Rescue animal agency denies families with kids to adopt small dogs...Why?

[cynatnite]

Here is why I ask...

DeGeneres had said her hairdresser's daughters, ages 11 and 12, had bonded with Iggy and were heartbroken when the dog was taken away.

Fink said Moms and Mutts has a rule that families with children under 14 are not allowed to adopt small dogs.

"It's for the protection of the dog," he said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071017/ap_on_en_tv/people_degeneres

I've been around small dogs all my life. My sister has kids and they raise small sized dogs. I've never heard of an agency denying a family to adopt based on the ages of their kids. This is new to me and I don't understand. What's the reasoning?

[Lasher]

1. Sure doesn't seem right to me.

I would think having kids in the family would be a plus for the dogs.

[Devlzown]

2. Is one of the girls named Sarah Silverman?

:shrug: That's the only reason I can think of.

[orleans]

3. i wonder if they let families with kids under 14 adopt cats?

cats and small dogs are about the same size

if their rationale is that kids under 14 have a tendency to step on small pets then all cats should be out of the picture as well. or is this a double (dog) standard?

btw--we had three small dogs when my daughter was born. (they were my first babies don't ya know? they all died of natural causes--old age. my daughter was never bit, she was always nice and gentle with them, and they were wonderful with her. of course there was always someone home, and we were very watchful with her. even more so when two little girls we knew were attacked by LARGE dogs--german sheperds)

[liberalla]

4. I have never heard of that before and It doesn't sound right to me. nt

[Ayesha]

5. I've seen this before and I think it's crap

Lots of rescues won't adopt any dogs to people with children, and it's ridiculous. Others set blanket age restrictions, failing to take into account the specific situation. Each dog needs to be taken as an individual, and each child! I have 5 dogs, 3 big and 2 little. They are all rescues and some came from bad backgrounds. Both of my small dogs like children. One of them I supervise closely when toddlers visit, as he tends to be on the shy and fearful side, but he has always been fine. He approaches visiting children cautiously but affectionately. The other was in a foster home with a 2 year old girl when I adopted him, and he loved to lick her face and cuddle with her. 2 of my big dogs adore children, though one might knock over little ones by accident until she learned not to. The third doesn't much care for young kids but is fine with teens.

Some VERY SMALL (i.e. under 10 lb.) dogs may be at risk of being injured by very young children. But kids 6 and up and dogs over 10 pounds that like children should be fine. It's all about teaching kids how to be gentle around dogs, and choosing an appropriate dog. Temperament, not size, is what matters!

[Robbien]

6. Wait a minute, the story says the dog was taken away because

Helen broke the contract by not keeping the dog she adopted. Helen gave the dog to a family which the adoption agency did not know.

Yes, there is a line in the story about the agency not giving small dogs to families with small kids, but the real story is that Helen broke the contract by not keeping the dog she adopted. Then she talked about it on her show and the adoption agency got flooded with hate mail and death threats.

If I were that agency I wouldn't give a dog to any person on the recommendation of a talk show host who had her viewers stage a hate campaign against the agency.

[cynatnite]

7. I didn't know Ellen had her viewers stage a hate campaign...

I hadn't read that. Do you have a source?

Also, I questioned the rule about them not allowing families with children adopt small dogs...not about breaking a contract.

[Robbien]

8. Your link, the article you posted said

As a result of the publicity, Marina Batkis and Vanessa Chekroun received voice mail and e-mail threats of death and arson and were besieged by the media, disrupting business at Paws Boutique

Perhaps Ellen may not have specifically asked her audience to do this, but from the news clip I saw, Ellen was adamantly talking to her audience visibly upset with the adoption agency. Saying how unfair the agency was and how awful it was of them to upset the children.

If I were the agency I wouldn't want anything to do with Ellen or the family Ellen pawned the dog off on.

And I like Ellen, but enough is enough.

[cynatnite]

10. In no way was she attempting to intentionally incite people...

Celebs like Ellen do have influence and since she wasn't telling people to write letters, protest or anything like that I don't see how she can be held responsible for idiots making death threats against these people.

[Robbien]

12. Ellen told her audience who the nasty ol' adoption agency was

and went on and on about how this mean nasty ol' adoption agency in such and such a city was mean to take away a dog from children.

Helen has been doing the show for years and knew how the audience usually reacts to this type of story. If she didn't mean for them to react, why did she give them the particulars of the adoption agency?

[cynatnite]

13. So she should be held responsible for what other people do?

We're told here at DU all the time to contact politicians, write LTTE's or get active when we see an injustice. Should those that encourage it be held responsible if some idiot makes a death threat? Of course not...no more than any other celeb or anyone that's been on TV for that matter, who's cried, vented or whatever the case may be in regards to what they view as an injustice.

The people who make the actual death threats should be the ones who get in trouble for it. They are the ones who broke the law. Telling a judge that 'Ellen told me through the TV' just doesn't fly.

[Robbien]

15. So by the same measure, Michelle Malkin

shouldn't be held responsible for the hate campaign waged by her audience against the SCHIF 12 year old Graeme Frost?

[cynatnite]

17. If she wasn't inciting people to make death threats...

no. As much as I despise the woman and her ilk I don't hold her responsible...I hold those who did the threatening responsible.

[Robbien]

21. Would you give a 12 year old kid to Michelle or one of her friends

based on Michelle's recommendation?

Why would you expect this adoption agency to give an animal to an unknown family based on the recommendation of a person who caused (directly or indirectly) a death threat campaign?

[cynatnite]

23. I think you got the order of events wrong...

1)Ellen got dog.
2)Ellen had problems with dog and her cats.
3)Ellen gave dog to friend.
4)Adoption agency found out and didn't like it.
5)Adoption agency took possession of dog from friend of Ellen.
6)Ellen cried on her TV show about.
7)Some whackos made death threats because adoption agency made Ellen cry.

I don't understand where you got the idea about Ellen and recommendations. I haven't read anything about that.

[Robbien]

30. Number three on your list is specifically forbidden in PAWS contracts

PAWS is adamant about adoptive families returning animals to the agency if the animal does not work out for any reason. They repeat it over and over again in their interviews.

That is where the problem started, when Helen gave away an adopted animal. Of course PAWS took back the animal.

Helen is at fault here. Helen is to blame for the kids being upset the animal was taken away. Helen is to blame for using bad judgment by going on TV and blaming everything on the agency. And Helen gets the blame for the agency receiving death threats because without her show the agency would never have been on the receiving end of such vile hatred.

[cynatnite]

33. It's Ellen...NOT Helen...at least get that part right if nothing else...

Ellen is not to blame for what other people do. If you tell someone they should be upset because the government might be spying on them because you're upset about it...it doesn't mean they should go around threatening the lives of governemt officials. It's not your fault they do that.

People took it upon themselves to act because somebody made Ellen cry. Ellen didn't tell them to do it. These people who made the threats have to take some responsibility for this. Instead, you want to blame the person who cried on TV about it. Geez, if that ain't passing the buck...I don't know what is.

For another thing...I'm not disputing the events in this. Ellen gave the dog to her friend and violated a contract in the process. The agency took the dog from the friend. Whether that was a good thing or a bad thing is up for debate, but it happened and I'm not disputing it.

But in no way did Ellen tell people to make threats against this adoption agency. Whackos took it upon themselves to make the threats.

[ronnykmarshall]

114. Actually it WAS Helen.

Helen is Ellen's evil twin sister. She tied Ellen up and went on the TeeVee and sent out (in secret code) a message for people the harass them dog people.

[theHandpuppet]

45. Just what did you mean by this?

"As much as I despise the woman and her ilk..."

Care to explain that statement?

[cynatnite]

48. Michelle Malkin...I despise her and those of her ilk...

rush, billo, etc...

I despise all them.

Does that help?

[theHandpuppet]

57. Thanks

I wasn't quite clear what you were saying so thanks for clearing that up.
:hi:

[Quantess]

89. Completely different scenarios.

Ellen was sharing her distress with the audience, and made a plea to the rescue agency to reconsider.

Michelle Malkin was spewing hatred and encouraged harrassment as part of her smear campaign.

[mondo joe]

95. Let's get some facts straight: Malkin LIED about the Frost family and disclosed PERSONAL

information about them encouraging harassment.

Ellen did not disclose personal information, has not even been accused of lying, and accepted personal responsibility.

[theHandpuppet]

53. I think folks who actually saw the clip from her show...

...will find your interpretation rather bizarre.

[nonconformist]

97. I watched the show yesterday, and Ellen NEVER said the name of the agency

She only said "a rescue agency in the area".

I certainly don't think she intended for them to get death threats.

[MonkeyFunk]

101. No she didn't

I don't think she ever mentioned the name of the agency.

[ronnykmarshall]

115. No "Helen" didn't mention the name

But on a local radio show the name was mentioned.

[theHandpuppet]

52. Bullcrap

I've watched that clip twice now and Ellen repeats over and over that she was wrong and then pleads that the dog be returned to the girls.

Sounds to me like a few power freaks bungled their way through a situation that could easily have been resolved to the benefit of everyone involved, including the dog.

[AngryOldDem]

65. CBS this morning had a voice mail left by DeGeneres' publicist

That was sort of threatening in that the publicist said all kinds of bad PR would be laid on this adoption place, mainly because of her massive following. A snip of it was played -- whether in context or not, I dunno.

[Ayesha]

9. Who cares about the damn contract?

LA city shelters kill hundreds of dogs a week and these people go and lie their way into a family's home to take away a dog. The dog was loved, and safe, their priority should be the thousands that aren't!

[Robbien]

11. Contracts are important when animal safety is involved

Paws is very careful to vet the people to whom it gives animals. Without knowing the family who got dumped with the dog, the agency should have taken the dog away until the vetting process was done. But before any vetting could occur, the agency was enundated with death threats caused by Ellen giving the name and address of the agency on national TV.

I wouldn't want any animal to be anywhere near that situation.

[ShortnFiery]

16. We have to admit it folks, kids play rough and are NOT aware of such.

I shudder to consider how many moderate size K-9s are euthanized each year for biting children because "the idiot adult owners" did not do the following:

1) take the time to train the dog in one of the numerous K-9 "Good Citizen" Dog Obedience courses:
2) Never (NOT EVER) leave children under 10 unattended by an adult in the presence of *any dog.* (even ones that are oh so calm around adults); and
3) Teach their children that dogs are NOT HUMAN and that in order to glean companionship and love from a pet K9, they must be gentle but consistent in their respect for "pack behavior." As much as you can to a pre-10 y.o. = teach them about the nature of respect within the pack and that humans are looked upon as *their master.*

When one takes the time to educate themselves and their children in K-9 behavior as well as dedicate a minimum amount of time to obedience training, "the family pet" is a treasure not only to it's loved ones, but he/she can also also serve an role model of "good K9 citizenship" for the entire community.

[Quantess]

90. 11 and 12 year old girls should probably be old enough...

...to properly play with a dog. Don't you think?

However, you raised some excellent points! Consider Britney Spears adopting a Yorkie puppy, with 2 toddler boys! Bad, bad human!

Edit: because I got the ages wrong.

[FreeState]

109. Did you even watch the show?

... death threats caused by Ellen giving the name and address of the agency on national TV.

Ellen never said the name of the agency or the address. I have it on DVR. Stop repeating false accusations please.

[annabanana]

14. Ellen (not Helen) did not "have her viewers stage a hate campaign

Over zealous, and possibly deranged, fans did it on their own. She was very emotional on her show and we know how some people can overpersonalize their relationships with celebrities...

[Robbien]

18. After being on the receiving end of a deluge of death threats

and threats of arson, can you really blame the adoption agency from keeping their animal as far away from the situation as possible?

[cynatnite]

19. So the dog is at a hidden bunker or something?

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. The dog was in someone's home, they took it away and the threats started after that.

[Robbien]

24. The dog was not in the home in which the agency placed it

The dog was in an unknown location. Per contract, the agency automatically retrieves the dog. If the unknown family wanted to adopt the dog, they would have to come in and get vetted by the agency.

But no, that was not how Helen decided it should happen. Instead she aired an emotional segment on national TV against the nasty ol' adoption agency. Then the deluge of death threat calls started.

[cynatnite]

27. You said....

"can you really blame the adoption agency from keeping their animal as far away from the situation as possible?"

From what situation? The dog was at someone's house, the agency got it and the threats started. So, from what situation were they trying to keep the dog from? The threats hadn't even started at that point.

Oh, BTW, it's Ellen...not Helen.

[Robbien]

35. Let's do the steps again

1. Ellen adopted the dog
2. Ellen couldn't keep the dog because of her cat
3. Ellen returned the dog to the agency per contract.

no wait, that didn't happen
Again 3. Ellen gave away the dog against her signed agreement not to do such a thing.
4. The agency retrieved the dog
5. The family came in to fill out the adoption papers and be vetted

no wait, that didn't happen
Again 5. Ellen went on TV blaming everything on the nasty agency
6. The agency got inundated with death threats
7. The agency is keeping the dog away from Ellen and the unknown unvetted friend of Ellen.

[cynatnite]

39. In other words you choose to ignore your own statements...

no prob. :)

[Robbien]

44. As do you

no prob :)

[annabanana]

20. No of course not.

The passions unleashed (no pun intended) by famous people are kind of like a wild fire. There doesn't really seems to be much control available without some very serious deliberate manipulation.

I'm sure that Ellens plea was genuine, but I don't think she "knows" some of her fans as well as she maybe should.

[ronnykmarshall]

116. Damn that evil Helen!

[ShortnFiery]

22. IMO, with regard to rationale and understanding of K9 behavior and issues, Ellen is a meatball.

:eyes:

The dog rescue agencies don't have these rules because they're "mean" and glean pleasure from denying small pet adoption to young children. No, they have these rules for the benefit of both the small dog and their potential adoptive owner's.

Now, if Ellen were thoughtful, I'm sure that "some arrangement" could have been made to have these young 11 and 12 year olds sign up to attend the next local PetsMart Dog Obedience classes.

No, "rules are NOT rules" - there's always exceptions but Ellen was a jerk for not reaching out to say, *the dog whisper* or other K9 trainer to serve as an intermediary for the family with those children under 14 y.o.

It's not like she doesn't have the money to hire a Certified Dog Trainer to: 1) work with the wannabe permanent "adoptive family" of this small dog; and 2) serve as an intermediary between Ellen's interests (for the family with younger children) and that of the Shelter?

IMO, dumb a** celebrities not coping and attempting to take "an easy" way out of their life's little dilemmas. :eyes:

[cynatnite]

25. All I wanted to know was why the agency was denying...

families with kids under the age of 14 the ability to adopt small dogs. That was my original question and the topic of this thread.

[Demeter]

26. Small Dogs Are Apt To Bite First

which can be very bad for small kids. Large dogs in general are much less excitable, probably because they know they are bigger, and the small kid isn't a threat to them.

[cynatnite]

31. Well, that doesn't make a lot of sense to me...

For one thing...the agency noted the dog's safety rather than the children.

For another, I've never found larger dogs less excitable than smaller dogs. It's about even on both sides depending on the breed, the dog's nature, the environment and so on.

[ShortnFiery]

34. Oh please, in a pet adoption contract there are a myriad of concerns.

The reason they have these rules is to MAXIMIZE the success of the potential adoption.

Believe it or not, those of us who are heartfelt compassionate about the care and prevention of harm/cruelty to our beloved K-9s, KNOW that many children and young teens are bruisers.

Plus the poster is right, the small dog BITES out of a fear response to a threat. When you're a small dog, even a feisty one, almost everything (hawks? falcons?) is "a threat." It's termed "fear aggression."

And please, I'm not trying to be haughty - but if would consider doing some research on K-9 behavior, I'm confident you also will view the women of this shelter as managing a thoughtful pet rescue effort. :hi:

[cynatnite]

38. I'm not coming down on the people who run the shelter...

not at all. My experience has been different given the dogs we were raised around. We always had dogs of all sizes and types so the reactions always varied depending on a lot of factors. We have a bird now and no other pets. My sister on the other hand raises and adopts out horses and dogs. Animals were a big part of our growing up and my sister does it because she loves them. I don't do it because I love them plus I don't have the stomach for much of the hard choices she's had to make.

[LeftyMom]

94. Preventing bites to children is a matter of the dog's safety

Dogs that bite (no matter what the provocation) and especially those that bite children are often euthanized. A disproportionate number of bites to children, and especially damaging bites to the head and neck, come from small dogs.

[LostinVA]

120. BINGO

[LostinVA]

119. I bet it's because Small Child Are Apt To Bite First

If not raised to handle pets gently. Small dogs get afraid and snap to protect themselves. Also, small dogs can often be easily hurt if handled roughly by children.

[ShortnFiery]

29. Because even young teens are often NOT responsible enough to "dedicate" themselves to

caring for a small dog. Their bones are very fragile. The family next door is about as loving and knowledgeable about small dogs as humans can get (the mother is a Vet Tech), but one of their young sons went tearing through the house and stepped on "Francesca's foot" - It was not intentional and happened in "an instant" but a number of bones were broken and this poor "little pomeranian" dog leg/foot had to be wrapped/casted. You can also imagine the hellacious vet bill?

So again, small dogs have small delicate bones. It's not RUDE or CRUEL to understand that *many* kids under the age of 14 ... are well KIDS! = carefree bruisers. :shrug:

+ AGAIN, if Ellen would have been a little more humble ("oh I am sorry. Can we work this out with a dedicated dog trainer to the family for a week?") to the women who manage this rescue effort, her celebrity TANTRUM would have been un-necessary. :shrug:

The people who volunteer their home, love and time to dog rescue are some of the most giving and compassionate people you would care to meet. They want pet adoptions to WORK and many of them are flexible if you don't come in like Ellen with her "celebrity guns ablazing."

This is just my not so humble opinion - But DAMN! ---> What a maroon! :crazy:

[cynatnite]

36. That does make sense...

thanks for answering. We were raised with small dogs like pomeranians. My aunt kept teacup sized ones for years around us and her kids. We were taught how to be around them. A lot of times it was looking before you sat and always knowing where they're at. It's never occured to me that agencies would have rules like this which was why it surprised me.

My sister adopts out horses and dogs.

[ShortnFiery]

42. Thank you cynatnite. That was very thoughtful of you to add.

:hug: :hi:

[BadgerLaw2010]

54. Because small children think pulling physical "pranks" on dogs is funny.

14 is probably too high a cutoff, but kids do a lot of dumb shit. Big, good natured dogs like Goldens and Labs are far better than small dogs - or big dogs with bad temperments.

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Maine-ah]

70. you could have put a warning on that post.

[ShortnFiery]

77. Why, it's a perfect REAL example of what can happen when you don't properly vet

people who wish to adopt a K-9. :shrug:

[Maine-ah]

84. yes, it is,

I will agree with that. Though a common courtesy would be a warning graphic pic.

[MiniMe]

55. I volunteer for a rescue organization

Labs, not all breeds. One of the first things we learn is that the dog is our "client", not potential adopters. When we adopt out, our concern is placing a dog in the right home for him/her. There are some dogs that we won't adopt out to families with young kids, mostly because they have not been around young kids before, or if they were strays, because we don't know their history. There are always exceptions, but they can only be made with observation of the kids with the dog and the dog with the kids, and it only applies for kids that are dog experienced. This is done to protect both the kids and the dog, we don't want to put the dog in a bad situation for it, and thus, setting them up to potentially fail. Some of that comes from experience on why dogs have been given up. We had one dog that was given up by a family because a kid and a dog were playing together in a pile of leaves and the dog accidentally scratched the kid. Even the family said it was an accident, but they were giving the dog up anyway.

I had one foster that was a 6 month old wild child. He had no training whatsoever, he jumped up, and he was very mouthy (tended to chew on your hand a bit). I only had him 2 days before our adoption day, and I didn't have time to try to correct those behaviors. Well, I tried, but I'm not the dog whisperer. A woman and her 4 year old child came up to look at the pup, and the mother was very interested, he was a really good looking pup. She interacted with him and that was OK. Meanwhile, her son was backing away from the dog because the dog was trying to jump up on him and looked a little scared of the dog. I told the mother that this dog wasn't approved for kids that were her son's age, and she didn't care, didn't even look to see how her son was reacting to the dog. I finally pointed it out to her, but she still didn't care, she wanted that pup. The rescue finally told her no way. The pup was adopted by a very nice couple who absolutely loved him, it was a much better situation for the pup. With training, etc, I'm sure that the pup would have been good with the child, but not at the time he was being adopted out. He needed a lot of training.

I have also seen dogs that can't tolerate commotion, and just wouldn't do well in a home with kids. I'm not saying that any of this was applicable in this particular case, just trying to let you know how the rescue that I volunteer for thinks. As for the small dog aspect of it, we don't know what kind of history that particular dog had, or how it ended up in rescue. We don't know if it had been abused previously. Younger kids sometimes just don't respect a dog's space, and might push the dog into a situation that the dog just can't handle, and that usually ends with a bite. Rescues do good work, and they usually have rules such as these due to their past experiences.

[CTyankee]

62. Are we SURE it was "overzealous" fans who made threats?

I find that hard to believe, since if anything Ellen's show would (to me at least) attract a very humanistic, liberal minded audience who love Ellen for who she is, including the fact that she is gay. I think that is admirable. I have never found Ellen to be small minded, hate-filled or zealous on anything. I used to watch her show at the gym and found it to be a warm, very nice place to be. I just can't see her show engendering viciousness.

[ronnykmarshall]

113. Damn that Helen!

[Holly_Hobby]

28. Because they can. n/t

[Clark2008]

32. Idiotic, stupid, no accounting for people's ignorance.

I have two children under 14 and three dogs.

My kids, including the baby who I'm teaching not to tug ears and tails, LOVE my dogs and my dogs ADORE my kids.

A kid without a pet is unfulfilled if you ask me. And a dog with a kid is a happy puppy.

[ShortnFiery]

37. And if your baby, well, acts like a baby and "gets rough" with the dog.

Will you blame the dog if he *wired by nature* well behaves like a "pack animal" and it bites your child due to "fear aggression?"

IMO, with regard to K-9 pet behaviors, NEVER say never and you won't get sued. ;)

I've been in the middle of a big dog fight to protect my K-9 sheepdog from getting his butt handed to him by a rottie. When we pulled this dog off of mine, the owner exclaimed, "But he's never done nothing like this ... why, he's so gentle with our kids! Your dog must have done something to provoke him?"

Nope, the rottie was "dog aggressive" but not "people aggressive."

Finally, my beloved 14 year old K9 was one of the most gentle dogs you'd ever care to meet. However, with her liver and kidney issues, she's tired and I must keep young children away from her ... she just doesn't have the patience for them - and I fully respect that.

Again, "never say never" even if you have had your beloved K-9 for years because they are descended from wolves and still default to PACK BEHAVIORS. :hi:

[Clark2008]

46. My dogs don't act that way.

Sorry... you, uh, don't know me... don't know that I was on the board for the Humane Society, don't know that I can train a dog in my sleep, don't know what kinds of dogs I own and judge people far too much and know far too little about them.

I am the Alpha "Male" in this house and they all know it.

Oh - and hubby's an insurance salesman... we have an umbrella policy that would knock your socks off because we have dogs. :)

P.S. I realize that not all dogs should go to homes with kids; however, to have a blanket policy that you don't adopt to homes with kids under 14 is outrageous.

[ShortnFiery]

51. OK, but one day you will be surprised when all those "human characteristics"

that you've placed on your beloved K-9s fall to the wayside and they do something aggressive to knock all your "my dogs will never" belief system on it's ass - yes, it's very sound for you to have an insurance policy. :wow: :scared:

No, HUMANS should NOT EVER leave a dog and a child under 10 unattended. NOT EVER! It's like playing Russian Roulette. :thumbsdown:

[midlife_mo_Jo]

126. I disagree

with "No, HUMANS should NOT EVER leave a dog and a child under 10 unattended. NOT EVER! It's like playing Russian Roulette."

That might make a nice rule for rescue organizations - better to be safe than sorry - but in my home, my dogs are left alone with my kids once they get to an age that "I" can trust them. For some kids, that's five, and for some kids it might be eight. One of my children is hyper in the morning before he takes his medication, and although he's eleven, he still isn't allowed to be alone with the dog at that time. Some of my girls were very calm and gentle, and I had no problem leaving a well-behaved dog alone with them. Of course, the dog has to know that he is at the bottom of the pecking order. And mine always have.

[BadgerLaw2010]

56. "Protection" dogs tend to dislike other dogs. "Bad wolf, get away from sheep/master"

Our huge German Shepherd loves people and the other family dogs, but wants to kill any and all strange dogs. Not fight for dominance or territory, kill.

Rottweilers would be similar. They just have not been bred over the centuries to love everyone and everything.

Now Golden Retrievers otoh...great family dog, useless guard dog.

[cynatnite]

40. Just gotta say that is the most adorable photo! n/t

[Clark2008]

50. Thank you.

:)

And they both love their canine sisters and brother (a cocker spaniel brother who we've rescued and has some health issues, but, apart from a few set-backs, seems to be healing. He has some liver damage from malnurishment and mistreatment).

[MiniMe]

59. Good for you, however, not everybody is a responsible parent.

But now all dogs are happy with a kid around. I have a dog I rescued, and he is scared to death of kids. I assume that where he came from, he must have been teased or mistreated by kids. All I'm saying is it depends on the dog, and how much history the rescue has on the dog.

[cuke]

60. Ellen took a dog in, and then gave it up

She did a poor job assessing how the dog would fit into her own life. How good a job do you think she did assessing how the dog would fit into someone else's life?

The rescuse agency has experience with placing dogs. WHy did Ellen take it upon herself to break the contract she signed and make a placement when she obviously doesn't know what the heck she's doing?

[MiniMe]

68. Are you replying to my post?

Because I agree with the rescue agency.

Edited to add see my post #55

[cuke]

88. Whoops

Not sure why it's after yours. I thought I was replying to the OP.

[MiniMe]

102. Thats OK, I was confused.

Thanks.

:hi:

[LostinVA]

121. Exactly

[woodsprite]

41. We had to undergo an interview 3x before we were allowed to

adopt Silver from a rescue, plus several pop house inspections. We have 2 kids - 7 and 14. Now, Silver is a bigger dog - shephard/husky mix, but I thought that was a bit much. You should see what you have to go thru to rescue a few other breeds around here - both small and large. It gave you the feeling the dog was never really yours - pop inspections whenever (not just a year), if something happened to the dog you had to let the rescue know, if you gave up the dog for whatever reason, it couldn't be given to a friend, neighbor, relative - it had to go back to the rescue and they would place it with whom they saw fit.

BTW, 'around here' is DE/PA area. It truly made me think twice about adopting from a rescue organization. I think it would be easier to rescue your own dog from a puppy mill, but that defeats the purpose.

[cynatnite]

43. What were they looking for when they inspected your home? n/t

[woodsprite]

49. Toys on the floor, how the kids acted, they actually gave the kids

some reading to prep them for getting a dog and questioned them about that, if we minded 'hair' all over (when they blow coat), how we reacted with the cat and the cat's litter/food area, yard inspection (do/do not have a fence - oh, and it couldn't be an electric fence). Talked to 3 unrelated references, our vet and in-laws.

Edited to add: We had to prove to them that the electric fence that the previous owners planted in our yard had been disabled. It was - permanently.

And remember, this was the place that had *less* hoops to jump thru.

I will say this - there is no way we could have rescued a better doggie! AND, the lady has become a friend (since she checked on her so often to start ;)

[ShortnFiery]

47. And IMO, God bless them for closely vetting people. A K-9 introduced to the family

is an adoption of sorts - you are agreeing to care for this dependent animal for the rest of their natural life.

Yes, it's a Gift "of life" albeit not human, that you are bringing into your home.

Anyone who has ever watched The Animal Planet's segments of K9 abuse would fully embrace the need for CONTRACTS to be drawn up.

[seabeyond]

61. there you go, the little kids should have a sturdy pit bull. n/t

[lonestarnot]

63. Because small children don't realize small dogs have small bones, and they break.

[AngryOldDem]

64. The agency said it was just following standard adoption procedure....

The procedure is that adoptive homes are carefully screened so as to provide the best environment for the pet. Sure wish we as a society shared the same concerns about kids who are placed in adoptive/foster homes.

[malta blue]

66. I just went through a rescue process

and it is the same as being a trained seal - you have to jump through hoops, spin balls on your nose, and hope in the end you get the reward.

I was turned down for having an 8 year old daughter, regardless of the fact that we already had a dog that was in the house before she was even born, because I was searching for a small dog.

I was turned down for not having a fence around my "yard" even though I live in the woods - yeah - YOU fence it...

I finally got my little dog after going though 7 applications and interviews.

It is harder than getting a job.

[mondo joe]

67. It's very standard pet adoption contract. But the funny thing is, if your unneutered dog

has a litter of pups you can give them away to anyone. If you adopt a dog and it doesn't work well, you can keep it in a crate all day. But if you adopt a dog and then want to re-home it, you're in violation of your contract.

[ProfessorGAC]

71. Seems Silly To Me, Too

Go to a breeder, can buy any dog you want for the right price. Environment, kids, nothing comes into play.

Go to someone's garage who has a dog that just had puppies. Same thing.

It would seem a shelter would be perfectly happy that a dog was re-homed with a family who wanted it and cared for it. If the dog is the client, the welfare of the dog should take precedence.

The contract seems petty to me.
The Professor

[IdaBriggs]

75. Please read my answer #69. You wouldn't *believe* the idiots

we (rescuers) have to deal with, and trust me when I say we (usually) have the animal's best interest in mind. Its all about *not* having the animal come back into the system.

[ShortnFiery]

79. I believe you ... I was acquainted with a woman who did sheepdog rescue.

They are very large, high maintenance dogs. People truly don't realize the profound responsibility it is to adopt a K-9. The key is always "basic obedience" ... making time for that. However, you also must show larger dogs quality "bonding time" lest they can tear up your house.

When I went back to work after birthing our first baby, my newly adopted dog, went into my closet and chewed up the heels of all my GOOD ($$$) pumps. What's hilarious is that she did not TOUCH my husband's shoes. It's not wise to default to putting human feelings on K9s, but in some weird way I believe that my pup was "punishing me" by acting out with chewing my heels. She was not "a chewer."

My Point: Unless you get a teeny tiny dog, the responsibility to care, feed and walk it are for their lifetime. You can't just get bored and quit ... like many do with their marriages. :spray:

[OnyxCollie]

76. A responsible breeder has a contract

that says if the dog can no longer be cared for, it is to be returned to the breeder.

Responsible breeders may also rescue their respective breeds, at least the ones in the Belgian Sheepdog community that I am a part of do.

I have used my dog for stud purposes, but I am very hesitant to breed my two bitches. If you breed, you need to be prepared to accommodate ALL of the puppies if they can't be kept.

If you are interested in a Shiloh Shepherd (a new, very large German Shepherd breed that is trying to establish itself), be prepared to present receipts for the specific dog food the breeder recommends. If not, the dog must be returned. This is not to be mean, this is to ensure the breed will succeed.

[ShortnFiery]

80. Yes, I have always purchased our K9s from a reputable breeder.

If you don't, you don't know what you'll get. :scared:

You know that when the breeder gets intense and shows interest in EXACTLY how their puppy will be cared for, then that's an excellent quality dog. However, it's important to get the dog's pedigree and ensure that they have been screened for certain genetic diseases specific for their breed.

Yes, anyone who thinks the Agency Gal was "a control bitch" may be right but IMO, her arrogance came out of a desire for the dog to be placed in a loving and safe home.

Rent the flick "Best In Show" if you want to truly get a feel for the wacky world of K-9 adorers and their beloved mutts. ;)

[OnyxCollie]

83. LOL! My life is "Best In Show."

I was so naive when I started; "We'll run around in a circle and it'll be fun!"

[ShortnFiery]

85. Too funny! I used to tag along with a friend who was into show dogs.

It's a trip! And you're right, so much like "Best in Show." I love that flick. :hi:

[ProfessorGAC]

92. Maybe Some

But, when we got our lab, this guy had all sorts of documentation that the dogs weren't inbred, their lineage, etc.

And we signed nothing but our check.
The Professor

[OnyxCollie]

98. Caveat emptor. nt

[ProfessorGAC]

100. Absolutely

Always good advice.
The Professor

[Lyric]

69. You know, I've read through this mess of hyperbole and

the hand-wringing animal rescuers who think that the actions of this place were perfectly reasonable, and I think it's a bunch of crap.

The rigidity of the rules for animal rescue organizations might be well-intended, but there is a side consequence. If it's THAT difficult to qualify for a dog or cat adoption, people go elsewhere. Why jump through fifty hoops and sign a contract that limits your autonomy and rights and keeps the animal from *ever* really being *yours*, when you can just go adopt one of the millions of unwanted puppies and kittens out there for free, and without a contract? The ever-increasing number of rules and restrictions within rescue organizations are off-putting, and contribute heavily to the very problem they're trying to solve. When people are averse to dealing with the rescue org "red tape" and rules, they might adopt from an irresponsible "breeder" for free, and thus that sort of behavior is reinforced and validated yet again.

I'm not saying there should be NO rules, but we have arrived at the point of utter absurdity. Sure, they're making a difference for "this one dog" or "that one cat", but what about the cost to the other animals out there? By all means, have rules--just not so damned rigid and extensive and repulsively harsh.

[IdaBriggs]

81. You are assuming most people aren't idiots. Unfortunately, you

probably wouldn't *BELIEVE* the number of idiots rescue folk get to deal with. See my post below for details.

[ShortnFiery]

87. You do realize that the vast majority of people who work animal rescue are VOLUNTEERS?

Why don't you volunteer and work with organizations to be more flexible with the rules? Oh no, you won't because that would require "big time" commitment on your part.

I can't believe that we bitch about these people who may come across as arrogant but who are BASICALLY showing their concern that a K9 gets placed *permanently* in an appropriate family.

God bless these people who volunteer their time to do this humane and THANKLESS effort in order to save "thrown out" pets by consumers to be euthanized.

Dogs are not a commodity - they are one of God's creatures. When you adopt one, their yours for life. Especially rescued pets have some behavioral issues that you may not be privy to.

Far too many people default to trashing the rescue clinic only because of what's presented on the surface. Adopting a pet is not like buying a DVD player - it's a living being who requires nurturing and care.

[Susang]

111. Having been one of those volunteers

For several shelters and humane societies during my life. Not a single one of them would have called the police and removed the dog from the home in front of the children, not unless there was immediate danger to the dog or family. When considering the dog's welfare, sometime we had to be flexible for the benefit of the dog. Based on their comments to the press today, the people in charge of this rescue organization seem to be more concerned about their pride than the dog's, at least in this particular case

[napi21]

72. Let me explain the rescue process to all of you, and the reason WHY

they took the dog back from that family.

I've been a rescue volunteer foster mom for about 6 years. A rescue group is DIFFERENT from your local shelter! Our organization rescues Bichon Frise dogs, both pure bred and mixes from every kind of situation you can imagin! We first take them to a vet for a full exam and get any problems they may have fixed, including teeth cleaning. Then they are taken into one of our voster homes and cared for until a forever home can be found. In most instances, we invest about $500 in each dog before they are adopted, and in some cases, if they need surgery, it's much more than that!

All of our dogs are listed on Pet Finders to be adopted. When someone fills out an application to adopt a dog, we contact their vet for a reference, and then we do 2 telephone interviews to be sure they will make good foster parents. If their application is approved, they must sign an adoption agreement BEFORE THEY CAN TAKE THE DOG. In that agreement there is a sentence that states:

IF FOR ANY REASON I CANNOT KEEP THE DOG, OR DON'T WANT TO KEEP THE DOG, I WILL TURN HIM/HER BACK TO SMALL PAWS RESCUE! UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL I SELL, TRADE, OR GIVE AWAY THE DOG TO ANYONE ELSE!

That is a very standard demand of all rescue groups, and it's in there because we all spend a lot of time and effort to make sure that all our dogs go to verified suitable homes, to live with people who love them forever. We know where ALL of our rescues are and who has them. Ellen knowsd all of this. She's worked with this rescue group for long enough and she really did know better.

What she SHOOULD have done was contact the rescue group and explain the situation to them. Give them the information on the family who wanted to adopt this little dog, but let the group make the final decision if the home was acceptable!

If you knew some of the absurd reasons why people give up their dogs...after having them for YEARS...perhaps you'd better understand why we are so protective of these furbabies.

[Ayesha]

93. But there is a huge problem with this

If you had owned and loved a dog for months or years, would you want to return that dog to a situation where it might be put in a kennel for weeks or months, then placed with strangers? Could you deal with never knowing where that dog is or seeing him/her again?

I am in this very situation. I adopted a puppy 4 years ago - saw her in a pound, but asked a rescue to bail her out because she might need orthopedic surgery done and then it could be completed at the same time as she was being spayed. I signed the contract and adopted the dog. Years later, she developed health problems (unrelated to the fully healed broken leg) and started attacking my other dogs due to being in pain. I've spent thousands of dollars on her care, she gets acupuncture, a home cooked diet, supplements - but she really needs to be in a home with no other dogs. Do you seriously think she should be returned to the rescue, in a city 3 hrs from where I live now? ARE YOU CRAZY? They had this dog for less than a week 4 years ago. They're not equipped to handle her special needs. They don't know her personality and behavior. I'm the one who is qualified to find her a new home, one where I can visit and monitor her health, and that's what I'm doing.

BTW, I did try to contact them - twice - to ask for their assistance in locating a new home for her. No one returned my call or e-mail. Now, after this Ellen debacle, I hope they don't. And if they come knocking, I won't be answering the door!

Contracts are a good thing, but they need to be reasonable. If the rescue is notified, there's no reason why a person shouldn't be able to re-home a dog, especially to a close friend or family member. Making people jump through hoops with a dog that has been theirs for years is ridiculous.

[napi21]

107. You've already done what I would have suggested.

As I was readiing your post, I was going to suggest that you contact them and explain your situation. If you've done that and it was THEM who failed to hold up their side of the bargain, I feel you are off the hook. Even though you signed the agreement, you tried to comply, and THEY were the ones who failed YOU! BTW, not ALL rescue groups are that irresponsible!

I do understand your problem and what an emotional situation you are in. Follow your heart and do what you need to do, and I wish you good luck. It's very difficult to get a dog who has health problems adopted.

Sometimes people do get into difficult financial situations and they don't see any other way out but to give up their procious pet. I have a darling little 6 YO female Bichon right now who has to get EXPENSIVE allergy shots and special food that costs $49.95 a bag! Her owner had to turn her over to Small Paws a few weeks ago because her son has a genetic disease that gets more expensive and time consuming as he gets older and they simply couldn't afford their darling little dog any longer. It took her 3 weeks to make the final decision to turn her over to us, and she did understand why she will never know where her little dog went. Her biggest concern was that we, as a rescue group, could asure her that her baby would go to a loving forever home, and if that family couldn't keep her for ANY reason, Small Paws would get her back, so there would be no risk of her ending up in a bad situation. If you think about it, the same thing happens when human childred are adopted. The parents never know where their children go or who adopted them.

Best of luck to you, and if I can help at all, please let me know.

[Ayesha]

112. Actually that isn't true

Nowadays many children are placed in open adoption situations. The birth parents get letters, photos, and even occasional visits. It works out much better for all involved because there's no secrecy or shame and the child knows s/he has always been loved, and where s/he came from.

Was there not some organization that could step in and pay for the cost of the dog's care so he could stay in the home? PAWS, Pets Are Wonderful Support, is one group that helps low income disabled people keep their pets. Have you thought of starting an emergency fund to help out your adopters in these types of situations? It just sounds like this is a tragedy that could have been prevented, and could still be rectified.

Part of my re-homing contract with my dog will be that I will continue to cover all her medical expenses for life. Money isn't an issue for me, so if someone with lots of love but not much money can give her a home, I can remove that barrier.

[IdaBriggs]

73. As a rescue person who fostered 88+ puppies, let me explain some of the

thoughts behind the experience.

1) We aren't here for the PEOPLE; we're here for the pets, and the number one priority has to be making sure they end up in good, solid, committed homes where they will be well taken care of, and not end up back in the rescue system for any reason.

There is no #2.

Some of the things my husband and I are/were "unreasonable" about:

1a) We wouldn't adopt out to homes without fenced in yards because we found that people with *really good intentions* had a challenging time doing things like "taking the puppy outside to do its business in the middle of a snowstorm" (not uncommon in Michigan) "while the baby is screaming for attention" (which we understand, but the animal still needs to relieve itself, and once it starts happening regularly in the house, now Mom has a new mess, a screaming baby, and a confused puppy). Like it or not, a fenced in yard gives the "freedom" to toss a puppy outside, take care of the baby, and thus avoid an unpleasant "mess" plus do the housebreaking thing faster. How did we learn this? Someone brought a puppy back into the system, and they had already begun "bad habits" because they didn't have a fenced in yard. We learned the hard way.

1b) We wouldn't adopt out to renters because leases expire, and the next place might not allow pets. It wasn't a reflection on the quality of people renting, just the reality of life as a renter. The "perfect" place financially/location wise might not want your dog, who is now no longer a cute puppy. How did we learn this? Someone brought a six month old puppy back into the system because "things changed" in their life.

1c) We wouldn't adopt out to anyone who wasn't willing to bring their *entire* family for the puppy interview process. Why? "Its none of my spouse's business which dog I pick (except I'm not always going to be there, and my spouse is afraid of dogs)." The "humorous" story where we didn't apply this rule had the wife (who supposedly was *begging* for a dog for her birthday) being absolutely *TERRIFIED* of dogs. She was fine until her husband ended up doing a bunch of "out of town" stuff for his job, at which point she called because the dog was "being aggressive". Fortunately, this story had a happy ending, and the 12 week old Lab puppy (who was *NOT* aggressive) stayed in the home after we walked the wife through "basic dog body language" -- front end crouch, with wagging tail means "let's play" NOT "I'm going to attack!"

1d) We wouldn't adopt out to "living togethers" because uncommitted human relationships are problematic already without puppies who become dogs having to deal with "custody" issues (even assuming finances/living situations mean the pet isn't going to have to deal with becoming "homeless" depending on the person who "wants him/her"). Yes, we did make an exception to this once -- a 14 year relationship where the two just didn't believe in marriage. All rules have their exceptions, but "new folks" who want to "experiment" with puppies as a part of "playing house" weren't the kind of stability we were looking for with our babies.

1e) We wouldn't adopt out to anyone who couldn't swing the adoption fee because a family that couldn't financially swing $150 for the adoption fee probably wasn't going to be able to afford regular shots/neutering, let alone an emergency situation. Medical care for pets isn't cheap, and yes, at some level, this was a test. Again, it wasn't a reflection on the people who may have been lovely and charming, but it was a reality of life, and yes, we got a "returned dog" when someone hit a financial rough spot.

One of the rescue groups we worked with stopped adopting to families with children under 8 when THREE dogs in a row within a very short time were "accidentally" let out the front door and HIT BY CARS because the small children in the house were very briefly unsupervised. (Yes, it only takes a moment.) Two of the dogs died, and the third required several thousand dollars worth of surgery.

Yes, rescue groups (at least the good ones) work very hard at screening, but since we are largely staffed by volunteers and there is a learning curve, sometimes people "slip" through the system. One guy called me demanding a puppy in time for Christmas as a present for his three year old, swearing his wife didn't need to be involved in the decision making process because it wasn't going to be "her" dog, with a fenced in yard except for the front part on one side, in a house he was renting, and informing me that he was going to wait until "Spring" to begin housebreaking it because in the meantime he was going to teach it to defecate in the basement because it was too cold outside!

Can you count the red flags? He was very angry when we refused to let him even *meet* our puppies!

Now, you might ask why you have to "be interviewed" and "fill out forms" and "have your references checked." The answer is short:

PEOPLE LIE. Its a shocker, I know, but once folks figure out that a rescue group isn't going to find them "the most desirable home for a pet", sometimes they start "bending" the truth a little. They think the rescue group is made up of a bunch of Mean, Evil Control Freaks (and some of us are, thank you very much), but let me say it plain:

When I am up every three hours bottle feeding a puppy, or spending hours/weeks/months rehabilitating an abused or neglected puppy, I want to make DAMN GOOD AND SURE that they aren't going to "a good home" -- I want them going to A GREAT HOME. Folks who are committed to getting regular medical care, feeding them good quality food, insuring they are well trained, with good manners, regular exercise, and *lots* of love. I *pound* home the reality of owning a pet -- "a well mannered dog is a joy; a poorly mannered dog is a nightmare" -- "begin as you mean to go on -- jumping as a puppy is cute, but 90 pound dogs who jump on people Knock Them Down!" -- "Your puppy will signal when its ready to go out, and we've already started housebreaking them; if there are accidents in your house, its because *YOU* aren't paying attention!" -- "Puppies are like babies; they require supervision and discipline. NEVER leave them unattended while they are small without expecting *something* to happen. If you need to take a shower, put them in their crate just like you would put an infant in their playpen."

One rescuer's favorite warning seems obvious: "Dogs bark." Want to know how many "returns" he got because seemingly intelligent people didn't understand this in advance of getting their "new" puppy?

I know that there are some things in life that can't be controlled. Things happen. But during the adoption process, it is the JOB of the Rescue Group folks to put THE ANIMAL'S NEEDS FIRST. It may be the only time it ever happens, but there it is. It isn't about you, your kids, your schedule, your budget, your life, etc.

ITS ABOUT THE ANIMALS AND WHAT THEY NEED. And they *need* to never, ever, Ever, EVER again be in the position where they might have to be euthanized because someone isn't available to take care of them properly.

Yes, its obnoxious to fill out the paperwork, and its a pain for us to have to check it out, and verify with your references that you aren't lying through your teeth. Frankly, if the time you have to take filling out a six page application is a headache, plus spending an hour or two with a rescue volunteer during an interview process is just "too much" for your busy schedule, I suggest you re-evaluate the amount of time you are going to have available to attend to the emotional, physical, medical, and training needs of your new pet. Trust me when I say its not even a noticeable fraction of the time you are going to be spending with your new pet in the future. Like pregnancy and labor, it can be painful, intense, and annoying, but its also a short period in an incredibly rewarding lifelong relationship.

End Rant. :)

[MiniMe]

103. As another rescue person, well said!

Short but sweet, we don't set our dogs up to potentially fail because of stupid people. One of my fosters was a 4 month old puppy who went to a family with a 2 year old son. They were fine together while I was observing them. They took the puppy home and of course, the puppy was teething, and chewed on hands and fingers a bit. The kid freaked out. They called me and I said, that's what puppies do, you can work on the behavior, and make sure that he has plenty to chew on, but it is normal for a puppy. They put the puppy outside. Needless to say, we took the pup back. The pup shouldn't have to suffer. I said some of the same things on post #55.

[KamaAina]

118. 1d) Would Ellen and Portia be considered "living togethers"?

bearing in mind that they cannot get married because they do not live in Massachusetts, or in a civilized country such as Canada.

So the agency gets at least some props for not emphasizing the gay issue. Imagine what would have happened if Ellen had had to go on the air sobbing because she and her partner weren't allowed to adopt a dog because they're gay! This is a tempest in a teapot by comparison.

[LostinVA]

122. Please make this post itsown thread

[knitter4democracy]

74. The rescue group we got ours from almost wouldn't let us have Charley.

We had small kids, and he's a mid-sized dog. They were really against any children in the home. There were 60 dogs in that place, and it cost us $150, and they hadn't even gotten rid of all of his worms, so it cost us another couple hundred with many vet visits to finally get rid of all of his worms. We ended up with a great dog, granted, but I sure was left with a sour taste.

I understand the rescue issues. I really do. Our cat is a rescue, our dog is a rescue, and both of my mom's dogs are rescue. Still, to say that someone has to fill out a massive form, pay tons of money for a dog with no papers that she then agrees to have neutered, and is made to feel guilty that she even has kids and a cat at home--that is all ridiculous! Is the point to just kennel the dogs for the rest of their lives with 60 other dogs at a farm and just feed them and put them out once a day in an exercise yard, or is the point to get them in homes?

The reality is, they can do pop inspections (like other people on this thread have gone through) and charge tons of money and have iron-clad contracts, and they still can't guarantee the dog will be safe and sound. Shit happens to people, let alone rescue animals, and nothing will guarantee that any animal will live out its entire natural life without a single bad thing happening to it. To have to report to the rescue group for the rest of that animal's life, as elsewhere on this thread, it just plain ridiculous.

Ellen thought she found a good home for the dog. The dog and the family were happy. The rescue group could've gone in, done an inspection, made the new family fill out the forms and pay the fees, and been happy they got good press. Instead, they went all crazy-ballistic, and people got hurt, and the dog lost its home. How is that a good solution?

[ShortnFiery]

78. We don't know all the facts. Just perhaps there was a "valid concern" that the Rescue Agency

did not wish to allow this second family to be vetted.

There's some humongous whole in this story that have not been filled in.

"It takes two to tango" so I'm sure there's plenty of misunderstanding/blame on both sides. :shrug:

That's why it's always better to NOT EVER take squabbles public.

Yes, there's much about this situation that I don't fully understand ... but dammit, I know that for the sake of my IQ, I really shouldn't give a damn about keeping track.

Oh my, choices. :P

[knitter4democracy]

104. That's true. We don't know why the agency decided to take back the dog.

It might not have been just because there were kids in the home. There might have been some other reason, too.

[Scout]

82. because if any kind of conflict arises between the dog and a child....

no matter how provoked the dog was, the dog will LOSE and be gotten rid of or killed.

No one ever wants to admit that their kid was a brat and tormented the dog, or that the child was just too young and/or too immature, or that the parents didn't know what they were doing when they got a HERDING dog and complained when it chased small children....

I've seen it happen, and the dog is the one who loses. It's to protect the dogs.

[ShortnFiery]

86. Well Put Scout!

Yet, people will still, without much thought, go to those smarmy pet shops and buy puppies for Christmas. Then by Valentine's day, the untrained and uncared for pup starts acting out. The dog gets the blame when it's really the selfish owners who never fully committed to taking responsibility for training and providing appropriate human and K9 socialization opportunities.

But of course, I'm certifiable according to my mother: I actually brush my dogs' teeth every night right after I do my own. :blush:

If heaven does not have dogs, I don't want to go there. Mark Twain

[Withywindle]

96. I know this is true and it makes me sad.

Because I wasn't raised that way. My "sister" was a German Shepherd, and I vividly remember once I was teasing her (as 6 year olds might do) and ignoring her repeated warnings, and she bit me good (as dogs might do). Blood and screaming and all that.

What did my parents do? Freak out and have her hauled off to be killed? Hell no. They washed and bandaged me up (they'd keep an eye on it for infection), and punished us BOTH. They sent me to my room ("Bad girl! Never tease the dog!") and Angie to the basement ("Bad dog! Never bite the kid!") and let us both sulk on the fact that we both fucked up for a few hours.

My wound healed just fine (I have a scar but it's tiny; a reminder) and a few hours later Angie and I apologized to each other in that kid/dog way, and it never happened again.

It would've been different if it'd been a really severe attack of course, but I'm still so glad my parents didn't overreact.

[knitter4democracy]

106. That's what my parents would've done, too.

I remember we had a bird dog who bit one of my cousins twice. What did he expect backing a guard dog into a corner and sticking his hand out? :eyes: Being a bird dog, she left no marks, so it just scared him. Mom explained why Tag had done it and told him to go home. Dope.

[LostinVA]

123. But, some people would have taken your furry sister outside and shot her for that

I'm related to people like that. And, many of these people would let their small kids tease a dog.

:sigh:

[knitter4democracy]

105. That's not how I was raised.

If we messed with the dogs and got bitten, it was our fault. That's how I'm raising my kids--to know how dogs communicate, to always ask before petting if it's not ours, and to respect our pets at all times and let them have their own space.

When our cat bopped our kids on the heads as toddlers, I told them that they deserved it. They did! Greta's older and likes her space, and she's careful to keep her claws in, so if the kids get bopped or scratched, it's because of something they did to deserve it.

I'll admit, though, I grew up in the country with hunting dogs, barn cats, horses, and farm animals. There was no way my mom or stepmom would've allowed me to get away with anything with any of the animals at either house. Not everyone's raised that way--I know Hubby's family sure doesn't act that way. I almost rescued one of their cats once (poor thing was chased all day by their dog, which the family encouraged), but then MIL found her a good home and gave her away, deciding she preferred dogs. I cannot talk with her about pets at all.

[Quantess]

91. I know someone who had to give away their small dog

because the children played really rough with the little dog, and hurt it. It was scared of the kids.

[InvisibleTouch]

99. In general, large breeds are better for young kids...

...because a small dog is more likely to snap to defend himself, and of course could be more easily hurt by a clumsy child. But it very much depends on the individual circumstances. My first dog was a toy poodle whom I got at about age 4, and we were absolute best friends for 17 years. There aren't any hard-and-fast rules, and I sometimes question the hoops that adoptive families have to jump through, when the goal is to find homes for the animals. No one wants to place a foster pet into a bad situation, but there should be a happy medium between checking out a new owner's qualifications, and making the adoption process accessible.

[mondo joe]

110. True. The "no children unde 14" seems rather out of whack to me. My kids are both

under 14 and have been great with our dog - though he is a Standard Poodle which is a good breed for kids.

[minerva50]

108. My Mother has a chihuahua/Jack Russel Mix

She (the dog) gets stressed when grandchildren visit. They are mostly over 14 and play nicely with the dog, but just the constant petting and playing gets to the dog and she becomes snappish. I can see that an organization might prefer to place her in an adult home. The humane society where mom got the dog doesn't get many small dogs, and they are careful where they place them. Mom is over 80, and she wanted an animal she could easily pick up and carry. It was a good match.

[LostinVA]

117. Quite a few breeders and rescue orgs have this rule -- I have no problem with it

It's usually done to protect the animal: not everyone teaches their kids to handle animals right, and animals treated roughly are often hurt OR protect themselves from actions they consider aggressive, and are thus labeled "dangerous." I know the breeder who I got Punkers from wouldn't place her kittens in homes with children younger than 12.

The VA no-kill shelter where I got the youngest kitty had both this clause AND a clause not allowing the pet to be "transferred." Both clauses are to protect the oftentimes traumatized animal.

I love Ellen to death, but she's totally in the wrong here. Especially since the shelter has for all extent and purposes had to close it's doors and halt business. Not too many pets being saved or placed today by them, eh?

[Pithlet]

124. They can set whatever rules they want, and this is why

if and when I decide to adopt a dog, I will go to a shelter. I'd decided to stay away from rescues even before this Ellen flap. I've heard other horror stories. I can understand the reasons behind some of the rules and I think their hearts are in the right place, but I'm not dealing with that. After the bad publicity, I'm sure I won't be the only one now.

[midlife_mo_Jo]

125. UNDER FOURTEEN?

Geesh That's ridiculous.

Under six seems reasonable to me.