Veterinary care for animals owned by those who cannot afford to pay

Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced.

James Baldwin 1924–1987

As we approach the end of the calendar year and the festivities associated with it, our thoughts are directed towards the needs of those less fortunate than ourselves for food, clothing, money, and companionship: the poor, the homeless, the elderly, and the lonely. Some find companionship in owning a pet, and, as veterinarians, our thoughts should be directed to the needs of these pets.

Understandably, veterinary practices decline or are reluctant to provide treatment to animals whose owners are unwilling or unable to pay. So who takes care of the animals under those circumstances? A ready response may be that those who can’t afford to take care of their pet shouldn’t own one; on the other hand, those touting the human-animal bond will argue that animal companionship is important to the well-being of the needy. The reality is that the needy do own animals, whose welfare should be important to us.

In Ontario, The Farley Foundation subsidizes veterinary clinics to offset the cost of providing veterinary treatment to the pets of elderly and disabled owners, resident in Ontario, who cannot afford to pay, provided that they qualify (1). But what of the pets owned by the needy in the rest of Canada?

Enquiries to the Canadian Federation of Humane Societies, the provincial veterinary medical associations, except Ontario, and the Northwest Territories and Nunavut about organizations that subsidize or provide free veterinary care for the animals of the genuinely poor in their area either didn’t enlighten me or informed me that none existed.

However, a search of the Internet turned up a number of organizations that provide financial support for veterinary treatment of animals owned by the genuinely needy living in the USA. Two of these organizations also make their support available for owners living in Canada: The American Animal Hospital Association’s Helping Pets Fund, through AAHA accredited practices, and Angels4Animals, on a case-by-case basis (2,3). Both The Farley Foundation and the AAHA Helping Pets Fund limit the annual amount payable to each clinic and each pet and household.

Returning to the question “who takes care of the health needs of animals owned by those unable to pay for veterinary care,” it can be argued that since society has a responsibility to care for the health and welfare of people in need and companion animals play an important role in the health and welfare of at least some of the needy, it is in society’s best interests to take responsibility for the health and welfare of these animals. In the UK, the People’s Dispensary for Sick Animals and The Blue Cross provide free veterinary care to the pets of people in need.

In the absence of other charitable organizations to do this, maybe the mandate of the various Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals should be broadened to include the provision of free veterinary care for animals belonging to the genuinely needy, thereby allowing them to solicit support for the veterinary care of both those animals and the animals for which they are providing shelter or protection.

Alternatively or additionally, the mandate of municipality-owned spay neuter clinics could be expanded to include provision of veterinary treatment to animals of qualified needy.

Thank you readers and all who have contributed to the Journal for your support throughout the year, may your festive season be joyous, safe, and thoughtful.