That is a very radical and totally unreal "either-or" scenario. You don't have to give up your dogs, or cats, or snakes, or iguanas, or spiders, or whatever, to care for a homeless person. Buying a homeless person lunch has far more utility to it than abandoning family members to make room for a stranger. That's actually a very bad idea, and I wouldn't ever suggest or recommend it to a client. Helping feels good, but abandoning those you love hurts. It wouldn't be good for someone to do. And, no, that isn't being selfish. If we aren't healthy, we aren't at our best, and if we aren't at our best our ability to help others dwindles (as does our motivation to care about others). We have needs that must be met, and if they aren't met it can be called selfish to expect this person to continue giving even though giving is hurting them. In the case of a family pet, the hurt would indeed be great, and the chances it would cause additional problems beyond the pains of removing a family (try explaining that one to your kids or spouse) it would be a very foolish thing to do. It's definitely way better for health to have happiness at home and keep your pets and find other ways to help those in need. Or you can give until you end up in a hospital and assigned a case manager because the stress became too great and you shut down and are barely functioning.
