the animal rights movement’.

The problem with this attribution of paternity is that Singer is a utilitarian who rejects moral rights altogether, and supports any measure that he thinks will reduce suffering. In other words, the ‘father of the animal rights movement’ rejects animal rights altogether and has given his blessing to cage-free eggs, crate-free pork, and just about every ‘happy exploitation’ measure promoted by almost every large animal welfare charity. Singer does not promote animal rights ; he promotes animal welfare . He does not reject the use of animals by humans per se . He focuses only on their suffering. In an interview with The Vegan magazine in 2006, he said, for example, that he could ‘imagine a world in which people mostly eat plant foods, but occasionally treat themselves to the luxury of free-range eggs, or possibly even meat from animals who live good lives under conditions natural for their species, and are then humanely killed on the farm’.

We use the term ‘animal rights’ in a different way, similar to the way that ‘human rights’ is used when the fundamental interests of our own species are concerned. For example, if we say that a human has a right to her life, we mean that her fundamental interest in continuing to live will be protected even if using her as a non-consenting organ donor would result in saving the lives of 10 other humans. A right is a way of protecting an interest; it protects interests irrespective of consequences. The protection is not absolute; it may be forfeited under certain circumstances. But the protection cannot be abrogated for consequential reasons alone.

Non-human animals have a moral right not to be used exclusively as human resources, irrespective of whether the treatment is ‘humane’, and even if humans would enjoy desirable consequences if they treated non-humans exclusively as replaceable resources.

W hen we talk about animal rights, we are talking primarily about one right: the right not to be property. The reason for this is that if animals matter morally – if animals are not just things – they cannot be property. If they are property, they can only be things. Think about this matter in the human context. We are all generally agreed that all humans, irrespective of their particular characteristics, have the fundamental, pre-legal right not to be treated as chattel property. We all reject human chattel slavery. That is not to say that it doesn’t still exist. It does. But no one defends it.

The reason we reject chattel slavery is because a human who is a chattel slave is no longer treated as a person, by which we mean that the slave is no longer a being who matters morally. A human slave is a thing that exists completely outside the moral community. All the interests that the human slave has can be valued by someone else – the owner – who might choose to value the slave as a member of the family, or could provide the slave with minimal sustenance but otherwise treat the slave horribly. The slave’s fundamental interests might be valued at zero.

There were many laws that purported to regulate race-based human slavery in the United States and Britain. These laws did not work because the only times regulatory laws are relevant is when there is a conflict between slave and slave owner. And, if the slave owner does not prevail substantially all of the time, then there is no longer an institution of slavery. There can be no meaningful challenge to the exercise of the owner’s property rights.

The same problem exists where non-humans are concerned. If animals are property, they can have no inherent or intrinsic value. They have only extrinsic or external value. They are things that we value. They have no rights; we have rights, as property owners, to value them . And we might choose to value them at zero.

There are many laws that supposedly regulate our use of non-human animals. In fact, there are more such laws than there were laws that regulated human slavery. And, like the laws that regulated human slavery, they don’t work. These laws are relevant only when human interests and animal interests conflict. But humans have rights, including the right to own and use property. Animals are property. When the law attempts to balance human and non-human interests, the result is preordained.

however ‘humanely’ we treat animals, they are still subjected to treatment that, were humans involved, would be torture

Moreover, because animals are chattel property, the standard of animal welfare will always be very low. It costs money to protect animal interests, which means that those interests will, for the most part, be protected only in those situations in which there is an economic benefit in doing so. It is difficult to find a welfare measure that does not make animal exploitation more efficient. Laws requiring the stunning of large animals before slaughter reduce carcass damage and worker injuries. Housing calves in smaller social units rather than in solitary crates reduces stress and resulting illness, which reduces veterinary costs.

To the extent that animal welfare measures increase production costs, the increase is usually very small (eg, going from the conventional battery cage to ‘enriched cages’ in the EU) and rarely affects overall demand for the product given elasticities of demand. In any event, however ‘humanely’ treated animals used for food are, they are still subjected to treatment that, were humans involved, would be torture. There is no such thing as ‘happy’ exploitation.

Although the right not to be property is a negative right and does not address any positive rights that non-humans might have, recognition of that one negative right would have the effect of requiring us, as a matter of moral obligation, to reject all institutionalised exploitation, which necessarily assumes that animals are just things that we can use and kill for our purposes.

W e want to take a short detour here and point out that, although what we are saying might sound radical, it’s really not. Indeed, our conventional wisdom about animals is such that we come to almost the same conclusion without any consideration of rights at all.

Conventional wisdom about animals is that it is morally acceptable for humans to use and kill them but that we should not impose unnecessary suffering and death on animals. However we might understand the concept of necessity in this context, it cannot be understood as allowing any suffering or death for frivolous purposes. We recognise this clearly in particular contexts. For example, many people still have a strong negative reaction to the American football player Michael Vick, who was found to be involved in a dog-fighting operation in 2007. Why do we still resent Vick almost a decade later? The answer is clear: we recognise that what Vick did was wrong because his only justification was that he derived pleasure or amusement from harming those dogs, and pleasure and amusement cannot suffice as justifications.

Many – perhaps most – people object to bullfighting, and even most Tories in the UK oppose fox hunting. Why? Because those bloodsports, by definition, involve no necessity or compulsion that would justify imposing suffering and death on non-human animals. No one proposed that Vick would be less culpable if he were a more ‘humane’ dog fighter. No one who opposes bloodsports proposes that they be made more humane because they involve unnecessary suffering. They oppose the activities altogether, and advocate their abolition, because these activities are immoral, however they are conducted.

The problem is that 99.999 per cent of our uses of non-human animals are morally indistinguishable from the activities to which the overwhelming number of us object.

The only use of animals that we make that is not transparently frivolous is the use of animals in research to find cures for serious illnesses

Our most numerically significant use of animals is for food. We kill more than 60 billion animals for food annually, and this does not count the even larger number – estimated conservatively to be about a trillion – of sea animals. We don’t need to eat animals for optimal health. Indeed, an increasing number of mainstream healthcare authorities, including the National Institutes of Health in the US, the American Heart Association, the British National Health Service, and the British Dietetic Association, have stated that a sensible vegan diet can be just as nutritious as a diet that includes animal foods. Some authorities have gone further to say that a vegan diet can be healthier than an omnivorous diet. In any event, it cannot be credibly claimed that we need animal products for health reasons. And animal agriculture is an ecological disaster.

We consume animal products because we enjoy the taste. In other words, we are no different from Vick, except that most of us pay others to inflict the harm rather than inflicting it ourselves. And our uses of animals for entertainment or sport are, by definition, also unnecessary. The only use of animals that we make that is not transparently frivolous is the use of animals in research to find cures for serious illnesses. We reject vivisection as morally unjustifiable even if it involves necessity (a claim we also believe is problematic as an empirical matter), but the morality of vivisection requires a more nuanced analysis than the use of animals for food, clothing, entertainment and other purposes. Just about all of our other uses of animals can easily be seen to be immoral given our conventional wisdom.

The bottom line: whether you adopt an animal-rights position and recognise that animals must have a basic, pre-legal right not to be property, or you stay with conventional wisdom, the result is the same: substantially all of our uses of animals must be abolished.

T o say that an animal has a right not to be used as property is simply to say that we have a moral obligation to not use animals as things, even if it would benefit us to do so. With respect to domesticated animals, that means that we stop bringing them into existence altogether. We have a moral obligation to care for those right-holders we have here presently. But we have an obligation not to bring any more into existence.

And this includes dogs, cats and other non-humans who serve as our ‘companions’.

We treat our six dogs as valued members of our family. The law will protect that decision because we may choose to value our property as we like. We could, however, choose instead to use them as guard dogs and have them live outside with virtually no affectionate contact from us. We could put them in a car right now and take them to a shelter where they will be killed if they are not adopted, or we could have them killed by a veterinarian. The law will protect those decisions as well. We are property owners. They are property. We own them.

The reality is that in the US, most dogs and cats do not end up dying of old age in loving homes. They have homes for a relatively short period of time before they are transferred to another owner, taken to a shelter, dumped or killed.

And it does not matter whether we characterise an owner as a ‘guardian’, as some advocates urge. Such a characterisation is meaningless. If you have the legal right to take your dog to a kill shelter, or to ‘humanely’ kill your dog yourself, it does not matter what you call yourself or your dog. Your dog is your property. Those of us who live with companion animals are owners as far as the law is concerned, and we have the legal right to treat our animals as we see fit as long as we provide for minimal food, water and shelter. Yes, there are limitations on the exercise of our ownership rights. But those limitations are consistent with according a very low value to the interests of our animal companions.

But, as you recoil in horror thinking of what life would be like without your beloved dog, cat or other non-human companion, whom you love and cherish as a member of your family, you are probably thinking: ‘But wait. What if we required everyone to treat their animals the way I treat mine?’

The problem with this reply is that, even if we could come up with a workable and enforceable scheme that required animal owners to provide a higher level of welfare to their animals, those animals would still be property. We would still be able to value their lives at zero and either kill them, or take them to a shelter where they would be killed if not adopted.

You might respond that you disagree with all that as well, and that we ought to prohibit people from killing animals except in situations in which we might be tempted to allow assisted suicide (terminal illness, unrelenting pain, etc) and that we should prohibit shelters from killing animals except when it is in the best interests of the animal.

domestication itself raises serious moral issues irrespective of how the non-humans involved are treated

What you’re suggesting starts coming close to abolishing the status of animals as chattel property and requiring that we treat them in a way that is similar to the way we treat human children. Would it be acceptable to continue to breed non-humans to be our companions then?

Our answer is still a firm ‘no’.

Putting aside that the development of general standards of what constitutes treating non-humans as ‘family members’ and resolution of all the related issues is close to impossible as a practical matter, this position neglects to recognise that domestication itself raises serious moral issues irrespective of how the non-humans involved are treated.

Domesticated animals are completely dependent on humans, who control every aspect of their lives. Unlike human children, who will one day become autonomous, non-humans never will. That is the entire point of domestication – we want domesticated animals to depend on us. They remain perpetually in a netherworld of vulnerability, dependent on us for everything that is of relevance to them. We have bred them to be compliant and servile, and to have characteristics that are pleasing to us, even though many of those characteristics are harmful to the animals involved. We might make them happy in one sense, but the relationship can never be ‘natural’ or ‘normal’. They do not belong in our world, irrespective of how well we treat them. This is more or less true of all domesticated non-humans. They are perpetually dependent on us. We control their lives forever. They truly are ‘animal slaves’. Some of us might be benevolent masters, but we really can’t be anything more than that.

There are some, such as Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka, who in their book Zoopolis (2011) say that humans are dependent on each other, and ask what’s wrong with animals being dependent on us? Human relationships might involve mutual dependence or interdependence, but such dependence either operates on the basis of choice, or it reflects social decisions to care for more vulnerable members of society who are bound together and protected by the complex aspects of a social contract. Besides, the nature of human dependence does not strip the dependant of core rights that can be vindicated if the dependence becomes harmful.

There are those who respond to our position by saying that dogs, cats and other ‘pet’ animals have a right to reproduce. Such a position would commit us to continue to reproduce without limit and indefinitely, as we could not limit any reproductive right to ‘pet’ animals. As for those who are concerned that the end of domestication would mean a loss of species diversity, domesticated animals are beings we have created through selective breeding and confinement.

Some critics have claimed that our position concerns only the negative right not to be used as property, and does not address what positive rights animals might have. This observation is correct, but all domestication would end if we recognised this one right – the right not to be property. We would be obliged to care for those domesticated animals who presently exist, but we would bring no more into existence.

If we all embraced the personhood of non-humans, we would still need to think about the rights of non-domesticated animals who live among us and in undeveloped areas. But if we cared enough not to eat, wear or otherwise use domesticated non-humans, we would undoubtedly be able to determine what those positive rights should be. The most important thing is that we recognise the negative right of animals not to be used as property. That would commit us to the abolition of all institutionalised exploitation that results in the commodification and control of them by humans.

We love our dogs, but recognise that, if the world were more just and fair, there would be no pets at all, no fields full of sheep, and no barns full of pigs, cows and egg-laying hens. There would be no aquaria and no zoos.

If animals matter morally, we must recalibrate all aspects of our relationship with them. The issue we must confront is not whether our exploitation of them is ‘humane’ – with all of the concomitant tinkering with the practices of animal-use industries – but rather whether we can justify using them at all.

Thinkers and theories

A man beyond categories

Paul Tillich was a religious socialist and a profoundly subtle theologian who placed doubt at the centre of his thought

War and peace

Legacy of the Scythians

How the ancient warrior people of the steppes have found themselves on the cultural frontlines of Russia’s war against Ukraine

Peter Mumford

Public health

It’s dirty work

In caring for and bearing with human suffering, hospital staff perform extreme emotional labour. Is there a better way?

Susanna Crossman

Social psychology

The magic of the mundane

Pioneering sociologist Erving Goffman realised that every action is deeply revealing of the social norms by which we live

Lucy McDonald

Prehistory in the atomic age

To understand the terrifying futures unleashed by nuclear weapons, we urgently need to return to the deep past

Maria Stavrinaki

Who bears the risk?

Under the guise of empowerment and freedom, politicians and business are offloading lifethreatening risk to individuals

Suzanne Schneider

My Pet Essay

500 words essay on my pet.

Pets are a blessing that only lucky people get to have. I have been lucky enough to have many pets since my childhood. My pet is a cat whom we call Mingi. It is white and grey in colour. Mingi is 3 years old and has been with me ever since she was born. Through my pet essay, I will make you learn all about Mingi and why it is so dear to me.

How Mingi Became My Pet Essay

Mingi has short hair and also a glossy coat. It is a female and love to have milk and chicken. Sometimes, I treat it with fish as it loves the taste of tuna. Moreover, Mingi is a very loving pet that stays with me at all times.

Ever since I was little, I liked cats. I love how clean and majestic they are. Although, there were no plans to keep a pet cat. My mother did not allow me as she would end up doing all the work for the pet.

However, she used to keep a bowl of fresh water in our garden to ensure no birds or animals remain thirsty during the summer season. A lot of pigeons and sparrows come to my garden to quench their thirst.

One fine day, a cat came to drink the water. It started coming regularly afterwards and gave birth to kittens in our garden. My mother gave them food as well and some milk every day.

However, one day all of them were gone except for a little kitten. I started to feed it regularly and became close to it. As the mother did not return, I decided to keep it as my pet.

After taking permission from my mother, I finally got to keep Mingi by promising to bear its responsibility. Ever since Mingi has been in my life. It was so little but now has grown into a big and beautiful cat.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

A Clean Pet

Cats are one of the cleanest pets that do not require a lot of effort to maintain. I hardly have to worry about Mingi being dirty as it cleans itself regularly. I conduct a bathing session every month with my mother.

It is not easy but Mingi is now used to it. We also comb Mingi’s coat twice a week so no dead hair remains and her hygiene is intact. Moreover, it may sound rare but we also brush Mingi’s teeth every week.

During winters , Mingi gets cold so we have got her a warm coat to protect her from the cold. Mingi remains indoors mostly and never dirties our house. Ever since it was little, she knew where to relieve herself so she’s always been low maintenance and love.

Conclusion Of My Pet Essay

All in all, Mingi has been a blessing that happened by chance. However, she is now an inseparable part of my life. I love spending time with her and she manages to make my saddest days happier.

FAQ on My Pet Essay

Question 1: Why are pets important?

Answer 1: Pets like cats and dogs can reduce the stress and anxiety of a person. Moreover, they also help to ease loneliness and reduce depression. Children become more secure and active when they care for animals .

Question 2: What do pets need?

Answer 2: Pets needs food, water, shelter, exercise, and socializing. It is essential to give your pet all this so they can lead a comfortable and happy life.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

IELTS Practice.Org

IELTS Practice Tests and Preparation Tips

• Band 9 IELTS Essays

Band 9 essay sample | Keeping pets can cause health problems in children

by Manjusha Nambiar · January 24, 2017

Essay topic

Some people think that keeping pets is good for children while others think it is dangerous and unhealthy. Which opinion do you agree with? Discuss both options and give examples.

Sample essay

Whether to have a pet or not remains a controversial issue. While some people are against having pets, in my opinion, domestic animals have a positive impact on our physical and psychological health and wellbeing. Also they make great companions for our children.

People who are against having pets argue that playing with them can cause serious health problems in human beings especially children. Of course, there are people who keep spiders and snakes as their pets. These creatures are certainly dangerous and pose considerable threat to the life of their owners. However, the vast majority of pets do not belong to this category. Another argument against keeping pets is that they can cause skin allergies and aggravate bronchial asthma. These health concerns are real and I feel that people who are susceptible to them should stay away from animals. Animal rights activists also claim that keeping pets away from their natural habitats will affect their health and the food chain. However, in my opinion, if their owners take good care of them, keeping them at home is unlikely to have any adverse impact on their health.

While it is true that keeping a pet may have some ill effects on our health, the benefits of having one are more significant. Pets improve our mood and health. Playing with the pets or taking them for a walk will keep both children and adults fit and healthy. What’s more, most people keep dogs, cats and fish; however, serious accidents caused by pets remain rare and statistically insignificant. Last but not the least, having a pet makes children more responsible. They learn to take care of another life and also become more sensitive, caring and sympathetic.

To sum up, although there are some minor drawbacks to owning a pet, in my opinion, the advantages of having a pet are far more significant. Pets make great companions and prevent depression in children and adults.

Tags: ielts essay sample

Manjusha Nambiar

Hi, I'm Manjusha. This is my blog where I give IELTS preparation tips.

• Next story  IELTS essay about obesity and its causes and solutions
• Previous story  IELTS essay sample about shootouts and liberal gun laws

4 Responses

• Pingbacks 0

Hi Ma’am – Please provide a band for below question:

Pet animals have played a pivotal role in the lives of human beings. Some people opine that keeping animals as pets has a positive impact on youngsters, while others vehemently contend that this can be hazardous for children. I strongly agree with the former agreement.

On the one hand, proponents of the view that domestic animals are good for children, state numerous reasons. Firstly, having a pet inculcates in children the habit of taking care of another living creature. There is ample scientific evidence to bolster the unequivocal and irrefutable argument that this develops in children various traits that are necessary for life, including time management, discipline, and empathy. Secondly, children get a companion at an early age that they can spend their time with. This is especially critical for children with no siblings. For instance, a single child with no companion is more prone to feelings of loneliness and isolation.

On the other hand, few people believe that allowing children to take care of pets is not a good idea. They opine that children feel overwhelmed and overburdened in taking care of domestic animals, and are not able to make judicious use of their time. Children are already pre-occupied with myriad activities throughout the day, like completing school assignments and attending coaching classes. This leaves little or no room to take care of pets and can rather act as an impediment to their career. Furthermore, they believe that children with limited life experiences and knowledge will not be able to take care of another living being. According to these people, some pet animals can be potentially dangerous for children. For example, there have been reports around how few breeds of dogs like German Shepherd and Bulldogs have attacked young owners.

To conclude, pets form an intrinsic part of people’s lives and while there are few obvious demerits of allowing children to have pets, like the possibility of being attacked and excessive time consumption, I strongly believe that taking care of pets is essential to inculcate positive habits and to allow overall development of a child.

This is close to band 7. You believe that it is good to keep pets, so you have to downplay the disadvantages.

Hi Ma’am, please provide a band for below question and answer:

Many people believe that cooking is an essential life skill and should be taught to boys and girls in schools. Others disagree and believe it is a waste of school time. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Cooking is considered by some individuals as a pivotal and quintessential skill which should be taught in educational institutions. While others vehemently contend this view and believe that it is a non-essential skill. I strongly agree with the former argument.

On the one hand, learning cooking in the initial years serves numerous advantages. Years of practicing and rearing such a skill, since adolescence, allows a child to hone their natural talent. Furthermore, cooking is essential not only as a hobby, but it can turn into a prospective career in the future. There is ample scientific evidence to bolster the unequivocal and irrefutable argument that indulging in creative fields, like the culinary arts can allow an overall development of a human being. For instance, the world’s greatest chefs pursued their interest in this field since childhood, and therefore could climb the ladder of success. Moreover, the cognitive capacity of children is significantly greater than adults; therefore, teaching during this age is of utmost importance.

On the other hand, proponents of the latter view believe that, teaching pupils cooking has a plethora of demerits. Firstly, they believe that school curriculum should focus on theoretical subjects, like Mathematics and Science, which would help children prosper in their careers. They believe that teaching students cooking can be a waste of time, resources and energy, for both teachers as well as students. Secondly, they believe that using stoves can be hazardous as LPG leaks can cause a fire outbreak, risking the lives of innocent children.

To conclude, there are a few demerits of teaching children cooking during early life stages; however, as per my opinion, the merits significantly outweigh the demerits. The addition of cooking as a necessary subject during secondary education is critical to hone the creative talent of children.

This is close to band 7.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Quick Links

IELTS Practice

IELTS Sample Test

Band 9 Essay Samples

• Band 8 Essay Samples

Band 7.5 Essay Samples

• Band 7 essay samples

Band 9 letter samples

Band 7.5 IELTS letter samples

• Band 8 letter samples
• Band 7 letter samples

Academic IELTS Task 1 reports

Get Free Lessons In Your Inbox

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Author | Manjusha Nambiar

• Academic Writing Task 1
• Advantage Disadvantage Essays
• Advantages/Disadvantages Essays
• Agree Or Disagree
• Discuss Both Views
• Grammar exercises
• IELTS Writing
• Learn English
• OET Letters
• Sample Essays
• Sample Letters
• Writing Tips
• Discovering India
• English Grammar and Writing
• IELTS Writing Tips
• Learn Maths Online
• NCERT Guides

Keeping Exotic Pets and Negative Consequences Essay

Introduction, works cited.

Specific Purpose: To convince conscious pet-owners that keeping exotic pets harms the latter, the solution is to advocate for better regulations because I do not want to play God and would rather start being responsible for protecting the environment.

Central Idea: To be convinced not to keep exotic pets.

• Many exotic pets die even before being sold, and the rest suffer in an unsuitable environment.
• Not making inquiries before buying such an animal results in insufficient resources and a pet’s death.
• Everyone in the audience probably has a pet and can feel empathy towards a non-human being.
• After researching the topic properly, I hope to convince you that keeping exotic pets is harmful to them, so the solution is to advocate for better regulations because I do not want to play God and would rather start being responsible for protecting the environment.

(Transition: Before I tell about advocating for better regulations, allow me to explain the issue with exotic pets).

Keeping exotic pets can be harmful to them due to inadequate care (problem). According to PETA, most of them die during capture and transportation, and those who survive the ordeal suffer the same fate at people’s homes, barely living for more than a year. Such pets require specialized diets and facilities, which are not easily available or affordable (Henn). Some impatient owners may leave them outdoors to solve the issue, but it is equally lethal for the animal (PETA). It may also become too distressed and try to escape, leading to a similar outcome (Henn). Meanwhile, several stakeholders, including smugglers, sellers, and other indifferent owners, appear to benefit from the situation.

The problem is rampant due to inadequate legal regulation regarding exotic pets, so the best solution would be to advocate for its improvement (solution). Better laws can remove the loopholes used by traders and make it mandatory to monitor animal lives to prevent abuse by smugglers or owners (Nuwer). The advocacy can be done through starting petitions or signing the existing ones, appealing to the local government, or joining forces with the Wildlife Conservation Society or another organization (Nuwer). As a result, exotic pets will not be openly sold, and their lives will be spared; moreover, a potential owner may avoid being incriminated for illegally possessing one and will opt for a safer option.

(Transition: As you have the understanding of the issue and its potential solution by advocating for better regulations in the field, I will share why it resonates with me).

I do not want to play God and would rather start being responsible for protecting the environment (emotional appeal). People buy exotic pets simply because they are unique or beautiful without caring for their survival, which is a consumerist approach to nature, and I cannot accept it. I believe that those animals are living beings deserving of freedom, and by leaving them alone, we will eventually learn how to save the planet, too.

I am out of time, but I am certain that now you see why it could be very beneficial to advocate for better regulations concerning exotic pets instead of keeping them.

Henn, Corrine. “Here’s Why Exotic Animals Belong in the Wild, Not as ‘Pets’ in Our Backyards.” One Green Planet , 2021, Web.

Nuwer, Rachel. “Many Exotic Pets Suffer or Die in Transit, and Beyond—and the U.S. Government is Failing to Act.” National Geographic , 2021, Web.

PETA. “Exotic Animals as ‘Pets.’” PETA , Web.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2022, October 5). Keeping Exotic Pets and Negative Consequences. https://ivypanda.com/essays/keeping-exotic-pets-and-negative-consequences/

"Keeping Exotic Pets and Negative Consequences." IvyPanda , 5 Oct. 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/keeping-exotic-pets-and-negative-consequences/.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'Keeping Exotic Pets and Negative Consequences'. 5 October.

IvyPanda . 2022. "Keeping Exotic Pets and Negative Consequences." October 5, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/keeping-exotic-pets-and-negative-consequences/.

1. IvyPanda . "Keeping Exotic Pets and Negative Consequences." October 5, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/keeping-exotic-pets-and-negative-consequences/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Keeping Exotic Pets and Negative Consequences." October 5, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/keeping-exotic-pets-and-negative-consequences/.

• The PETA print advertisement
• Cultural Analysis of PETA Commercial
• The Birth of a Consumerist Society
• Impatient Rehabilitation Center's Services
• The Character of Jesus
• Happy Cows Case: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
• Exotic Species Threat to Native Species
• Retributivism and Fallible Systems of Punishment
• Value of Anti-Consumerist Movements
• Ethical Problems With Non-Human Slavery and Abuse
• The Evolution of Communication Structures in Animals
• Compulsory Microchipping of Dogs
• Dogs: What Can't They Do?
• Instinctive Behavior in Animals
• Seasonal Trend of Fertility in Pigs

IELTS essay task 2 Keeping pets

IELTS essay task 2: Keeping pets

Nowadays, keeping pets in many families is growing in popularity. Some people claim that having a pet offer many benefits, while others are opposed to this idea. My opinion will be discussed in the succeeding paragraphs.

On the one hand, I believe that there are some undeniable perks of pets. Firstly, pets will increase personal safety. Take dogs for example, they can attack burglars and inform the family about suspicious people by barking loudly. In addition, smaller dogs or cats can alert their owners to dangers such as fire or gas leak. Many people could stay alive thanks to the protection from their pets kept in their house.

Another advantage is that domestic animals improve mental health. Everyday anxiety and stress can be greatly decreased by spending time with a pet. For example, teenagers, whose parents are always too busy to spend time with them, consider a pet as their friend who they can play and talk with. Pets also bring some moments of relaxation and mind refreshment, which can solve some emotional problems that people are vulnerable to.

On the other hand, there are some negatives that people should consider. One drawback of getting a pet is the increase in responsibility. For instance, owning a dog requires a lot of time spent, such as taking the dog for regular walks, bathing and feeding it. Besides, large dogs or aggressive pets such as snakes will require special attention and even training to make sure they are safe, especially around children.

In conclusion, there are some negatives of keeping a pet, however, if the owner is aware of his responsibility, I believe that domestic animals can bring huge benefits to the owner.

• Log in or register to post comments

Essay evaluations by e-grader

Grammar and spelling errors: Line 7, column 365, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1] Message: Did you mean 'making'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'train' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun. Suggestion: making ...ire special attention and even training to make sure they are safe, especially around c... ^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used: also, besides, first, firstly, however, if, so, while, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech: To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK Preposition: 30.0 41.998997996 71% => OK Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words: No of characters: 1407.0 1615.20841683 87% => OK No of words: 281.0 315.596192385 89% => More content wanted. Chars per words: 5.00711743772 5.12529762239 98% => OK Fourth root words length: 4.09427095027 4.20363070211 97% => OK Word Length SD: 2.54992077748 2.80592935109 91% => OK Unique words: 171.0 176.041082164 97% => OK Unique words percentage: 0.608540925267 0.561755894193 108% => OK syllable_count: 443.7 506.74238477 88% => OK avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by: Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK

Performance on sentences: How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short. Sentence length SD: 37.9729461153 49.4020404114 77% => OK Chars per sentence: 82.7647058824 106.682146367 78% => OK Words per sentence: 16.5294117647 20.7667163134 80% => OK Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.06120827912 113% => OK Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted. What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion: Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.143822024324 0.244688304435 59% => OK Sentence topic coherence: 0.0522097299547 0.084324248473 62% => OK Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0555919478898 0.0667982634062 83% => OK Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0917785984593 0.151304729494 61% => OK Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0324601925107 0.056905535591 57% => OK

Essay readability: automated_readability_index: 10.4 13.0946893788 79% => Automated_readability_index is low. flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 50.2224549098 110% => OK smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low. flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.3001002004 84% => OK coleman_liau_index: 11.48 12.4159519038 92% => OK dale_chall_readability_score: 8.53 8.58950901804 99% => OK difficult_words: 73.0 78.4519038076 93% => OK linsear_write_formula: 5.5 9.78957915832 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low. gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK What are above readability scores?

--------------------- Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100 Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9 --------------------- Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Student Opinion

Do We Pamper Our Pets Too Much?

Are we a little too obsessed with our animals? Is it healthy for them? For us?

By Katherine Schulten

Do you have any pets? If so, do you pamper them? How?

Do you think, in general, people spend too much time, money and attention on their animals these days? Even if you don’t have a pet yourself, what have you observed about those around you?

In “ My Goldendoodle Spent a Week at Some Luxury Dog ‘Hotels.’ I Tagged Along ,” Sam Apple asks: “How did humans start catering to the whims of canines rather than the other way around? And what if, somewhere along the way, we all became a little too obsessed with our dogs?”

The article begins this way:

By the time my goldendoodle, Steve, and I pulled up to our resting place, I was tired from the long drive and already second-guessing my plan. I felt a little better when we stepped inside the Dogwood Acres Pet Retreat. The lobby, with its elegant tiled entrance, might have passed for the lobby of any small countryside hotel, at least one that strongly favored dog-themed décor. But this illusion was broken when the receptionist reviewed our reservation — which, in addition to our luxury suite, included cuddle time, group play, a nature walk and a “belly rub tuck-in.” Venues like this one, located on Kent Island in Maryland’s Chesapeake Bay, didn’t exist when I was growing up in the 1980s. If you needed a place to board your dog back then, you went to a kennel, where your dog spent virtually the entire day in a small — and probably not very clean — cage. There were no tuck-ins, no bedtime stories, no dog-bone-shaped swimming pools. There were certainly nothing like today’s most upscale canine resorts, where the dogs sleep on queen-size beds and the spa offerings include mud baths and blueberry facials; one pet-hotel franchise on the West Coast will even pick up your dog in a Lamborghini. I knew Dogwood Acres wouldn’t be quite as luxurious as that, but the accommodations still sounded pretty nice. The website mentioned “distinctive décor,” “cable television” and “a large picture window overlooking an extra-large private outdoor patio.”

The piece continues:

It’s not just the hotels. There are now dog bakeries and ice cream parlors and social clubs. One dog-only San Francisco cafe serves canines a $75 tasting menu; more and more restaurants (for people) also now offer dog menus. A lot of these things probably started as jokes, but such gestures have a way of outliving their origins. At some point, throwing birthday parties for our dogs and buying them Valentine’s Day gifts went from being something we did to be funny to something we just did. Total spending on pets in the United States — and dogs are by far the most popular pet — rose more than 50 percent between 2018 and 2022, when it reached $137 billion, according to a pet-products trade association. Americans now spend more than half a billion dollars each year on pet Halloween costumes alone, per the National Retail Federation. This sharp spending increase overlaps with Americans’ spending approximately twice as much time with pets today as they did two decades ago. A 2023 survey found that around half of American owners believe their pet knows them better than anyone else does, including significant others and best friends. These statistics sit uncomfortably alongside the fact that the U.S. surgeon general recently declared human loneliness an “epidemic.” It’s hard not to wonder whether our growing obsession with dogs is somehow related to our declining interest in one another. Maybe, even as we’re humanizing our dogs, the deeper appeal is not that they’re like people but that they’re not like people. Maybe, if you dig far enough beneath the surface of our dog love, you eventually arrive at a thin layer of misanthropy.

Students, read the entire article and then tell us:

What pets do you own? What role do they play in your life?

How have you pampered your pets? (Or, if you don’t have any, how have you seen friends and family members pamper their pets?)

If you had all the money and time you needed, how far would you go in spoiling your pet? For instance, would you throw him or her a birthday party? Shell out for a $75 tasting menu? Read him or her a special bedtime story? Install a bone-shaped pool in your backyard? Pay for your pet to spend time at a spa? Call the spa each day to play your pet the kazoo, as one of the “pet parents” described in this article does?

To what extent do you think pampering is healthy for animals? And how healthy is it for the humans who own them? Why?

What do you think of the 2023 survey that reports that around half of American owners believe their pet knows them better than anyone else? Do you think your pet knows you better than your parents, siblings or closest friends? Why or why not — and how can you tell?

Do you sometimes feel that you might like animals better than people? Among the questions this article poses is whether our obsession with our pets might be related to loneliness, and whether it is both caused by and contributing to our declining interest in other humans. For you, does having a pet alleviate loneliness or make it worse? Or, perhaps, both?

In your view, what should be the place of animals in our lives? What would be most healthy for us? What would be most healthy for them? Why?

Students 13 and older in the United States and Britain, and 16 and older elsewhere, are invited to comment. All comments are moderated by the Learning Network staff, but please keep in mind that once your comment is accepted, it will be made public and may appear in print.

Find more Student Opinion questions here. Teachers, check out this guide to learn how you can incorporate these prompts into your classroom.

Katherine Schulten has been a Learning Network editor since 2006. Before that, she spent 19 years in New York City public schools as an English teacher, school-newspaper adviser and literacy coach. More about Katherine Schulten

IELTS Mentor "IELTS Preparation & Sample Answer"

• Skip to content
• Jump to main navigation and login

Nav view search

• IELTS Sample

IELTS Writing Task 2/ Essay Topics with sample answer.

Ielts essay # 1233 - keeping pets is good for children, ielts writing task 2/ ielts essay:, some people think that keeping pets is good for children while others think it is dangerous and unhealthy for them., discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

• IELTS Essay
• Writing Task 2
• Discuss both views
• Discussion Essay

IELTS Materials

• IELTS Bar Graph
• IELTS Line Graph
• IELTS Table Chart
• IELTS Flow Chart
• IELTS Pie Chart
• IELTS Letter Writing
• Academic Reading

Useful Links

• IELTS Secrets
• Band Score Calculator
• Exam Specific Tips
• Useful Websites
• IELTS Preparation Tips
• Academic Reading Tips
• Academic Writing Tips
• GT Writing Tips
• Listening Tips
• Speaking Tips
• IELTS Grammar Review
• IELTS Vocabulary
• IELTS Cue Cards
• IELTS Life Skills
• Letter Types

• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Copyright Notice
• HTML Sitemap

Spread the word.

Share the link on social media.

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people's questions & connect with other people.

Username or email *

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

You must login to ask a question.

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

ByTure Latest Articles

Essay on keeping pets (500+ words).

Pets bring an extra dimension to our life. Pet owners often have great affection for their pets and treat them with loving care, as they do to the members of their family. Is this a bad thing? The answer depends on the degree and nature of this loving care.

It is quite good for a person to be fond of a pet and treat it accordingly. Medical research suggests that the fond association of a pet may prolong a man’s life and keep his health in good condition. On the other hand, a pet gets a good home. It is, as if, a pet becomes one of the children of a family. It plays a more important part in those families of husband and wife who have no child. A pet owner says, “Nobody waits for me as my dog does.”

It is regarded as a good thing for a child to have a pet to take care of. It teaches the child playfully a sense of responsibility for maintaining duties and to show affection to a dependant. On the other hand, it is found that people who have abused animals in their childhood, abuse others in their adulthood. So, pets deserve due affection and attention.

But problems arise when pet owners are too indulgent with their pets. The pets cannot understand what and how far they should do and what they should not do or what limit they should not cross if they are given too much indulgence. An overindulgent pet owner does not like the idea of his or her pet sleeping in a basket or on a separate bed, however comfortable, and the pet is often found sharing the owner’s bed. This practice is very unhygienic and it should not be encouraged. Letting a pet sit on the armchair just before an important guest is not such a good idea either. Pets, especially dogs, should be trained on how to behave.

It is all very well to give pets a few food treats as bait during the training of obeying commands. But if they are given food bites too frequently, they become too fat. Some cats and dogs are by nature quite greedy, and animal obesity, like human obesity, can lead to major health hazards. It is also not any favour when pet owners give their pets food designed for humans. The owner may love chicken in a spicy sauce and cream-filled chocolate cakes, but these are very bad for the pet’s digestive system. They should be given simple food according to their requirement.

It is one thing to treat an animal with love and care, it is quite another to treat the animal like a human being with over-indulgence. This is the line that should not be crossed, though we see it is frequently crossed. Some pet owners even dress their dogs as though they were dolls fitted in knitted coats. When they have perfectly warm coats of their own, it is harmful to cover them with unnecessary extra coats, especially in hot countries. It is fine to comb the pet’s hair and keep it neat and clean, but not tie up the hair with ribbons for fashion only. Rather, it is important to take care of hair fall here and there as it is unhygienic.

Treating animals like humans in all matters and manners can have a very bad effect on their health too. Under the influence of such treatment, some dogs become aggressive or adopt other behaviour problems.

So, by all means, let people treat their pets with due care, kindness and love. But they must remember that an animal is an animal, not a human being. The nature of an animal and a human being has been differentiated by Nature herself. This principle should be taken care of for the sake of both the pet and the owner.

Related Posts

• Conversation Writing
• Biography of R. K. Narayan
• Critical Analysis of Short Story 'Selvi'
• Summary of Selvi by R. K. Narayan
• Summary of After Twenty Years by O. Henry
• After Twenty Years' Critical Analysis
• Essay on Population Problem in India
• Essay on the Future of English in India
• The Role of Students in Free India Essay
• Essay on Democracy