I would. Without compunction. As far as I'm concerned, our pets have as much value to me as any other member of our family.

Proud to be stupid. Animals need advocates.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-12143079

Really sad story. I'm so sorry for his family but he did the right thing

Agreed, without a doubt.

I was at a level crossing with our Jack Russell terrior. He ran across the tracks and stayed between the two gates and wouldn't move. I was 12 at the time and calling him but he thought it was a game and just kept barking at me and wagging his tail. The train was coming and without thinking, I jumped the gates, grabbed him and jumped the gate again.

In that situation it was ok because I could clearly see the train and knew I had enough time. I don't think if he had jumped into a rough river I would've jumped after him as the danger would be too great. Not only was the 13 year old's life put in danger but now she has to live without a father. Loosing a pet is heartbreaking but it doesn't compare to loosing a family member. It was probably a knee jerk reaction on the part of the man but I don't think it was the right thing to do and unfortunately he paid the ultimate price.

No matter who is in danger, whether it be an animal or person, you are never supposed to put yourself in danger to rescue them, as it can cause more casualties and hinder the rescue process. It's not that easy to remember though when you are in a situation and have to make split second decisions. That poor girl is going to be far more traumatised by the loss of her father than her dog.

Pathetic.

Absolutely patheic.

Poor girl now heartbroken and it's going to affect her for the rest of her life because somebody put a domesticated pet over the value and safety of their own child.

I have two cats, I love them to bits. I also had a small field mouse that I rescued and made better that the cats attacted and brought in once and it used to live in a little mouse house I made for it and loved blueberries and Rich Teas, so I'm hardly against animals or a non-animal person.

But I wouldn't expect 2 weeks off work on compassionate leave if one of my cats died like I would for my own parents or loved ones.

Sad state of affairs where a domesticated family pet takes priority over a human being.

We keep pets as pets, they are not small people. They are domesticated animals living off food that we would not eat. I would never endanger the life of a human over the life of a pet. I may be sad and upset if one of my cats died but it's not the same as if your own parents died and to insinuate it is is both disturbing and sick to me.

Go to that level for a pet and where do you go to when it's a family member.

I feel really sorry for the poor girl who will wake up in hospital to be told she no longer has a a pet dog, oh and by the way your Daddy's dead too. Nice.

Nobody can argue with your opinion my friend. You are of course correct. A daughters/sons life MUST be "worth" more than that of a pet. I just know that if it happened to us, anyone one of my family would risk their lives to save our pets.

Well you can rationalise it as being "pathetic"; but it takes a cold heart to watch your own pet dying and not do anything about it. Sometimes the heart rules the head.

Although in this case there's the question of whether or not the dogs would've been ok if left. They're very good at surviving in such circumstances (better than people.)

I would go on to ice or in a raging river if my dog was in trouble .Yes i'd risk my life for him / it would be automatic and you'd just do it ..

Thankfully, none of my cats would jump into a deep body of water and need rescuing. They aren't stupid like dogs.

But then you don't have the same emotional attachment to your cats as us dog owners do.

They (cats) are fiercely independent & total "food whores".

If it came at the expense of dying probably not lol

As a dog and cat owner, I'd risk my life for any of them.

Would you agree then that felines are not as dependant on humans & really see us as a convenience & hence the emotional bond may not as be as intense as it with a canine?

Never, It's not worth it, Pets can be replaced.

Not the current one. He's a little bastard

This is something of a brick wall I've always come up against with dog owners.

You can say you don't like cats, mice, spiders or any other animal and it appears to be socially acceptable, to the point that you have just demonstrated that you say people with cats, etc can't possibly have the same emotional attachment to their pet as someone with a dog.

However, say in company that you don't like dogs and people look at you as if you're weird.

I, for one, absolutely hate dogs. To me they are nasty smelly unclean creatures. I much prefer cats who to me have a much nicer nature than dogs. On the point of them being "loyal" I think cats are the intelligent ones. Cats know you'll love them unconditionally and always feed them and therefore don't have to pander to you or do stupid tricks. A dog on the other hand will jump through hoops to keep being your "best" friend.

I once read that while you might own a dog, a cat owns you and looks upon you as it's "person" rather than you looking upon it as your "pet".

That's intelligence!

Some people have this thought that if the family cat dies then you just get one with your life and go into work the next day as it's just a cat. Whereas if the family dog dies....woaa, do you need time off? Councelling?...sit down...have a cup of tea...

It all depends on personal preference. I know someone who keeps fish. To them, those fish represent the same emotional presence as a dog. To insinuate that dogs and their owners are the only ones that can have a legitimate bond is pure rubbish of the highest purity.

Darn it!

I wish I'd have thought of saying that rather than rattling off an essay!

Sums up my thoughts exactly!

How do we know that it wasn't the daughter who went in first, and father wasn't trying to get the dogs to stop her going in any further?

Either way, I can understand somebody putting themselves in danger to try to save a much loved pet that is major part of their lives, where as I could not understand somebody standing by watching them drown and I can particuarly understand a 13 year old girl rushing in after her pet dogs....I am pretty sure my daughter would have, which is why we keep him on a long lead when by the sea, as he is quite small and could easily get caught up in the currents.

No, not for me, because my emotional bond isn't based on the level of dependance on me.

Great essay though.
It's true about "you" owning a dog and a cat owning "you".

We've got a cat, He sleeps all day, eats, then goes out all night, Treats the place like a Hotel at times

No, they can't. Yes, you can obviously get another pet, but it doesn't replace one that's been lost.

I am sorry if that's how you interpreted my post. That was not how I intended to portray my thoughts & I am in no way belittling cat owners.

Off topic but cats can be quite interactive as well. This always cheers me up and on such a downer of a thread some cheer is needed (it's only 17 secs so give it a look ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Bmhjf0rKe8

Yes they can

If i was that little girl i know which i'd prefer to have back and it wouldn't be the dog.

I really have to disagree with you on this, It just wouldn't enter my mind to jump in after a pet.

This is the basis of any attachment though surely. Our need to be "needed"?

I can not form an emotional bond with a paper clip because it does not rely on me for its needs. Any more I could a cat as I know it will happily take up residence with anyone that fulfils its needs.

A dog forms a dependence on its "master" which is rewarded with a real, psychological " need" from its owner.

That's the very first thing they teach you on a 1st Aid course.

D
R
A
B
C