What Does It Mean To Say That Pet Owners Should Be Considered A Guardian

In the last couple of years people have argued about whether a pet was property or if pet owners should be considered a guardian. Many people have argued that pet owners should be considered guardians while a few others say pets are property. Although this people believe these things most do not know the difference between being a guardian and a pet being property. The definition of an owner is to have or own as property; to have control over. A guardian is a person entrusted by law with the care of a person or property which could lead to limited or temporary possession (Jodi Presi). In the past, the law said that pets were considered property. Although pets are considered property they are considered a special kind of property. This type of property protects the animal from neglect and abuse. As an owner of this type of property they are known as a pet owner which means that responsibility has been placed on people or person to care for an animal. As an owner they are about to ease animal suffering. For example it

Adding guardianship adds many legal cases; they could subject decisions about petcare to outside intervention by anyone including neighbors and government authorities (McClure, 2005). Adding guardian also means a higher level of responsibility for animals they would have to hold themselves and others to a higher standard of care and treatment than an owner would. The guardian of an animal would also have to give the “best” treatment for an animal even if they could afford the treatment. If a guardian had an elderly dog and it develops very bad hip arthritis the options could be hip replacement or a less expensive option. With that person being considered that animals guardian that person would have to choose the “best” option which would be the hip replacement; this would force the caretaker to choose this option even if they did not want such an expensive