I AM JUST ABSOLUTELY HEARTBROKEN AFTER WATCHING THE LATEST EPISODE OF HEROES PHOENIX CALLED PEPE LOVES CHACHEE. I SAW A HOMELESS MAN FORCED TO GIVE UP HIS DOG B/C HE DIDNT HAVE THE MONEY FOR MEDICAL CARE FOR THE DOG. THAT IS THE SADDEST THING I'VE EVER SEEN. HE DID NOT WANT TO LOSE HIS DOG AND OBVIOUSLY CARED ABOUT HER BUT WAS TOLD BY THE EAMT THAT THE POLICE COULD BE CALLED IF HE DIDNT WANT TO VOLUNTARILY GIVE UP HIS DOG. MY HEARTBREAK IS THIS: IS THERE NO HELP FOR THOSE WHO CANT AFFORD MEDICAL CARE?? BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE FOOD AND SHELTER IS ONE THING, BUT BEING ABLE TO AFFORD EXPENSIVE SURGERY IS ANOTHER. WOULD THE HOSPITAL RATHER HAVE TO EAT THE COST AND THEN HOPE SOME ONE MIGHT ADOPT THESE ANIMALS, WHEN THERE ARE OWNERS WHO LOVE THEM BUT ARE NOT IN A POSITION TO AFFORD EXPENSIVE CARE. WAS ANYONE ELSE AS UPSET BY THIS AS ME, OR AM I JUST TOO SENSITIVE? I GUESS I JUST FEEL LIKE IF THE SERVICES WERE NOT PAID FOR ANYWAY, WHAT WOULD IT HAVE HURT TO LET THE MAN KEEP HIS DOG? THE MAN IS HOMELESS AND NOW COMPANIONLESS.....

We were just outraged after watching that episode!! That man loved his dog, and obviously she was WELL taken care of, she just had a broken leg!! It just wasn't right!!

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought it completely unfair to take the homeless man's pet away from him, especially when in the same episode another dog was hit by a car, but that dog was treated at the animal hospital (I'm assuming at no cost to the owner) and returned to said owner. She was not required to turn her dog over to them or threatened to be arrested if she didn't! I've watched these shows many times and they always make the point that the animal rescue and hospitals have ample funding from public donations. The surgery and post-op care would cost just the same whether they returned her to her owner or adopted her out. Rather then returning her to an owner that obviously loves her, even though he is homeless, they would rather take away his companion and friend, and go through the hassle of fostering the dog, and hoping someone adopts her. I guess only people who own houses should be allowed to have pets?!

I, as you, just watched this particular story regarding the homeless man and his dog and I must say I am absolutley disgusted by the actions taken by the EAMT. What kind of organization takes pride in what just happened. I would have been ashamed to air this episode instead of proud that something great was done. The gentleman they took the animal away from obviously cared deeply for his companion and even attempted to make a make shift cast for it's leg. This man has obviously lost alot in his life but love for his animal wasn't one of them. Sassy was well feed and cared for by his owner and by looking at her she did not do without while I am sure many a night her owner did. I am a nurse and I have a degree is health management and I have to say if one of my animals who are well cared for and well loved would have had an injury like this, it would be a struggle for me to pay for an expensive surgery and after care for my animal. Does this mean I am less worthy or my children don't deserve an animal to love because healthcare costs for any type of animal or vet care is excessively expensive. Are the wealthy or people of means only allowed to keep and love animals. Maybe the emphasis should be put on helping this man to keep his best friend instead of riping them apart. I am sure that the Animal Shelter and the channel that airs this program have some financial arrangements and maybe they need to consider all of their options instead of hoping that the animal would be adopted. I am happy for the family that was kind ebough to adopt the animal but my heart breaking for the man thats heart was ripped out because money is obviously more important than love and care except for extreme circumstances for some. Did showing this story help the plight of animals, my answer is no. It will only scare off people that have an injured pet from seeking help because of their fear of losing as in this case the only thing they to love insted of feeling comfortable enough to seek some kind of help for the animals in need.
One last note, my son was sick with Leukemia when he was young and I did not have the money to pay for his treatment to keep him alive, but we recieved help with his medical cost. Thank God we don't treat sick people the way this man was treated or I to would have lost someone I loved because I did'nt have the means to pay for his over expensive medical care. I have never written a response to anything of this nature before but my overwhelming grief compelled me to and I have to say, my children and I will not be watching this program anymore. Shame on you!!!

I was shocked by the lack of compassion displayed by the EMT towards the homeless man. Obviously the dog had to be taken in for treatment, however to do so with such apparent disregard of the intense bond the man had with his dog was horrible. He was offered no kind words of condolence or kindness. It was very sad to watch.

I too thought it was pretty sad that the guy was forced to give up his animal because they were homeless. I think the AHS and the EAMT could have been a bit more compassionate on that one. This is however a tight situation because the dog did need medical attention but in defence of the EAMT, he saw that the dog needed treatment and that was a main concern of his.

The AHS has done a few things that are unpopular and tends to be a bit overzealous in dealing with animal rescue, which is why there are more and more people starting to look at the no-kill groups for animals these days. I know quite a number of people who are not too happy with AHS and its policies. Some of them are of these people are with other rescue groups. On the other side of the coin the AHS's EAMTs have also helped the public in certain situations. One former EAMT Marisa McHugh once told me a story about how a Senior Citizen, who was taking care of a feral cat. She didn't have the money to get the cat spayed but Marisa not only did the transport to get the cat to the shelter to be spayed, but also got the cat back to the woman. It's too bad she's not with them anymore because the AHS could use that kind of caliber of person on the job.

I understand what all of you are saying. It was very upsetting for the man to have to give up his animal but it was in the best interest of the animal. If this man can not afford to take care of the animal when it is sick and injured than is it really fair to the animal to stay with him? I just think about if that was to happen again and again he couldn't do anything to help the animal and it died in pain, that would be a much more horrible outcome. Yes, I think that it would be great if there was a place for people to get medical treatment for the animals for free or with little cost (just like there are for humans) but there isn't and right now that just isn't possible. If you are really that upset and want to help donate and get more people to donate because the only way to make programs like that is through donations. As for the other women in the epoisde she did have to pay for the medical treatment. At the end they said that she made a donation (that just happen to cover the costs for her pet). I think what upset me about this post was that you are basing an opinion on the 37 minutes of footage they happen to show. These people are out there everyday saving animals and I think that they are amazing people. They may not be perfect but at least they try.

If you can't care for an animal then you shouldn't have one. I rescued a cat from a situation where the person couldn't care for themselves let alone the cats she had. Of course the situation was dangerous because the person was bi-polar and set fire to her apartment leaving the cats scared and homeless. One of the cats returned to the area the next day and was laying outside the apartment. I was able to get the cat transported and placed for adoption.

The cat which I named Phoenix got adopted into a good and loving home. I got to meet the people who adopted him and they really love him. They adopted him after losing a cat to an illness. Rarely, do I ever get to meet the people who adopt a cat after they are rescued. It's good to know that he's in a home that loves him.

No one disagrees with the need to assist animals who cannot be cared for. The point of my post was that it needs to be done with compassion. The lack of empathy for the homeless man was inexcusable. The EMT treated this man rudely and did not even acknowledge the emotional attachment he had for his beloved pet.

The previous post regarding the woman with bipolar disorder was offensive. Bipolar disorder is an illness. She is as much a victim of her illness as her cats were. Of course you need to remove the cats, but do we then treat the person with an illness as if they had a criminal intent to harm? Similarily, do we look down on the homeless with disgust because they cannot care for a pet?

At least the animals will have a chance of medical care, food and shelter. That is probably more than the homeless man will get.

How was the post offensive? Nobody was punishing her for being bi-polar. All that was said that she was bi-polar and was unable to take care of herself let alone a cat. Then on top of that the woman purposely set fire to her apartment and the cats were inside when it happened. If it hadn't been for neighbors breaking the windows and then getting her and the cats out (the cats apparently got out during the rescue on their own) the outcome would have been all 3 of them would be dead right now.

Bipolar may be an illness but she put those cats at risk. She wasn't supposed to have them but nonetheless one of the cats got a good and loving home.

The instance of the homeless man was simply this, the dog needed medical care, the EAMT saw this and acted. Sure, he may have been brash in your eyes but if you have someone who's reluctant to get the animal care sometimes you have to be a little bit more forceful. I think in this case the EAMT was justified here.

You also don't know the homeless guy's entire situation. It could be that after they shot the episode the crew could have tried to help him. We really don't know the entire outcome except that maybe the animal got fixed up and adopted.

I believe that the man should have been able to keep the dog because she was so well taken care of. Yes, I believe that the officers could have treated the leg and then returned the dog, there are free rabies vaccinations all over the nation and I'm sure that he could find a way to have cared for the dog without cost hell I would have helped him pay for vaccinations he deserves to keep his dog. Back in history people didn't have the problems they do now, they used to live on the open range and there dogs were their companions and their protectors.

No one does their job perfectly 100% of the time. Imagine you were being taped at your job don't you think that maybe you would seem rude at times.

And there is nothing less about these people whether they are homeless or bi-polar, the point is that they are unable to take care of their animals.

As for the previous posts, I do not believe you know that actaully costs for medical procedures.
The dog did not just need vaccinations, it needed surgery. The cost of a rabies shot is between $5 and $10. (That is covered by donations) But the cost of surgery is between $1000 and $4000. The shelter has to be able to pay their bills too in order to stay open, which they get money through adoption costs and donations. (not everything is free for them)But the can't just give hands outs to everyone that walks through their door otherwise they would be closed due to lask of funds. Are you really willing to donate up to $4000 so someone who is unable to care for their dog when it is sick or injured and then have them get the animal back? The dog went to a loving home that was able to afford to care for it.

It is not that I do not have sympathy for the man, don't get me wrong I was crying when he had to give up the dog. But lets face it, the world we live in is expensive and we all have a head that needs a roof, a mouth that needs to be feed, and a back that needs to be clothed.
Animals should be in homes where they will have everything they need.