Ditching the family dog :(

[JenBKR]

This quote especially pi$$es me off: But it was too late—Shadow was already my starter baby.

So many couples get a dog for this purpose - to see what it's like to have a baby. And when the real baby comes along, the dog is just cast aside.

Arg I missed that when I first read it. IMO, when you adopt a pet, that is a part of your family for life. You wouldn't leave your child behind, would you?

[Miss Z]

Ugh, some people do not know the meaning of responsibility, or love, IMO. I suppose the upside to the story is that Shadow found a home that actually understood him.

Our lives are calmer, freer, and in Paul's case, healthier.

These people seem to be forgetting that Shadow was part of their family aswell. He has feelings too.

My favorite image of Shadow is his tail waving in the air as he walked away with Ed that weekend. He didn't look back.

Why am I not surprised?

[JenBKR]

I agree Miss Z, I wouldn't have looked back either

[jenluckenbach]

I did not go to the link to read beyond what is posted here but why are you all so shocked? Stuff like this (and things 10 and 20 times WORSE) happen hundreds of times each day!

This person was honest. This family no longer was able to or willing to care properly for this dog. Keeping him would have been like staying in a loveless marriage. The dog was not PTS, left along the side of the road nor brought to a shelter to live (or die) in a cage. The family saw that they were no longer a dog-friendly family and left him in the care of someone who had time for him.

Our very own moosmom (sorry Donna, I hope you do not take offence at this example) has rehomed several of her kitties. She NEEDED to and she thought about their best interests as well. Doogie is having the time of his life with his new dog brother and I bet that Eli is relishing his time on his new farm.

As a person who has heard hundreds of stories about why they have to "get rid of" their pet, most are weak arguments or cliche's. But I think for this dog's sake, he wins! It is when a family trades in one old pet for a new "baby" that really infuriates me. This does not seem to be the case in this story.

JUST MY OPINION Thank you for allowing me to share it.

[carole]

I am with you on this one Jen, however i still think it is so sad when people continue to think of pets as being disposable, it is still wrong IMO, but the main thing here is Shadow is better off where he is, if he had stayed with the family just imagine how unhappy he would be, so there really is a happy ending, it is just the principle of it all that i dis-agree with as you all do, pets should never be adopted with the thought oh well we can always get rid if we have to, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.

[dab_20]

IMO she did the right thing... giving him to someone who actually cares about him. At least Shadow's happy now.

I DO NOT agree that she got the dog in the first place as a 'starter baby'. What really made me angry is that on the top it says "Sometimes it makes sense to ditch the family dog". She worded the article very wrong... sounds like she never cared about the dog after her kids were born.

[carole]

Yes I agree a lot of the way in which she worded the article really aggravated me and made me angry.

[lizbud]

Yes I did read the article. (I'll read anything about animals)
What struck me about the story is that she first got the dog to please
herself, and then desposed of the same dog later for the same reason.

I am glad that the dog finally found someone to properly care for him
an wanted the dog just for himself.

[Cataholic]

I did not go to the link to read beyond what is posted here but why are you all so shocked? Stuff like this (and things 10 and 20 times WORSE) happen hundreds of times each day!

Jen, this doesn't sit well with me, and I don't think you mean it as it was worded, since I 'know' you. That bad stuff happens much worse every day doesn't change that THIS is a bad thing, and is 'deserving' of our attention, too. Sure, lots of worse things happen, but, that shouldn't detract from this situation.

This person was honest.

Honesty or dishonesty doesn't make give this woman any more character, IMO. If I say, "I hate you" and slap you across the face, my statment of hate doesn't support my action, does it? Yet, I am being 'honest'.

Our very own moosmom (sorry Donna, I hope you do not take offence at this example) has rehomed several of her kitties. She NEEDED to and she thought about their best interests as well. Doogie is having the time of his life with his new dog brother and I bet that Eli is relishing his time on his new farm.

The difference with Donna's situation was HER needs were put second. She rehomed her pets because it was best for THEM. Not her. In fact, if she could have done it differently, I think she would have preferred they stay with her. It wasn't like Donna said, "Oh, I am tired of having so many cats, some have got to go!". Of course, Donna is quite able to speak for herself, so, I will conclude with this is MY interpretation of her situation. An interpretation for which I could very well be wrong.

I think the wrongness here is the desensitizing effect the article could have on people 'ditching' pets. The more we hear, support, agree with lame reasons to ditch our pets, the more it happens. It is changing the minds of individuals, one at a time, to support inclusion, responsibility, commitment and love, that needs work here. Not articles putting a positive spin on 'ditching' family pets.

[Catty1]

They took time to find someone to take him, didn't just leave him in the house or drive him out into the country and dump him.

Sure they felt guilty - and cried, and struggled...

This was quality of life for the dog AND THE ADULTS who were dealing with allergies and two toddlers.

Maybe if she had written more about her guilt and added more stories of crying, some folks here would feel better about it.

Human marriages are supposed to be a lifetime commitment too - HELLO?

Life happens.

I agree with what she did.

JMO

Catty1

[Corinna]

I think Ed and Shadow are the heros and winners in this story.
First of all this woman had no right to adopt a dog with out consulting with her partner. it all went down hill from there.
I'm glad for Ed and Shadow they have each other and it's very apparent they have a great partnership.

[K9soul]

I think the wrongness here is the desensitizing effect the article could have on people 'ditching' pets. The more we hear, support, agree with lame reasons to ditch our pets, the more it happens. It is changing the minds of individuals, one at a time, to support inclusion, responsibility, commitment and love, that needs work here. Not articles putting a positive spin on 'ditching' family pets.

This really states well why I felt upset by the article. The title, the use of the word "ditching," the way she seemed to feel justified and talked about how the dog listened to Ed better than he ever had her. Well that's called training. She seemed to have an attitude like "Oh well he's got a better home now and happier so it was fine to 'ditch' him." Which by the way she didn't even have the courage to ask Ed herself and who knows where the dog would have ended up if her husband hadn't stepped up and asked. Thank God for people like Ed, those who constantly step up to clean up the messes of people who just "don't have the time" to properly care for an animal THEY have committed to when they brought it home.

It just seemed like the point behind the article was to say "it's fine to ditch the family pet if you just don't feel like working through the problems." I agree with Johanna, the article seemed written to assuage this woman's own guilt.

I don't really see it the same as a marriage breaking up because that is two adults involved and both making decisions for themselves. A dog or cat is helpless at the hands of its humans and has no say in what happens. I see it more like dumping a little child one doesn't want to deal with.