ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh that is a lot of money... and I could never part with it... I am a cheapskate.. plus I already have my loving animal pal...

I do believe this site is for the well off business man/woman(or the like) ... this is why I was using the lawyer in my first senerio.. my opinion is that this is the cliental they want ... someone who has money to burn for a few hours of fun... someone who is too busy becasue of work to take care of an animal... seems to me as well if someone is willing to dish out this kind of money then maybe they will be an 'upstanding' citizen :huh: lol but just goes to show you never know about a person... but you can always hope... did you see anything in there discussing the possible abuse issue???

like I said before I would never do it... even if money wasnt an issue... I adore animals and would want to keep them all and then I would be broke cuz I have a farm to feed... at one time I had soooooooooooo many animals it took all my spare time to just care for them... now I have my one dog... want another9male not fixed :blush: ) and a salt water fish tank... then I would be a happy camper ... well that and a nice loving man who isnt a liar or a cheat... :unsure:

opps here I go rambling again :heart:

ZetterGRD, Thanks for the price breakdown. One could make the case that the $1208.15 per year expense will also put off people who are not serious or interested in treating the dog well. Looks like it will cost a pretty penny so only serious rentersneed apply.
Here is necdotal supporting evidence.
Some years ago, I began offering one-on-one obedience lessons for dogs and their families. I charged enough to cover expenses and was happy to help people with their dogs. But I found that people didn't practice; they didn't show up for the lessons. After a while they would quit ... nearly all of them. So I quadroopled the lesson fee. I immediately stopped getting so many calls from casually interested people and the people I did get practiced the lessons and stayed with the whole program at a much higher rate.
So, sometimes, a hefty pricetag can put off folks who might mistreat the dogs.
LTD

I didn't see anything on their website relating to the welfare of the animals other than the fact that they're supposedly well fed and taken care of while in the program, and I didn't see anything mentioning abuse. Their website definitely seems to encourage people who really desire to spend quality time with these animals.

I would assume the one hour orientation period would probably go through a checklist or member evaluation of some sort, especially if the client intends to keep the dog for more than a day. However, there is no mention of this on the site, so I'm really only theorizing there. Given that you can register for membership on their main site, they probably don't do any prior background check before the registration itself.

I agree that anyone willing to pay the price would be most serious in their desire for a temporary animal companion. Given these costs, I'm now inclined to think that the potential for client animal abuse is low. Since they seem to run on a sort of reservation system, and they have a business to run, I image there would be a hefty penalty if the dog was returned in any apparent questionable state, either physically or emotionally.

All I'd really like to know about the company is how well the animals are really treated, and if the animals don't mind changing caretakers all the time. This isn't something we could ever learn from their website, though. All things considered, while I was somewhat against the idea at first, I think I've come to a neutral stance on the issue. Only way to learn more about this would be from real testimonials from client experiences.

This seems very odd to me. The best relationships I've had with animals have been really dynamic and depended heavily on mutual trust and respect acquired over time. Kind of like with people. Imagine that?

Anyone for FLEXWIVES? FLEXLOVERZ? FLEXBESTFRIENDS?

I seriously question the ethics of this whole scheme.

My first question would be "what are they really saving these dogs from when they get them from the shelters?"

In order to be any good to them as a rentable "goods" the dog would need a good temperment and be a desirable pet - so their ideal prospect would be an animal that has the best chance of being adopted for a long term home. They are most likely being "rescued" from their chance of a happy, secure adoption.

The second question is, "what happens when they're no longer rentable". The constant change in routines could create neurotic basket-cases, and even those that thrive on the variety of carers will get old eventually. Will the company find someone to care for their ex-rentals, or will they be pensioned off back to the shelter, or get the green dream as their golden handshake?

No, not something I could support without a lot more information :mellow:

that seems...like an odd idea.....for some though it could be good,they might have a part which allows people to buy the dogs instead of just rent...like most rental places for other stuff,and also,im sure they dont have a put down thing like shelters,so it helps them some...unless they dont take care of them....personally i think it is a good idea as long as the animals arent mistreated at all,and also for all the first timer zoo's it could make it easier to anyone who dosent own an animal

well, for the record, this sounds rather like a local keneling service. the basic idea is that they take care of the dog/cat/etc. during the week and then they are with you when you actually have time to properly be with them.

they get a lot of clients from the local bussiness and legal communities. people who tend to have either lots of time on their hands or none at all.

Ok to be honest
with all respect of every ones personal opinion
I Both do and don't like the concept of it, yes they are doing this a all proffit with probable little thought to abuse I can't say that for sure...
please define what you mean by abuse ?? sexual Physical beating, torture by means of High voltage electrolysis devices, cutting their head off with a spoon, yelling at them using course language....???
before I start I'll narrow it down to Sexual and Physical trauma

though if we look at the idea these people are taking these animals from the shelter
and placing them with people, I would think it better if they gave the option for purchasing the animals from their company, but at least the animals will have up to date shots, be well groomed & fed. Go figure they have had training so it's not like they are just shoved into the marketing field. I'd imagine also the person who "hires" the animal would be given a list of commands the animal knows and some routine information, if this concerns you so much people, why don't you take the time to email them for some detailed information about them first before you say "it's wrong it should be shut down"

after all what's worse for the dog than being locked in a cage at a shelter
with only a few days before they are put down with no one to show them any emotion?
I'd say it gives them a chance I think personally it could be developed a little better and has the potential to save a percentage of the 40,000 + animals that die each year

on the negative aspect it's another way for people to rent animals for more um ..
well I guess I'd say "sexual" purpose this is not a good thing!
I doubt any of the dogs they send in to other homes would live the duration
of their doggy life with out being molested at some point

but I can see this being one of the major reasons for their success
you could look at it like (hire a lay for a week or a day)
if you want to see it as a legal method of animal prostitution…

so think carefully and maybe if you do email them you could ask them have they thought about people who would only hire their animals for sexual purpose
and how would they know who would and who wouldn't?
do they even care about the animals health risks involved ect. ect. ect.
the list could go on all night with human and animal health and mental health issues so, if none of the above is the reason for your opinion being against it, what is your reason? please add that in your reply, I'm very interested......

PS compairing this to Hire a Child idea is Irratating people already do this
you would be displeased to know what they are used for and there is no emotional love involved in this concept I dare not put my thoughts here ...
:angry soapbox: :angry soapbox: :angry soapbox:

I kind of doubt that any of these dogs would be used sexually...just thinking of the percentage of people into sex with animals, and the percantage of people who would actually rent a dog like this, makes the chances so slim, and I'm sure all the animals are spayed or neutered. With all the information I'm sure they collect on clients, just the thought of bringing a dog back in that could show signs of being involved sexually with someone, or an injury due to inexperience, or just not caring would make it too risky of a chance that someone would be willing to take.

Do they know that there are really perverts out there,,,people will rape and harm the dogs.Do they also know that zoos will rent their dogs only for sex, abused them and return them with lots of injuries....no insurance will cover that.And what about the dogs that really find a loving soul to attaches to..for crying out loud, its a living thing, not a car or a Tv you can simply just return after use.No permission in my eyes.

I doubt any zoos are going to rent their animals for sex and abuse and injure them.

This post has been edited by Itzwolf on Jun 11 2007, 07:22 PM

I'll copy my reply to this on another animal forum...

Its just like leasing a horse, personally don't think there's anything wrong with it.. if you love animals/pets but can't have one of your own it does kinda stink. I highly doubt anyone would become a member go through all that to just beat the dog.. It looks like they pay attention to the people wanting the dogs and have a screening process of sorts. Don't think it would be bad at all and much better than sitting in a kennel all the time at a pound or something..

This rent-a-pet scheme seems pretty cheap to me...you're basically paying a rather ridiculous amount of money to have a pet that you basically don't have to have an emotional investment in. Besides, for that much money you could probably afford to hire a pet-sitter for when you're too busy to spend adequate time with your pet.

I'm doubtful of sexual abuse, considering all the animals would be spayed or neutered. I just can't imagine many humans getting very far with any of these animals. Considering male human clients, I'm sure most of the female dogs are probably small breeds. On the website, only 1 of the 5 dogs listed was female, and was a Boston Terrier. I won't doubt the possibilities that some people may try it, I just think this is more of a case of overestimating the existence of people interested in real bestial experiences.

If these dogs are changing caretakers so often, and unable to form trusting bonds with people, then wouldn't they be more likely to resist anything that makes them uncomfortable, possibly becoming hostile? I assume it would take only one or two bad experiences to permanently place the dog on the defensive. If there's any struggle, surely the abuse might become apparent to the company when they are returned?

This does raise an interesting question to me, though one that could never be answered. This is what percentage of male/female clients select a male/female dog breed, and of what size. No way to access that kind of information unless you were an employee though...

With that aside, I've been reading a few comments made from the general public regarding Flexpetz, and it seems a fair amount of people in the "non-zoo" community are also against this concept. Comparatively few people seem openly welcoming of the idea, and most people seem neutral.

When reading over a few blog comments, one comment struck me as particularly interesting. The person asked about subtle illnesses relating to dog care and health. If these dogs are changing caretakers so often, how will people be able to detect the early signs of a disease or illness? Some people need to know their dogs well, or know enough about pets in general to in order to pick up these signs, either unusual physical or behavioral characteristics.

All these types of questions really get me wondering just how well the dogs are treated and examined in their "home" facilities. I want to think they receive a high level of care, but for a company big enough to warrant expanding into several states and possibly countries, it's easy for a business to lose sight of what's ethically important in favor of more financial income. This is what worries me the most, and I know I'm not alone in thinking this way.

This post has been edited by ZetterGRD on Jun 11 2007, 10:58 PM

Very, very good points.

Wow. What an interesting topic this has become. I keep finding myself switching stances on it. :wacko: