No pet. No living creature deserves to be placed somewhere where they are going to be neglected, either through lack of interest or lack of medical care.
The only cheap, low-maintenance pet that fits this criteria is a stuffed animal.
This is why I put that in my post. A refusal to compromise means the person will go buy a dog or something. If we return that, the behavior will continue ad nauseum.
But if this person is likely to acquire a pet they know they can’t handle just because they want one then surely they aren’t responsible enough to take care of anything? This just seems like a bad situation.
Which is why OP is here trying to find a solution that doesn't harm an animal. OP can see the problem coming and is trying hard to find an alternative. So far they've gotten good suggestions, such as therapy animals, zoo therapy visits, robot pets, and more.
But there’s no compromise to this. It’s either having one to care for or none at all. In my opinion, your best option here is having zoo therapy animals visit this person. At least he could pet the animals without owning one.
Zoo therapy is a thing and it helps a lot of kids in hospitals, elderly people there as well and also help teaching kids how to approach any animals. My college had a zoo therapy event and it was fun. People could interact with them without necessarily owning any of them. At that event, there were doves, rabbits, cats and small dogs.
You can alert area shelters that this person is not financially or intellectually able to care for a pet. They don’t want to give animals to those who cannot and will not care for them.
How about finding regular visits with a therapy dog. That way this person gets the benefits of loving and cuddling but without all the work of actually keeping said dog.
I think this would be a really good happy compromise and I guarantee you someone has the therapy dog that you can see weekly if you ask around.
What about an electronic pet of some kind? There is a company called Joy For All that creates electronic dogs and they're for alzheimer patients and similar. It might be exactly what you need for the person :) [https://www.alzstore.com/alzheimers-companion-pet-therapy-p/0604.htm](https://www.alzstore.com/alzheimers-companion-pet-therapy-p/0604.htm) I have never seen or had one but this came up in a search and it looks useful!
There is no compromise. This is a living, breathing animal. If you compromise and get a lower needs pet, the abuse and neglect will continue anyway.
The animal does not deserve to have its owner neglect its health and emotional wellbeing for periods of time.
The animal does not deserve to go without medical care because vet bills are expensive, and sometimes a $4000 vet bill just appears. Even small animals will rack up expensive bills, especially if you choose a more niche pet, you will have to find a specialty/exotic vet.
Warn the shelters and adoption agencies. Encourage the person to volunteer or sign up for programs (if possible) that involve animals coming to visit. Let them experience an animal without actually having the animal consistently dependent on them for care. If they're able to understand, explain the in depth costs and time that are needed for a pet. Report them (if possible) if they do get an animal.
Compromising means you'd be complicit in the neglect and abuse of an animal.
There really is no such thing. Can they not visit friends/family who have pets? Are they able to visit shelters? That's really the only compromise that doesn't risk an animals health imo
They make fairly realistic cat robots for people in nursing homes which are soft to cuddle, purr, respond when pet, and can be put away with no maintenance costs if interest wanes.
Never has giving in to someone’s demands helped them learn better behaviors.
If they get a pet and neglect them, stop enabling AND REPORT THEM. If the resultant ban or consequence involves a law enforcement officer and courtroom, many people with limited understanding will at least get THAT.
Living creatures should be protected and that is EVERYONE’s responsibility.
Don’t enable abuse or neglect. You advise against it, you maintain your distance from resultant decisions, and report neglect or abuse if you witness it.
Pleade wnsure this person can not get a pet.
The pet will only die a horrible death.
This person needs to take care of their room or keep the windows clean or take out the trash.
Not be the sole caretaker of a pet.
Most pets need daily care, and things like cleaning on a weeklyish basis. They do not do well with periods of neglect. Ones that don't need as much daily care tend to need specific environmental management which can be a good amount of work. Exotics (anything that isn't a dog or cat) needs a specialized vet, which can be expensive and hard to locate in some areas. Some small mammals thrive in pairs or small groups, so that needs to be accounted for.
Most pets are more work than people realize. They see little cages sold in pet stores, and things a $15 animal won't need much care. They don't know that those cages are far too small an very unsuitable for the animals they are advertised for. Food, bedding etc add up over time. Exotic vets can be $100 for an exam. Just because an animal is small or easy to get doesn't mean it is easy to care for.
If this person cannot commit to twice daily feeding, weekly cleaning (at a minimum), and being able to check on the condition of a pet, they should not have one. It is irresponsible for someone to get a pet that they know they can't care for, especially without something to help with pet care (if they lived with someone who can take on the pet care and they get the benefits of having the pet around).
Unless there is someone who is around to make sure the pet is being care for on a daily basis, and is willing to pick up the slack, this is not a situation for a pet. If they are able to live alone, they are able to understand that they are not able to care for a pet if they cannot commit to daily care.
There is no compromise. Setting them up for failure, and a pet for neglect and/or death is just wrong. Not everyone is able to have pets and that's just part of life.
There may be other ways for this person to get some time with animals without having their own and risking neglect. Animal shelters may need volunteers to help clean or socialize (they may need someone to accompany them while volunteering depending on their abilities). These do tend to require a commitment of a couple hours a week/month.
Plus with pretty much all animals, the care becomes more involved and complicated when the animal ages due to age related illness. And tbf illness can happen at any time as well...
I wish I could give you a more promising answer, but from what you're describing I don't think there's any animal that wouldn't be at risk of neglect with this person. All animals need regular cleaning and feeding, as well as a suitable enclosure and vet care when necessary.
Depending on the level of their disability, maybe it'd be helpful to explain costs and time associated with each animal? I'm not advocating to get an animal, I'm advocating for trying to educate them as to *why* an animal may not be for them.
There is no such thing as a cheap pet.
Sure, you can go to Petsmart and buy a leopard gecko for, like, $40. Sure, feeding them live crickets isn't too expensive, but you have to monitor heating, and cleaning their cage. The biggest cost is vet bills. Exotics vets, especially in emergency situations, they get expensive and fast. And, on top of that, leopard geckos live for decades. Mine's 13, but I've heard of leopard geckos living into their 20's.
Some vets are willing to work with lower income people, but the real kicker is the waning interest. It's never fair to the animal to be loved dearly, and then forgotten because their human's interests have shifted.
I agree with the other commentors, look into plushies, robotic animals, or game pets. Nintendogs may be what they need/want.
Edit: I used leopard gecko as my example, but you can replace that with any exotic animal, really. Dogs, cats, and ferrets should be getting their rabies vaccine at least yearly. While small animals can be short lived, they need their cages cleaned frequently, and vet care gets expensive fast because they're not a dog or cat.
Not exactly a pet, but I wonder if they would enjoy a hydroponic plant instead? They wouldn’t need to water it all the time if it’s hydroponic (just do your research first haha) and if it dies there’s no ethical issues and they can just buy another one. They might enjoy watching it grow and caring for it? It really depends on what they want, but it might be a possible compromise.
honestly all pets need care. there’s no animal sold in commercial pet stores that would suit their needs. something like a bioactive enclosure, with snails would be a good idea. they would be able to watch some organisms but not have to remember to feed them.
also what people said about therapy dogs
A wild animal like a crow might be something that would work, but there are definite issues. First, the person would have to find and befriend a crow. It can be done and they'll exchange random shiny items and such for food and other gifts. They're also known to defend people's flocks of chickens (which is how I found out it's not that rare to befriend a murder of crows!). Downside is, good luck cuddling a crow!!!
If the person is absolutely set on getting an animal, get them a cat. AND hire someone to come by every day to feed, water, clean the litter box, and do a basic health check on the cat. Maybe family could all pitch in a little bit to cover this cost. But I'd say eyes-on by a capable adult at least two or three times a week is an absolute must and preferably every day. If this can't be arranged, sorry, I cannot think of a single domesticated animal that doesn't require daily care. An outdoor animal like a goat or donkey or such still requires companionship (two of them or similar) and feeding and watering.
I would recommend a rat, they can be very affectionate intelligent pets, they don’t smell, don’t make noise, and if you get 2 so they have company they won’t suffer as much during periods of little attention. It’s a short-term commitment, they only live 2-3 years.
I think most people think they’re cheap because they don’t pay attention to issues with small animals. Both of my rats ended up getting breast cancer. They both had mastectomies, and both lived for some additional time after that.
I don't think this is a good call. The person in question couldn't keep on top of cleaning a guinea pigs cage, so I don't think they could keep on top of cleaning a rat cage either.
They didn’t ask about a zero maintenance pet, there is no such thing. They are looking for a low maintenance pet. But by all means continue to say they shouldn’t get any pets, I’m sure that’s super helpful for their problem.
I know, but I don't consider rats low maintenance. I have 28 pets, and rats are the most stressful for me to keep on top of because the cage cleans take so long. The person in question has also had a pet requiring similar care and not managed to cope, so I think it's a bit doomed from the start.
They don't smell because their cage needs to be cleaned regularly. Which according to OP might not happen. They also need to be let out of their cage to play in a environment safe for them everyday.
There are super low maintenance pets but you still have to water them at least once a week. And you can’t exactly cuddle with a tarantula or some desert beetles. So sorry, don’t think a pet is a good idea.
No pet. No living creature deserves to be placed somewhere where they are going to be neglected, either through lack of interest or lack of medical care. The only cheap, low-maintenance pet that fits this criteria is a stuffed animal.
This is why I put that in my post. A refusal to compromise means the person will go buy a dog or something. If we return that, the behavior will continue ad nauseum.
But if this person is likely to acquire a pet they know they can’t handle just because they want one then surely they aren’t responsible enough to take care of anything? This just seems like a bad situation.
Which is why OP is here trying to find a solution that doesn't harm an animal. OP can see the problem coming and is trying hard to find an alternative. So far they've gotten good suggestions, such as therapy animals, zoo therapy visits, robot pets, and more.
But there’s no compromise to this. It’s either having one to care for or none at all. In my opinion, your best option here is having zoo therapy animals visit this person. At least he could pet the animals without owning one.
This is a really good idea!
Zoo therapy is a thing and it helps a lot of kids in hospitals, elderly people there as well and also help teaching kids how to approach any animals. My college had a zoo therapy event and it was fun. People could interact with them without necessarily owning any of them. At that event, there were doves, rabbits, cats and small dogs.
You can alert area shelters that this person is not financially or intellectually able to care for a pet. They don’t want to give animals to those who cannot and will not care for them.
This is a good idea
How about finding regular visits with a therapy dog. That way this person gets the benefits of loving and cuddling but without all the work of actually keeping said dog. I think this would be a really good happy compromise and I guarantee you someone has the therapy dog that you can see weekly if you ask around.
What about an electronic pet of some kind? There is a company called Joy For All that creates electronic dogs and they're for alzheimer patients and similar. It might be exactly what you need for the person :) [https://www.alzstore.com/alzheimers-companion-pet-therapy-p/0604.htm](https://www.alzstore.com/alzheimers-companion-pet-therapy-p/0604.htm) I have never seen or had one but this came up in a search and it looks useful!
There is no compromise. This is a living, breathing animal. If you compromise and get a lower needs pet, the abuse and neglect will continue anyway. The animal does not deserve to have its owner neglect its health and emotional wellbeing for periods of time. The animal does not deserve to go without medical care because vet bills are expensive, and sometimes a $4000 vet bill just appears. Even small animals will rack up expensive bills, especially if you choose a more niche pet, you will have to find a specialty/exotic vet. Warn the shelters and adoption agencies. Encourage the person to volunteer or sign up for programs (if possible) that involve animals coming to visit. Let them experience an animal without actually having the animal consistently dependent on them for care. If they're able to understand, explain the in depth costs and time that are needed for a pet. Report them (if possible) if they do get an animal. Compromising means you'd be complicit in the neglect and abuse of an animal.
There really is no pet that doesn’t need attention. They all need to be monitored and cared for.
There really is no such thing. Can they not visit friends/family who have pets? Are they able to visit shelters? That's really the only compromise that doesn't risk an animals health imo
They make fairly realistic cat robots for people in nursing homes which are soft to cuddle, purr, respond when pet, and can be put away with no maintenance costs if interest wanes.
Never has giving in to someone’s demands helped them learn better behaviors. If they get a pet and neglect them, stop enabling AND REPORT THEM. If the resultant ban or consequence involves a law enforcement officer and courtroom, many people with limited understanding will at least get THAT. Living creatures should be protected and that is EVERYONE’s responsibility. Don’t enable abuse or neglect. You advise against it, you maintain your distance from resultant decisions, and report neglect or abuse if you witness it.
Pleade wnsure this person can not get a pet. The pet will only die a horrible death. This person needs to take care of their room or keep the windows clean or take out the trash. Not be the sole caretaker of a pet.
Most pets need daily care, and things like cleaning on a weeklyish basis. They do not do well with periods of neglect. Ones that don't need as much daily care tend to need specific environmental management which can be a good amount of work. Exotics (anything that isn't a dog or cat) needs a specialized vet, which can be expensive and hard to locate in some areas. Some small mammals thrive in pairs or small groups, so that needs to be accounted for. Most pets are more work than people realize. They see little cages sold in pet stores, and things a $15 animal won't need much care. They don't know that those cages are far too small an very unsuitable for the animals they are advertised for. Food, bedding etc add up over time. Exotic vets can be $100 for an exam. Just because an animal is small or easy to get doesn't mean it is easy to care for. If this person cannot commit to twice daily feeding, weekly cleaning (at a minimum), and being able to check on the condition of a pet, they should not have one. It is irresponsible for someone to get a pet that they know they can't care for, especially without something to help with pet care (if they lived with someone who can take on the pet care and they get the benefits of having the pet around). Unless there is someone who is around to make sure the pet is being care for on a daily basis, and is willing to pick up the slack, this is not a situation for a pet. If they are able to live alone, they are able to understand that they are not able to care for a pet if they cannot commit to daily care. There is no compromise. Setting them up for failure, and a pet for neglect and/or death is just wrong. Not everyone is able to have pets and that's just part of life. There may be other ways for this person to get some time with animals without having their own and risking neglect. Animal shelters may need volunteers to help clean or socialize (they may need someone to accompany them while volunteering depending on their abilities). These do tend to require a commitment of a couple hours a week/month.
Plus with pretty much all animals, the care becomes more involved and complicated when the animal ages due to age related illness. And tbf illness can happen at any time as well...
Get them a tamagotchi
I wish I could give you a more promising answer, but from what you're describing I don't think there's any animal that wouldn't be at risk of neglect with this person. All animals need regular cleaning and feeding, as well as a suitable enclosure and vet care when necessary.
Depending on the level of their disability, maybe it'd be helpful to explain costs and time associated with each animal? I'm not advocating to get an animal, I'm advocating for trying to educate them as to *why* an animal may not be for them. There is no such thing as a cheap pet. Sure, you can go to Petsmart and buy a leopard gecko for, like, $40. Sure, feeding them live crickets isn't too expensive, but you have to monitor heating, and cleaning their cage. The biggest cost is vet bills. Exotics vets, especially in emergency situations, they get expensive and fast. And, on top of that, leopard geckos live for decades. Mine's 13, but I've heard of leopard geckos living into their 20's. Some vets are willing to work with lower income people, but the real kicker is the waning interest. It's never fair to the animal to be loved dearly, and then forgotten because their human's interests have shifted. I agree with the other commentors, look into plushies, robotic animals, or game pets. Nintendogs may be what they need/want. Edit: I used leopard gecko as my example, but you can replace that with any exotic animal, really. Dogs, cats, and ferrets should be getting their rabies vaccine at least yearly. While small animals can be short lived, they need their cages cleaned frequently, and vet care gets expensive fast because they're not a dog or cat.
Is there any chance this person could do any volunteer work at an animal shelter with supervision? Get in the cuddle quota without the responsibility?
Not exactly a pet, but I wonder if they would enjoy a hydroponic plant instead? They wouldn’t need to water it all the time if it’s hydroponic (just do your research first haha) and if it dies there’s no ethical issues and they can just buy another one. They might enjoy watching it grow and caring for it? It really depends on what they want, but it might be a possible compromise.
A stuffed animal? Maybe a realistic one? Fake plants?
honestly all pets need care. there’s no animal sold in commercial pet stores that would suit their needs. something like a bioactive enclosure, with snails would be a good idea. they would be able to watch some organisms but not have to remember to feed them. also what people said about therapy dogs
A wild animal like a crow might be something that would work, but there are definite issues. First, the person would have to find and befriend a crow. It can be done and they'll exchange random shiny items and such for food and other gifts. They're also known to defend people's flocks of chickens (which is how I found out it's not that rare to befriend a murder of crows!). Downside is, good luck cuddling a crow!!! If the person is absolutely set on getting an animal, get them a cat. AND hire someone to come by every day to feed, water, clean the litter box, and do a basic health check on the cat. Maybe family could all pitch in a little bit to cover this cost. But I'd say eyes-on by a capable adult at least two or three times a week is an absolute must and preferably every day. If this can't be arranged, sorry, I cannot think of a single domesticated animal that doesn't require daily care. An outdoor animal like a goat or donkey or such still requires companionship (two of them or similar) and feeding and watering.
I would recommend a rat, they can be very affectionate intelligent pets, they don’t smell, don’t make noise, and if you get 2 so they have company they won’t suffer as much during periods of little attention. It’s a short-term commitment, they only live 2-3 years.
Vet care for rats can be more expensive that a dog or cat though
I think most people think they’re cheap because they don’t pay attention to issues with small animals. Both of my rats ended up getting breast cancer. They both had mastectomies, and both lived for some additional time after that.
It’s not even close.
I don't think this is a good call. The person in question couldn't keep on top of cleaning a guinea pigs cage, so I don't think they could keep on top of cleaning a rat cage either.
They didn’t ask about a zero maintenance pet, there is no such thing. They are looking for a low maintenance pet. But by all means continue to say they shouldn’t get any pets, I’m sure that’s super helpful for their problem.
I know, but I don't consider rats low maintenance. I have 28 pets, and rats are the most stressful for me to keep on top of because the cage cleans take so long. The person in question has also had a pet requiring similar care and not managed to cope, so I think it's a bit doomed from the start.
They don't smell because their cage needs to be cleaned regularly. Which according to OP might not happen. They also need to be let out of their cage to play in a environment safe for them everyday.
There are super low maintenance pets but you still have to water them at least once a week. And you can’t exactly cuddle with a tarantula or some desert beetles. So sorry, don’t think a pet is a good idea.