Yeah, I know that his thing is "don't bother doing anything that might inconvenience you", but I find his attitude toward his pets appalling. Letting the kids torment the cats? Yes, they will come back at you, and you can't supervise kids every moment, but the reason you don't cause the animal pain is not that they will scratch you, but because it just isn't right to cause anyone needless pain.

And the poor bunnies! No big complaints about the first one, unfortunately rabbits are delicate and accidents can happen. But, we in rescue have seen many broken buns recover from broken limbs, and amputation if necessary hardly slows a bunny down. Oh, well, let's not bother, after all, I'm an idle and cheap guy.

Second, letting your rabbits go signs their death warrant. It was amazing that your bun survived for a few years. Most disappear within a couple of months. I have been involved in 5 cases of bringing a bunny in from being abandoned; all were severely underweight, had some kind of wound, were riddled with parasites. Amazingly, all have retained their sweet natures and have gone to good homes (including mine). This guy (I don't want to use the word man) acknowledges that rabbits can be smart, charming, fun; why doesn't he treat them with the respect they deserve?

"Let animals do the work" of entertaining your kids. This is the idea that sends animal rescuers into despair. Pets are not toys for your children. They do not exist for your entertainment. They are not to be used for a while and then discarded when the kids get bored or turn to other activities. Tell me, Mr. Idle Parent, what happens when your children turn into teenagers? They're not so fun anymore -- do you give them a sleeping bag and tell them to go camping? Or will it be too much bother to supply them with the sleeping bag?

I agree completely. It bothers me that Slate seems so willing to put a jovial spin on what is animal abuse.

I was pretty appalled by this post as well. I'm an animal lover, so I was pretty freaked out by how the guy treated his pets. But I was also freaked out by the relationship between the children and the pets.

You don't let the kids torture the animals. For one, it's cruel to the animals. For the second, it's absolutely moronic with regard to your children's safety. They grab the cat by the tail and nothing bad happens, but see what happens when they do that to some pit bull they encounter at a friend's house. With a pet in the house, you have an opportunity to teach your child empathy and responsibility, but this guy fails miserably.

As for the rabbits... what, it wanted to be free? Um, it's a pet. If it's not a dog or a cat, most of them are quite content to live a life without people. However, they are unaware that they actually need people in order to survive because they are not wild animals. Which is why rabbits that could have lived quite contentedly in a domestic situation for as much as a decade had their lives severely shortened. I'm also kind of curious as to how one goes about running over a pet rabbit in the driveway.

I'm not a PETA member or anything (OMG, I love burgers and steaks), but this attitude seems utterly archaic to me. And I'm not a city dweller - I'm very familiar with "country life" and attitudes. I've seen a lot of abuses, but not usually by people who are supposedly educated and intelligent and below the age of 50. This whole essay is pretty depraved.

Agreed... this guys a douche.

I'm so glad to read that others find this article repulsive. The entire family should not be allowed to have pets... ever. Hope one of kids never breaks a leg, he'll probably just have 'it' put down because he and his wife can make a quick trip to the bedroom to make another one. Even cheaper than buying another bunny, really. In seriousness, animals can teach children hugely important lessons and be a best buddy to a lonely child. All this idiot has managed to teach his kids is that the value of life is nil and everything (and everyone) is disposable.

How long do you think "bunnies" live in the wild? Believe me, those critters had a very nice life with these people, and longer than most.

And "abuse" because the kids pulled the cats' tails? Holy gods, what do you think cats ARE? They aren't pretty crystalline philosophers who must not be touched. They're freakin' predators. They KILL things, in case you haven't noticed. They're also naturally armed with twenty small daggers, which they are not shy about using when they're pissed. Those cats are not being abused; they're putting up with human children. The day the cats decide they've had enough, the kids will know. Boy, will they know.

Christ, you people. You're as bad as the idiots who deify children as "little Buddhas". You pet worshippers claim that treating animals as if they "existed only for our amusement" is wrong, and yet you have your own fantasies about what kind of lives they should lead, and certainly not ones based on the animals' natural lifespans. Rabbits should live into old age. Cats can't take care of themselves. I feel sorry for the creatures that have to live the proscribed, over-coddled existences you foist upon them.

Amen, Serai, I agree with everything you said.

I think I read an article about the author of Animals in Translation, who stated that we are doing our pets a disservice by forcing them to stay indoors, keeping them from barnyard pursuits, and just generally letting them wander. The tradeoff may be life span, but assuming the animals are well cared-for, I know my cats would much rather be knocking about in a barn than pacing the same house for years.

Yes, I can't agree more. The writer treats animals like objects that can be replaced, and to which he owes no responsibility despite their complete dependence on him.

I do not think pets are people. I do not think that it is always wrong to put them down, and I do not even think they have the same rights as a person. But I do think it is our responsibility to care for pets. It is our responsibility to make reasonable efforts protect them from pain-- like preventing a child from throwing them out a window, for goodness sakes. It isn't ok. It is bad for the kids, who need to learn empathy and that other living things feel and deserve some form of respect.

The writer is not evil, but I think he is callous. I wish he would re-evaluate his relationship to pets and see that an animal bred to live in captivity does not have the resources to live on its own, and that every pet is a living thing that is wholly dependent on its owner for its health and safety.

Serai: you said it yourself:Rabbits should live into old age.

Yes, we have proven that with good care, good genes and good luck, rabbits can live 9-10 years, and there are now many that are old enough to be in high school. It is true that in the wild, the vast majority of rabbits don't make it to breeding age, and those that do will die in a couple of years. Specious argument my friend! The natural lifespan of "wild" humans is about 40 years. Sadly, many children in countries without health care don't make it to school age. Does that mean that I don't have to pay into the Medicare that helps you with your future heart bypass? Or I can kick your kids out of school because they haven't contributed to the proper infant mortality?

As for living wild'n'free (another poster) my buns and my 16 year old cat go with me into the yard and play. Then we come back into the house and everyone plays there. Oddly enough, if I leave them in the yard with the door open and go back inside, within 15 minutes the whole pack comes stampeding in to see what I'm up to. That's the key. I'm not forcing it on them, they love being here and we're all in it together. I'm humbled at having this privilege.

Agreed, animals would probably do a better job raising these children. "Buying" and endless stream of animals from pet breeders and then letting exotic species simply run around outside when they become and inconvenience, without any regard for not only the "disposability" notion that instills in children but also for diseases they may be carrying and introducing into native species, is saddening. Perhaps the author might pay more attention, both literally and figuratively, when one of the children's legs is run over by an inattentive driver. Casts are terribly inconvenient and rather expensive as well. Douche is right.

I would like to point out that while you may be doing a disservice to your cats by forcing them to stay indoors (poor things, locked in same house for years), but you are doing a much larger disservice to the ecosystem by letting them out. Study after study has shown the staggering number of birds killed by house cats. I do not know if I can put a link in here, but the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has a great short entry on cat predation of songbirds at: <link>

I grew up on a farm (by which I mean a farm, not a pet menagerie like the author seems to have), and I know how valuable cats can be for pest control. However, most of that happens in the house and the vast majority of us do not live on farms. Your cat is domesticated - please keep it inside.