The new policy against caged pets in the dormitories is not just annoying, it’s unethical. To force students to forfeit their pets to “good homes” is a naïve request. Millions of pets are homeless in America and countless have abusive or negligent owners. Forcing students to, within months, find good homes for their beloved creatures is a call for students to place their pets in the questionable care of others. Beyond the loss of an emotional tie to a pet (my cats at home are my favorite people, in my case), it upsets me to know that the Wesleyan administration feels comfortable sending animals away from their owners. Even if a student does have a home that can take care of a small pet, many have dogs or cats and the presence of these animals in homes can be traumatic for the dogs and cats and fatal for the small pets.
The way the pet ban has been executed baffles me. It would have made sense to notify students this year that in three years, pets must be cycled out of the dormitories. That way, incoming students would know not to bring pets or buy them during their stay at Wesleyan, and no students would have to give up their pets in the mean time. Surely, if students had been notified before coming to Wesleyan that this policy would be in effect as of Fall 2006, students would have made the right arrangements, or maybe would have chosen a different school all together if they wanted to keep their pets. I understand the reasoning behind the pet ban, but the way that it has been executed is extremely problematic. Why has there been no dialogue between students and administration? Students weren’t even aware that keeping small pets was an issue until now. And what’s the rush in forcing pets out immediately? Why can’t students who currently have them keep them and a no-pet policy can be introduced now and not enforced until this year’s freshmen have matriculated?
I have yet to hear a Wesleyan student make an alleged complaint about allergies to caged pets, although I assume these complaints exist if this rule is being enforced. If a Wesleyan student has such an allergy, I suggest that he/she speak out and present his/her opinion to the students, not to the administration. We are between the ages of 18 and 22, and thus mature enough to handle the issue of discussing pets in dormitories on our own. We don’t need the administration to intervene. It’s one thing if it’s a ban on cigarette smoke that affects everyone negatively in the hall (not to mention that cigarettes can be smoked outside). It’s another if it’s a caged pet and the owner is responsible about keeping the cage clean and away from allergic people. I don’t see the harm in that. And I am terribly disappointed in ResLife’s autocratic approach to dealing with this problem and in creating this policy.
Leave a Reply