Pets-for-presents story a bad idea

I am angry and very disappointed with the Daily Herald posting such a shallow and uneven story about pets as Christmas presents (I suppose you espouse wrapping them in a box and keeping them under a tree for a week). Sorry, off-topic. The fact that you emblazoned this subject across the Herald hard copy and then changed it for the online version indicates that somebody thinks maybe an error was made. No kidding. I have owned, and cared for, hamsters, guinea pigs, cats, dogs, and fish. None of them are inexpensive or easy to care for. Children should never receive a pet they haven't chosen as a gift. We all know what happens to gifts we don't really like - and the same can be said for animals. The article implies that children should receive pets when they are too young to care for them. The best model that a parent can be in this regard is to have a cat, dog, or other pet that a child can interact with (OK, this will leave out many pets, but that's the point) and teach them the proper way to touch, care for, feed, interact with, and in general take care of. Children find out by doing. If one has a small animal and the child happens to be a kicker, she will likely kill the animal. I have actually seen an older man do this in Arlington Heights to a neighbor's small dog because, although she had it on a leash, it was barking at him. This is the type of behavior that needs to be quashed before a child has responsibility for their own pet. Believe me, the shelters are going to be filled with "cheap, colorful pets" about spring this year, thanks to the Daily Herald. How disgusting.

Sandra Morris

Glen Ellyn