Are you an owner or a guardian?
A debate has been raging for years over the proper terminology to use when describing the relationship of a person to his or her pet. Historically, animals have been regarded as property in the eyes of the law. Therefore, people with pets have been called pet owners.
However, a growing number of people feel that the word “owner” does not do justice to the relationship between a person and a pet. Adherents to this school of thought often prefer the word “guardian.” They argue, quite reasonably, that people form intense emotional bonds with their pets, and that this relationship deserves a unique title. They point out that most people love their pets. Nobody I know would say that love their dishwasher or their sofa.
Members of the owner camp retort that calling oneself a pet guardian may have unintended consequences for people and pets. They point to the example of adults who are guardians of children, and claim that guardianship carries responsibilities that ownership does not. For instance, the owners of a sick pet can refuse veterinary treatment if they cannot afford it. The guardian of a child would go to prison if he declined medical treatment for the same reason.
Proponents of pet ownership ask what would happen in these circumstances if pet owners became pet guardians? And how would the change in terminology affect the availability of procedures such as spaying, neutering, and euthanasia? They point out that a child’s guardian cannot have him sterilized or put to sleep. Would an animal’s guardian be able to do these things?
As a veterinarian, this issue is a minefield for me. Pet guardians are offended if I call them owners. Owners think I am crazy if I call them guardians. I try to avoid both terms.
For now, the proponents of pet ownership hold sway in most quarters. But the guardian camp is gaining momentum. The guardians make some valid points, and I suspect that in the long run, if they can resolve the issues listed above, they will carry the day. Only time will tell.
You have questions. 
I usually say “master” or “mistress”. Unfortunately, being counted as a guardian in the eyes of the law has more risks than benefits, IMO.
MINE CONSIDER ME THEIR STAFF. MOL!! HOWEVER I WOULD BE CLASSIFIED BY THEIR OWNER BY OUR COUNTIES AUTHORITIES.MY VET CALLS ME THEIR “MOM” PERSONALLY I DON’T CARE. THEY KNOW I LOVE THEM AND THEY’RE MY BABIES-ALL NINE OF THEM!!!.
i feel neither term is appropriate. i consider my cats companions. they are part of the family. they have their own unique and very distinct role. just like a child isn’t a parent or a parent isn’t a child. animals are neither as well. they are companions, not less than humans. animal care IS as big of a responsibility as being a parent. in some states it is a criminal act to neglect your pets’ health and well being. they need to treated with respect and love. THEY ARE NOT PROPERTY!! they think and feel too. animal companionship is a privilege, not a right. just like parents can have their children taken away because of neglect, so should animals. and yes i am my girls mommy. my 2 cents.
How about ‘human’ or ‘person’? I have always considered myself to be my cat’s person, which to me signifies that I am her caregiver, responsible for giving her care that I am capable of as a human (food, shelter, affection, medical care). Similarly, as my cat, Hattie is responsible for giving me purrs, noserubs, kisses and the occasional happy feet massage. It’s a nice little contract we worked out a while ago; it seems to work for us.
My husband and I think of your cats as our companions. I really don’t have a preference on what people say we are to our cats; pet parents, staff, owners, guardians, etc. What matters most is that we love and care for our animals and always do the best we can for them while they are with us.
I am tired of everything being politically correct. I have five kids and two Afghan Hounds, all of whom I adore. I am their mom. I own my dogs, whom I purchased. They are my beloved companions, my furry kids. I gave birth to my kids. I am not their “guardian,” any more than I am my dogs’ “guardian.” The dogs are MINE. Just like my kids are MINE. It’s about the bond of love, not linguistics.
Just as a tiny rodent was to Robert Burns, my five adoptees are,”.. my earthborn companions and fellow mortals.”
They enrich my life, and Iona has trained herself to be my hearing ear dog!!
I consider myself a guardian and I have seen enough episodes of “Animal Police” on APL to know that you CAN be arrested for not providing proper vetrinary care to your animals. Whether one who neglects their pets goes to jail for this, I’m not sure. But from what I understand it is JUST AS ILLEGAL to deny a pet medical care as it is to deny a human (child or otherwise) medical care.
~Willow’s Mommy, Tarah
My cat is family~I don’t care other people refer to them. She is my buddy, pal, and I’m her staff..LOL
I say we’re neither owners nor guardians. Rather, we’re pet parents, and the animals we love are our furkids.
I consider my cats & dog my family. My cats have always been my best friends. I can talk to them, tell them things I couldnt tell other humans, I guess they are like therapy. They give me unconditional love & acceptance.
I don’t believe we “own” them. I think we are to care for them, love them, and keep them safe. In return they love us and enrich our lives more than we truly know. I realize they are not humans & often get a lot of flack for calling them my furkids, but I would do anything for them, just as I would my own flesh & blood.
So if the lawmakers use the sense God gave them & not go off the deep end with their decisions, then in the end I don’t think it matters what the term is as long as what ever is decided legally is in the best interest of the animal. There are way too many animal abusers & killers that are allowed to get away with these horrible acts.
Owner/guardian/parent doesn’t really matter since I am owned by them. LOL My dogs and cat are part of my family and just as I would a human member of my family I grieve the loss of a pet. I call them my furkids because I want to, I don’t have to I can refer to myself as their owner. My pets are great listeners and they give me unconditional love. If I’m not in the mood to snuggle and push a dog away she will come back later without being angry that I rejected her earlier, if I reject one of my children they would resent being rejected. They are companions, friends, confidants, and beloved pets. When you anesthetize things and make them property you lose something. The are living breathing creatures not inanimate objects and they deserve to be respected just like us. Being politically correct about this is ridiculous.
I consider myself the Mom. Legally, he is considered household goods, but I don’t have the same kind of relationship with him that I do the couch. I speak for him, know his activity, intake and output, and every other thing about him, just as I would a minor child. So I act like a Mom, and I think of myself as the Mom. He is not just a companion, and I am not sure who owns whom. He’s my boy, and I’m the Mom.
I call myself my cats’ “lair-mate”…they have a kitty door and half of my eight cats simply *decided* (free-will) to come live with me. I feed them and provide medical care, but we share in giving each other affection…I protect them, they protect me (they really are pretty good “watch” cats!
I consider myself an “Animal Trustee”. My fur-panions trust that I will give them the care I promised them when I took them under my protection. If for some reason I am no longer capable of this task it is my responsibilty to find someone who can.
Actually, my cat owns me!
I call all of our cats my babies/my big boy/little girl.
I refer to myself as Mommy/Momma. We are a family, pure and simple.
My dogs refer to me in their blogs as “My Gale.” In their heads, since no other human lives here, I think they call me “her.” But I call them my girls, my kids. Really, I don’t care what the law says. I know I will do everything in my power to take care of them, just as I would a child. I don’t care for them like children, I care for them like dogs because they are dogs. They are my doggie children!
I love my dogs and do everything they need and more for them. However, I own them. I pay the bills, I buy the food, I take them to the vet and I pick-up every expense for anything they need..
Ownership gives me the right to chose whether I spay or neuter them, ownership gives me the right to keep them with me at all times. Being a guardian is NOT in the picture. it is a dream of the Animal Rights Zealots, as they hope they can get governmental agencies, animal controls etc to take our animals from us at any time they’d like. Animal Welfare equals good animal husbandry Animal Rights Zealots have no knowledhe of proper animal husbandry and at the bottom line do not want any of us to have animals.. Animal Owners becareful, very careful of what you allow to happen via legislation, to your animals! Maintain your ownership or you won’t have animals to maintain.
I AM their Mom; end of story.
Guardian makes me feel like I’m another one of Mom’s foster kids DYFS brings around then takes away when they feel like never letting her make decisions for the kids’ best interest in the long run. We’ve adopted two of these kids and the stress has been disasterous on our family. I can’t imagine me being taken away whenever a vet or animal control officer thinks one of Mom’s ways of caring for me isn’t up to their standards. I mean let’s be real, some dogs have no shleter, live outside on a chain, are lucky if they get food or water and should be taken away. But any pup living in a clean environment, being fed and cared for as a member of a loving family unit, and healthy should be left alone. If the law wants to say Mom owns me so I can stay safely in her care so be it. What we don’t need is more stressing people out since they’re already going through enough with racial issues, religious wars, and watching their weight.
The terms “owner” and “guardian” have specific legal meanings. These are not just a matter of word games.
Being an owner makes the animal your property. I know that’s cold but the law is not intended to be warm and fuzzy so hang with me for a minute. As property, you have total control over the dogs health, happiness and welfare. Because a pet is living “property” cruelty and abuse laws apply and must be strongly enforced.
Being a guardian means that your dog belongs to the government agency in charge of overseeing animal welfare - like your local high-kill shelter. You simply care for it as long as they allow you to. Why is this important? In a guardian state, if you are clipping your dogs nails for example and it yelps out of fear and your neighbor calls animal control and complains, because the dog is not your property they can show up at your door and without a warrant terminate your guardianship - take “their” pet away and unceremoniously give it to another guardian. The state can also mandate spay, neuter, microchipping, ear notching, branding, banding, muzzling, or ear tagging for its animals and as a guardian you have no choice but to comply because the pet is not yours, it belongs to the state and you are merely its guardian.
As for my dog. She is my child with fur, my silly companion, a part of my heart, and loved beyond measure. I own her with love and deep affection and she is cool with that.
I can only sum it up by saying that my two pups are family….and as equally loved as any other family member……..
I don’t want to be consider myself as a dog owner, I look at myself as Sasha’s mom. She is not just a dog, but she is my daughter, a loved and a true member of my family!!! The other family members feel the same way!!
Glenda Murray
My dogs have ALWAYS been my kids, plain and simple, and I have always been their Mom. I am a pet parent, not just an onwer. I prefer to leave the word “owner” for my car, sofa, bed, things ilke that. End of story!
The dogs are my house mates, freeloading, but house mates nonetheless. I go to work, they laze around most of the day, do an occasional trick and duck when the mortgage is due!
My dogs are part of my family, and I love them more than anything! Why can’t we leave it at that? While I am very pro-animal, some things move into dangerous territory, and end up harming the responsible “owners” more than anything.
Does it really matter what terminology we use to describe our relationship with our pets? Every individual has a different relationship with their pet(s). As far as how the law views it it really doesn’t change the fact that every owner or guardian has a responsibility to treat an animal to the best of their ability. In my own situation I am sometimes “mommy”. There will always be animal cruelty no matter what title a person gives themselves in relationship to their pets. Loving and caring for the animals is really the most important thing. Wouldn’t you agree?
I believe that Naomi was quite eloquent and absolutely accurate in her definition of her relationship with her special family members/companions. This perfectly defines my relationship with my dog/cat/bird family which is definitely a privilege. They bring love, joy and comfort to my life and I pray that everyday I bring love, joy and comfort to their lives. Their companionship is a privilege! Thank you, Naomi!! Well said!!!
i purchased 3 of my 5 dogs. but i do not consider them my “property” anymore than i do my daughter. but i do consider all of them my kids. as i have to feed, teach and care for them all the same. therefore, i guess “guardian” would be a better term than owner. although they are “family” you can go to jail for neglecting and animal as you can for neglecting a child. so i would definately say “owner” would be an inpropriate term. they are not a piece of property like land,car,or a house. i like furry children.
Personally, I don’t think it really matters what you are called. Is what you are called really going to affect how much you love your pet? I think all that really matters is that you know how much you love your pet and that you don’t let somebody label that.
A loaded debate to be sure! I work at a vet clinic. I can feel for the owners that are faced with decisions regarding a pet’s care if they cannot afford it. It takes them someplace in their thoughts that is hard to grasp. I can only speak for me, but regardless of the terminology, my moral obligation is to my pet whether I’m her owner or her guardian.
I love my cats so much and consider them my babies. So, I guess you could call me their Mom. When people ask me if I have kids, I say I have a 6 year old and a 5 year old, oh and by-the-way, they happen to be cats.. :o)
Legal changes in the status of animals are necessary and therefore we need a change of terminology. Guardian is the best choice that I know of. It most certainly does not mean that the animal belongs to the state, anymore than a child who has a guardian (for instance, through death of a parent) belongs to the state. Law aside, you can call your relationship to your pet whatever you want. I call my humans Mama and Daddy, because as a cat, I relate to humans who take care of me as I did to my cat mom. A dog may prefer to refer to her humans as pack mates. The legal issue, however, is the distinction between a living being with feelings, needs and preferences, and an inanimate object which may be called property. Unfortunately, laws will never be passed stating that your human is your “mom”. Which is why I’m making Mama give me her money *now*, since I can’t inherit it. -Milagrito
I’m their Mom. I hate the thought that animals are my property. Obviously we need to be able to spay and neuter our animals. But I am against euthanasia unless an animal is dying and is in great pain.
There needs to be a change in the law, but I can’t see that happening any time soon.
For me, the term is Pack Leader. And of course, a responsible pack leader guards the dog.
I do believe that guardian is the appropriate term, with all the legal consequences. When an individual decides to bring a companion animal into their home, they are tacitly assuming all responsiblity for the well-being of that animal. They establish a fiduciary duty with that animal to make decisions that are in the best interest of the animal, not themselves. Yes, there are legal ramifications for this paradigm shift, but they can be gradual and they are necessary to change the negative implications of allowing companion animals to remain as property interests only.
technically, i am none. i adopted my dog from the humane society and the terms of adoption include that if i choose to not keep the dog at a later time, i can’t give him to anyone else. i am bound by the agreement to return him to the humane society so i always say i am the lessee. i have never uttered the words owner or guardian. i just say “i have a dog”
As with everyone close to me (human or other animal), I am different things in different situations.
I am friend, mom, companion, playmate, caregiver, provider and whatever else is needed. I am everything but their owner.
I take my responsibility to them very seriously. I brought them home and I responsible for making sure they have what they need and I do not need anyone to tell me I need to provide medical care or anything else for them, however, it seems there are some people who do not provide those things no matter what the terminology.
Maybe if we get some better language and laws our furry feather and finned little ones could get some additional benefits such as some of the $12,000 in veterinary medical care we have had in the past 3 years should be tax deductible.
I own a couch, some dishes, a table and some other inanimate objects, but I do not own the cats, fish and other animals that live with me.
I am Mom, and he is Daddy(he happens to be their 3rd dad, but this one’s a keeper!). In fairness, kitty wouldn’t nurse so I bottle fed her and raised her from 3 days old, so I really am all she knows as a mom (probably explains why she can’t quite use the catbox right). At the end of the day, I would protect my bunny and kitty with as much or more fierceness than I’ve seen most parents possess. They are my children; the law is stupid and ignorant.
p.s. I just wish I were a better personal trainer for my over-indulged girls…
Master should be the proper term used. Dogs should have masters, not owners, not guardians. The problem with unruly dogs is they have no masters, and as a master of your dog, you not only have the responsibility for their wellbeing but also to have a well mannered and stable dog. The debate here is silly.
I am my dogs advocate,I speak for him…………….
my fiance and i reffer to ourselves as our dogs momma & daddy. the dogs also know us by that, take our 1 1/2 year old english bulldog, pebbles, she and my fiance share a very special bond and if you tell her to go see daddy she will look for him until she finds him, if you tell her to look for momma she will look for me for awhile but not long… this is the same with our 11 month old english bullie, pooter, but he preffers his momma over his daddy… they are spoiled rotten and not owned by any one. i do everything in my power to make them happy and keep them healthy and both of them were born with medical conditions that required pricey medical attention and they got it asap! i cannot afford alot of things but i accepted the responsibilities that came with all the dogs i share my home with and there has been several times where i have skipped meals and paid my bills late to make sure they ate and had everything they needed and the way i see any one else with a pet should be the same way!
I prefer the legal term pet owner because it lets us decide what’s best for our personal pets (whether or not to have them desexed, what vaccines to use, when or if to euthanize them if they are suffering, etc), and because a (good) pet person knows their pet better than almost anyone else it should really be up to them and their (reputable) veterinarian to decide what’s best for that individual pet. Pet “guardian” laws do not change the fact that some people see non-humans as worthless, and have not shown to reduce non-human animal abuse. I usually use the term owner because of the legal connotation; I refrain from “guardian” because pets are not children (and treating them as children can lead to very serious problems) but at the same time hate saying “owner” because it makes me sound like I think of them as objects (which I am extremely against). I usually just use the term ‘mistress’ because of the legal connotation.