Opinion: Is it Ethical to Own a Pet?

Let’s weigh the pros and cons of the most well-intentioned form of captivity

Photo byCameron Jones on Pexels

The life of most pets begins with what is itself an unfortunate occurrence: They’re separated from their families and forced to live away from any conspecifics, substituting members of their own species for the members of another. If we’re thinking of cats and dogs, these are mammals with emotional brains comparable to humans and that very obviously form attachments to their families.

You sometimes see instances of a dog, who was taken to live with a human family as a pup, reunited with one of its parents after however many years, and the display of sheer ecstasy is sufficient to convince any onlooker that the animal remembers, with great affection, the parent it has so long been separated from.

Animals are without a voice, and we must assume we miss many aspects of their emotional state because of this. My cat sits near me, with an unchanged affect, and rejects my attempts to pet her. Many people may look at this as a sign that she lacks affection for me, but they’re gauging it in human terms. It’s very obvious to me that she feels bonded to me, as she comes to sit by me wherever I go, and whenever I return home from an outing, she frantically rushes over to serenade me with “meows,” rub herself against me, and the like.

Also, knowing the signs by which cats communicate affection, such as by looking at you and slowly blinking, which shows that they feel comfortable closing their eyes and being vulnerable around you, reaffirms this. All of this is to say that obviously we cannot communicate with them as we do with other humans, and much of their subjective experience is lost to us. If memories of our pet’s family passed through their mind each and every day, we would never know. It is safe to assume, however, that they do miss their natural family for some time and to some extent.

Not only is this experience likely aversive, but what is felt in regard to the replacement family? I know that at least my cat often seems frustrated that I cannot more faithfully heed her commands. Just prior to feeding time, she meows at me in a concerted effort to have her food come out earlier. Sometimes, while I’m working, she goes to great lengths to persuade me to play with her — usually by trying to come between me and my laptop or by dropping her favorite toy onto my lap. When I’m unable to oblige her, the frustrated meows begin again. The dogs I’ve had seemed, by comparison, much more agreeable when the requests they make of their human caretakers go temporarily disregarded.

The sequelae of this unusual social environment, for cats and dogs, seems to be a bit dark. Pets that have no other members of their species in the home, and that aren’t frequently taken to interact with others of their kind either, tend to become anxious in response to those interactions when they do come about. When I’ve taken my cat around other cats, which is a very rare experience for her, all she does is hiss at them from a corner. I’ve had similarly anti-social dogs.

Another thing that seems to form in many pets is a type of co-dependence, even separation anxiety. They become constantly needy, constantly requiring the companionship of their owner. It is sometimes looked on as cute, but it does seem to reflect a fairly sad state of being.

As a human, one cannot do a full apples-to-apples comparison of what life as a pet may be like socially. Obviously, being held captive by animals many multiples of my size that I can’t communicate with seems like a nightmarish, Kafkaesque experience — even if they are generally nice to me and furnish everything I need. But domesticated animals have been genetically altered for Stockholm syndrome; generation after generation of selective breeding has guided their behavior to be more amenable to the symbiosis between pet and owner. Dogs especially seem well-adapted to this.

Yet, some aspects of the lifestyle cannot be bred against. Is domestication itself healthy? Arguably, life for humans has become less healthy and less fulfilling as we’ve bound ourselves to the confines of four walls and taken to being sedentary. Is it not a tragedy to see an animal, especially a young one, essentially caged within our home? They want nothing more than to run about and chase things — exactly what nature would guarantee them endless opportunities to do — but we restrict them from this. Many pets sprint like mad to run out the front door every time it opens, and is there any more obvious sign that this is not the life they want?

While living with humans, pets are free from predation, from the elements, from privation, and are often given access to modern medical treatments. Is this enough to offset robbing them of what their lives would be out in nature?

Let me introduce an aside here: Some will argue that they cannot survive out in the wild, as they have been bred away from it, but changing their natural form is just another by-product of domestication, and we cannot argue for domestication on the basis of the consequences of it — without the institution we would have not have this outcome to begin with.

Returning to the question of whether or not the benefits that come with being a pet are enough to outweigh the many disadvantages that result of it, it is here that it becomes important for us to introduce more nuance: Clearly not all pet owners are created equal. Some go above and beyond to ensure the animal is entertained, gets sufficient exercise, eats a healthy and full diet, is furnished with toys and comfortable places to sleep, and is all-around loved and given attention. Other pet owners, however, treat the animal like a nuisance if it wants anything beyond the bare necessities and care for it with a general malaise.

At a glance, we can say thatit is unethical to be a bad pet owner. The question, then, is whether or not it is ethical to be a good pet owner. There is no firm answer here, but let us say this: If the pet owner can achieve a life for the animal that takes the pros of life in the wild and the pros of life in domestication, and in large part achieves both, then surely it must be ethical. However, this takes a significant effort that most will not put forward. Also, while this seems more readily achievable with dogs, the cat owner is likely in for some added challenges: For example, there are many dog parks where our canine friends can be taken to run about, chase a ball, and interact with other dogs. I have yet to see such a thing for cats, and it’s fairly obvious why that is.

In conclusion, unscrupulous pet ownership is comparable to life in a zoo for the animal, and society seems to be coming to the realization that life in a zoo is far from ethical. I would conclude the same. Even the pet owner doing a decent job is likely depriving the animal of a more fulfilling life than they may have had in the wild. Only the best and most determined pet parents are doing right by their animal companions.

Thus,if we can say anything about pet ownership, we can say that if it is to be undertaken it should be viewed as a huge commitment and carried out with the greatest amount of care. We may get into some moral relativism around taking care of a rescue, and how life with even a lazy caretaker is better than life as a stray. However, the only reason there are so many strays is because of the institution of animal domestication and the natural consequence that some animals will then end up without a home — or in truly bad homes. We cannot systematically justify pet ownership by the negative situation created by mass pet ownership.

Ultimately, the majority of pet owners are not up to the task of being truly good to their pets. In an ideal world, the practice would be abolished completely, or only granted to those rare few who do everything they can to give their pets the life they deserve. I, myself, often fall short of this mark. I will likely always have a pet regardless, but only because I do put forward large amounts of effort into striving to be a good pet owner, and I would only ever have a rescue, as life in my care is most certainly better than life as a stray in a city. In general, however, it is difficult to argue that pet ownership is not unethical.