Too old to adopt kittens!

My grandma adopted a puppy when she was 81 and it lived until she was 96. After her husband passed away the dog was her main source of companionship. Pets are a wonderful thing for the elderly.

I think that the agency has the right to restrict the adoption to anyone that it wants. If it is a private agency, it has the right to say who will adopt their kittens.

Saying that, I do not agree with that particular policy. Like others have mentioned, no one knows how long an animal, (or its owner) will live. I think that the elderly usually make wonderful pet owners. If I were the agency, I centainly would prefer to let an elderly person have the kittens, rather than a household with young children, who may not know how to treat pets kindly.

I think the tragic part of this article is that the elderly woman subsequently went out and PURCHASED two kittens.

I could understand restricting the adoption of kittens if there were some sort of "kitten shortage." But there clearly is not!

I've frequently adopted older cats myself, and have enjoyed them just as much as adopted kittens.

As another poster mentioned, this is a private shelter, and they can set their own rules. However I do disagree with an arbitrary upper age limit on adopters.

Granny's probably just tired of all the grocery clerks looking at her funny when she loads up her cart with cat food.

If I would adopt a cat (I wouldn't, they give me asthma, unfortunately), I would probably adopt a grown cat, as I've adopted what was considered a six year old corgi, both for the mature personalities and because other people skip over them, or, and the real reason, because of his eyes. I wouldn't be doing that because of a rule, but because I wanted to. I am also morose over how the older animals tend to be skipped over.

I'm sure the shelter has a perfect right to define its terms. I'm just gnawing on the term cited.

I see the concern re kittens and projected lifespan, but feel a little insulted that someone might think I'm too old for a kitten at sixty seven. I guess I have a different perspective on what is elderly. (I just read yesterday about Tom Lehrer walking all about the UC Santa Cruz campus recently, at what I take to be 81.) Pets can be very much solace for the elderly, for others of other ages - but I think especially for the elderly. And, as someone else mentioned, the elderly are not the only ones to die.

Which brings up.. my corgi was a big part of my kicking ass through treatment for breast cancer, back when I had just turned sixty. Animals can help the spirit, if not the metabolic processes, and I'm not sure on those. But, we all know that. Do kittens have more ability to spark a person than an adult cat? I don't know, but it might depend on the person and the circumstances.
I have a pal with long time aids who has had many cats, all adopted from shelters, since his diagnosis, when he didn't expert to live much longer. Several of those cats were kittens in his house. I think his present two cats and two dogs help him live, to get up each morning. I've no doubt he's worked out some plan for them if he is suddenly terminal.

Perhaps all adopters should submit their medical records? Or only married people should adopt? People who have written what to do about the animals into their wills?

The rule seems intrusive - at the same time I do understand the point, and the right of the shelter. I might argue that if a kitten is forbidden, so should a three year old cat be, given the said lifespan of cats.

Cats and dogs might have different grief behaviors re their "owners" passing, perhaps individually or as species - I've no idea. Cats are somewhat famous for a lackadaisical attitude to their humans, but having seen a duck grieve over a cat, I won't make any generalizations about cats and dogs adapting to new owners, and how easily they adapt at what ages - just wondering.

I'm 66 and I have a 14 year old cat. When she dies I'll be reluctant to get a kitten because the chances are good that I'll die before the cat does. Many cats become one-man animals, and it would be very difficult or impossible for them to adjust to a new owner, if one could be found. It's hard to think of your beloved pet taken to die in an animal shelter. On the other hand, the shelter probably has many older cats that need to be adopted.

Thank you to all who have taken the time to post to this topic so far. Your points of view have been noted.

Actually, PD is spot-on when he says:

That's exactly the kind of organization it is.

As I mentioned earlier, my wife and oldest daughter know the woman who runs this agency. They use to volunteer their time (cleaning the cages, feeding, and some grooming, etc) in the local branch, which had a glassed-in room in the pet superstore, 'Petsmart'.

It's a win-win for 'Petsmart'. They volunteer the space for free to the agency. Folks buy the cats from the agency (non-profit, by the way). The fee supports the work of the outfit for food, and the first vet check-up, etc, no salaries. A vet discounts their service to the agency. Finally, Petsmart wins, because the new cat owners buy their food and supplies at the shop, and it does generate a fair bit of business, never mind it looks good to the community to allow this in their store.

Now, in my mind, I'm not questioning the ability of the woman in the story to look after a pet, just questioning the motive as to why the new pet(s) had to be kittens. Yes, indeed, pets are great for seniors!

The sad part about it, is that she ended buying her kittens at a pet store, and then not one, but two of them.

Another point to be considered (for someone of any age really) is the "down the road" costs to maintain a cat (or dog) in a proper manner. Any caring pet owner knows well that the initial cost to buy a non-pedigree animal is the cheapest cost over the life of the animal. Just the routine annual vet checks are getting more expensive every year.

Heaven forbid your pet gets sick, because an owner better have health insurance, or deep pockets. I am very familar with what costs what for vet care in our local area.

Then, there's feeding your pet some decent food, not the cheapest "not-as-healthy" stuff going. It all adds up.

So, that's what I have to same on all this. The kittens never languish in the shelters. It's the older cats, and it's a shame.

We kill many millions of cats and dogs a year because homes can not be found, the idea that a rescue operation will make any difference in the end is absurd. The individual animals that make it to a no kill zone will be saved, and some other animal will take its place. There is zero net gain, zero alleviating of harm.

The only rescue that makes any sense is trying to save extraordinary animals, such as pure breeds that have reproduction potential, or others that are exceptional in some way.

These organizations that waste societal assets on non productive work should be condemned. People can do what they want to do, groups should have the right to stupid rules like not letting the old adopt, but those groups are not entitled to gratitude for their misguided efforts.

I non surprisingly have a different view than hawkeye. I pretty much care about the individual lives of animals, no matter how silly that is in some greater scheme.

On the matter that Reyn brought up about the costs of long term care of a pet, that is why I mentioned on a2k some time ago that I wouldn't get another dog. I've adapted to that, fairly sad, but with a lot of fond memories of the pets, including the damned cats, that I've had. Still, bummer of a thread. I am told I'm too old and too poor. I sort of knew that, y'know, although if money were no object I'd adopt another dog. But - I think it's shortsighted and borderline cruel to seniors and the poor and dogs and cats, oh, and I suppose birds and other living things, to ratchet up general societal rules on pet ownership. Useless too.

I get an individual small shelter having this kind of adoption rule. It's the overall sense of ... ahhhh... near immorality re someone breaching this kind of borderline that bothers me.

I know a lot of pets are left to forage during this time of foreclosures. I know in some areas of some countries, people dump the pets out of the car as they go off for august vacations in some resort area, or at least I've read that. A lot of pets, so called, in troubled homes, are ill fed and may be otherwise severely mistreated. Well, we all know this. My niece's mother from tribal Africa scoffed at the idea of pets. I think the angst about a seventy year old getting a kitten is overwrought. Don't do it yourself if you feel that way. Let Rockhead's Gran, or other peoples', have one.

This story is not about banning elderly people from adopting pets (cats, in this case).

It's about one organization's efforts to encourage them to adopt older cats, rather than young kittens, for a variety of reasons.


You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. Some folks aren't so cynical in their outlook in the welfare of animals.

The difference is at least some animals that didn't have to die, did not. What's so wrong in doing that?

Please. let's not turn this into more than it is. I wouldn't want to cloud my entire outlook on life like that.

Good post, osso.

Here I am with four cute and health kittens to find homes for and so far I had only found one home and would welcome anyone of any age to give them love and a home.

Had placed flyers all over, a listing on craglist and the flyer magazine and so far I have gotten two calls and only place one kitten. Talk to everyone I know also.

If the weather is nice I am going to place them in a large box and show them off on a parking lot in front of a pet superstore in the hope of finding homes for them tomorrow.

What the hell are those fools thinking of...............

Hee hee hee hee.



Very, very, very true. (Those that survive past weaning, anyway, and those that weren't raised feral.)



Yes and no.

I'm going to talk about animals as product here, because, in a discussion of sheltering and rescuing (not exactly the same things, mind you), that's exactly what they are: product, inventory, an item to be stored, sold, or exchanged.

The unwanted pet population waxes and wanes according to the season, especially in places where seasonal variation is pronounced. During the peak season, when our inventory necessarily exceeds our capacity, we channel hundreds of animals through smaller rescue organizations because much of our facility is occupied with housing the county's strays through their legally mandated seven day holding period.

Some of these smaller organizations take animals with particular medical needs that cannot reasonably be addressed by us. Some take particular breeds. Some take animals with behavioral problems -- one organization is dedicated to rehabilitating feral and undersocialized cats. These organizations -- boutique shelters, if you please -- will sometimes spend months finding homes for the animals they take from us, adopting them out during the winter months when the number of animals without homes (and therefore, the amount of product up for sale) is much lower. Since we operate more or less at capacity throughout the summer months and are contractually obligated to accept all animals who are brought to us, these animals would otherwise have been euthanized, as we do not have the warehouse space available to house them until the market was more favorable to their sale. So, from our point of view, the boutiques serve to increase effective warehouse space (as well as repair potential), so that seasonally elastic supply can be stretched out to meet a relatively seasonally inelastic demand.

Still, it's true that, over the course of the year, there is an excess of supply. However, without the boutiques, there would be a greater likelihood that there would be seasonal shortages of shelter animals, leading to a higher demand for purpose-bred animals in the off-season, and further increasing the magnitude of pet-overpopulation.

So, in effect, in our area and within our companion animal economy, the boutiques serve as reservoirs, ensuring that some of the excess produced when it is raining stray cats and dogs can be held over for the winter months when some people are stuck indoors, lonely, and looking for a new companion, whether it's from a shelter, a rescue, or a pet store.



If one views the problem as pet overpopulation, preserving animals with "reproduction potential" makes no sense at all -- particularly if you work in the field and have an appreciation for the depth and breadth of veterinary medical problems created with the aim of producing niche pets.



Gratitude is without monetary value, and for many who work in sheltering and rescue is not really the goal. Personally, my primary goals are to reduce pet overpopulation and the suffering of animals who were created with no other aim than to make our own lives more pleasant and, on occasion, more convenient. I think we, as a society, owe them that. Whether the general public -- or the holier-than-thou pricks at some of the "no-kill" rescues -- are grateful for what I do or whether (as may often be the case) they view me as some unfeeling instrument of death, I could give about half a ****. And I suspect that the "TLC" rescue, whoever they may be, dedicated to finding the best possible home for the small number of animals they have decided to help out, feel the same way about people who look askance at their arbitrary age limitation.

Or, to put it more succinctly...

If you're in the business of finding a home for one animal, essentially arbitrary limitations -- fenced yard, age, credit check, whatever -- may not seem very sensible. But if you're in the business of finding homes for a hundred, or a thousand, or 10 thousand animals, they start to make a difference in permanently placing animals, just as similar arbitrary restrictions are sensible if you're in the business of extending credit to thousands of individual consumers. Some of the folks who fit the requirements might end up being poor caretakers, and some who don't might be unfairly excluded, but, as a business model, the restrictions start to make good sense.*




(And, for what it's worth, our shelter has almost no such restrictions. If you want an animal and can pay the fee for it -- which more often than not does not cover the cost of the care that has been provided for that particular animal -- you can have it. But we get a lot of returns, too, and frequently the animal comes back in worse shape than it was in when it left.)

Thanks for the info, pdog. Any sense of the relative number of people who bring the pets back who are over seventy?

Frankly, we don't get many older adopters. More poor young families with children and without the financial or time resources to raise a pet. Hence they come to us, with our low prices.

But we're basically the city shelter, we are the bargain of bargains -- a spayed/neutered, vaccinated, and dewormed, animal tested for FIV/FeLV (cats) or heartworm (dogs) for a relative pittance. Our clientele is reflective of our prices. Heartworm positive dogs are treated at our own expense (which, at cost for drugs and without accounting for staff time, can be a couple of hundred bucks for a big dog).

But we do have a lot of animals surrendered to us from houses where the caretaker is too old or too deceased to care for the animals. With the economy the way it's been, we've also been getting a lot of animals from folks who have lost their jobs and homes or who have had to move into small apartments where pets are not allowed. And, of course, there are the families with four kids who thought a dog would be fun, and who've found out that food costs money and bored animals do things like destroy your furniture and piss on your carpets.

Interestingly, there is a recognizable demographic who tend to bring pit bulls to us but almost never adopt them from us. But that's another discussion altogether, and not an entirely comfortable one as it touches on stereotypes better left to the likes of Chris Rock.

Just had a discussion with my son. He is a "cat person" and for years has had at least three kitties at one time. He did not think that adopting an older cat is a good idea for an elderly person.

His argument is many:

Older cats are often set in their ways. It may be difficult for the cat to become accustomed to the new owner.

One never knows the history of the cat's former life. He may very well have been abused, and may have behavioral problems. I would expect that for the older person, dealing with behavioral problems would usually be more difficult than for the younger person.

If the cat came from a loving home, and the former owner died, or otherwise became unable to care for it, the adjustment to the new place may be daunting, for the cat.

One never knows how long that we will be walking this earth. Thirty year olds drop dead, or become incapacitated. At seventy, a person may very well have a lifespan that exceeds an animal. The important thing is that the elderly person make prior arrangements, in the case that he is no longer able to care for the animal.

I adopted a cat this summer when a neighbor showed up on my porch armed with a cat whose owner had died (in his 60s, mind you) seeking a new home for the gigantic feline.

"Godzilla", as she was renamed, had been a pampered princess. Never been around dogs or kids, both of which I have; never been outside, not even once.

I never thought she would make it in our free-for-all environment.

I was wrong -- she's doing brilliantly. She's wonderful. Cats can adapt to new situations.

Anyway, the reason I'm telling this story is because the man who had the cat made plans for the cat when he learned he was going to die. He enlisted his friend (my neighbor) to find a home for the cat and set up a small trust for the cat's care until a home could be found. My neighbor tried a few other avenues to rehome the cat before showing up at my door. The money that remained in the trust went to a no-kill cat shelter.

I really like this man that I never met.

Typically a retireee has a great deal more time available to work the animal. I'd actually argue that it's a better match to put a set-in-its-ways older cat with someone who's retired than in a younger two-income household where the cat is left to itself for 12 hours a day.

When we adopted our Lilly from the local city shelter, about half of the dogs
there were pit bulls. Some of them seemed so sweet and good willed, others
were quite aggressive, yet none of the potential dog owners dared to adopt
one (me included).

I agree, an elderly person should adopt an older animal for various reasons:
a) the animal is most likely better behaved as a puppy/kitten, b) it won't
outlive the owner; c and most important) it will most likely be saved from
euthanasia. Let's face it: an older dog or cat is most likely not adopted by a
family with kids as they want a pup/kitten. Adopting an older animal is
the niche that older people could fill.