Pet concerns

While reading the IDS on Monday, Jan. 14, I came across the opinion page and was somewhat taken aback by Cheryl Thomas’s article on pet insurance. Ultimately, I believe what a person does with her or his money is her or his business and not up for debate. But I feel so inclined to make an argument against what Miss Thomas explored. She insists that pet insurance is a waste of money; but what about the money spent on frivolous, truly useless items such as designer handbags or the newest technological toy? Not to mention that many people have these things insured. Homeowner’s insurance is there to protect your things. Life insurance protects your family, and as far as I am concerned, a pet is family. When you take an animal as a pet you are making a life-long commitment to another living being. It becomes your responsibility to take care where care is needed. \nAnother point that was raised was what one could do with the money individuals spend on pet insurance, such as AIDS research or helping the poverty-stricken all over the world. How can you assume that their money would instead be used to such causes? It may be used for extremely high vet bills for their elderly pet! America is home to one of the world’s highest populations of philanthropists. Rather than pointing the finger at pet insurance, look elsewhere for misspent funds.\nThe statement that really got me was Miss Thomass take on pets, “We need to remember ... they are ... just animals.” On behalf of the dedicated pet owners out there, no Miss Thomas, they are not just animals. The raccoons that eat my garbage are just animals. My dog is my companion and I will do just about anything to keep him healthy.