You always see various threads about what the best family dogs are. I’m interested in what the very worst family dogs would be. Let’s assume standard suburban family with a medium sized fenced yard. What dogs would suck for a family with young kids?
The obvious ones; Pitbull and Rottweiler.
Edit; A top ten list. The above breeds are #1 and #2, respectively.
Then it’s German Shepherds, Huskies, Alaskan Malamutes, Doberman Pinschers, Chow Chows, Presa Canarios, Boxers and Dalmatians.
Small dogs that jump up on adults and completely topple children. It probably depends on the exact breed, but some may be a bit too “enthusiastic.”
Saint Bernard
Conversely, bigger more boisterous breeds like Danes, St. Bernards and Newfoundlands, even despite a placid temperament, are less than ideal for families with young children simply because of their size.
By simply mentioning pitbulls, this thread is likely to turn into yet another SDMB pitbull vs. anti-pitbull 9 page trainwreck…
Jack Russell Terriers. They go batshit insane (jumping, biting, destroying) with inconsistent handling. High prey drive means they attack whatever runs from it (unlike some other dogs, who attack when threatened).
Border collies. Most of them have no business in a house that doesn’t also have a flock of sheep and a back 40.
pitbulls
That “cite” is shite. As we’ve noted in any number of “evil pitbull threads”, you can make a list go any way you’d like depending on the criteria. In addition, any popular breed will be disproportionately represented due to larger numbers of that breed and it’s phenotypically similar crosses.
Generally speaking, working breeds will make poorer family pets due to their high energy levels, low boredom threshold, and (generally) high prey drives. Many of the little companion breeds are terrible for families with small children as they are easily intimidated and more prone to fear biting. However this is entirely dependent upon the type of people, the individual dog, and the willingness to adapt to the needs of each other.
However, I’d nominate most of the newer breeds that are only a few generations removed from pure guardian and herding jobs, like the Kangal dog or the Caucasian Ovchartka. These breeds have been only recently introduced to a suburban environment and their instincts are honed for herding and guarding in relative wilderness.
where did that list come from? I can’t help but notice that it contains several breeds that are particularly known for being good with children (I’m thinking boxers, pit bulls, malamutes and huskies especially).
the problem would seem to lie in the fact that these are all large dogs and therefore more inherently dangerous just because of that. meaning, they can do more harm if they do go ‘bad’. And they are also high energy dogs, and if that energy is not properly utilized and directed can become hyper, frustrated and unpredictable as a result.
so the answer to your question really depends on how much effort and attention that you are willing to put into your dog. if you’re indolent, don’t get a high energy dog that needs to work! If you’ve got the energy and inclination to train your dog and keep it busy, you won’t go wrong with several of the breeds on that list.
be honest with yourself - if you’re lazy, get a lazy, couch potato type dog! the problem is usually not with the breed, per se, but with the fit!
I’ve heard that Afghan hounds are hard to train/control.
This board’s theme is fighting ignorance, no? That said the OP’s question is hard to quantify since problem dogs are usually a people problem not a canine one. Most dogs behave badly because of a lack of socialization and training. If I had a house full of kids though, I would probably steer away from anything in the herding group, livestock guardian dogs, Cocker spaniels, Lhasa Apsos, Chows and Tosas.
The most aggressive dog breeds are:
- Dachshund
- Chihuahua
- Jack Russell Terrier
I think it depends on the type of aggression (stranger vs. family). I know a Springer that’s the calmest dog ever.
Dachshunds tend to fixate on their chosen human and will randomly and suddenly become aggressive with someone if they feel that person is entering their “territory.”
Certain breeds bred for hunting or herding or guarding come to mind. As well as one bred for biting a bull by the throat and not letting go. :rolleyes:
I have known some absolutely lovely pit bulls, but so much depends on the breeding and the training. A family with small kids is not likely to want to devote that much time or money to having a good pit bull.
Chows and other breeds bred for personal protection (including fucking Chiwa-was…no, I will NOT look up the proper spelling…hate those little shits!:mad:) are a no-no. Their temperment is to attach strongly to ONE person and be incredibly defensive of them (i.e. “bitey”).
Herding dogs tend to be a bit hyper and nip at heels.
My last dog, had her for 13 yrs, was an Ausie shepard /chow mix…good dog overall, but we had to watch her close around the kids and anyone who visited she didn’t know well. She latched on to ME and considered it her duty in life to protect me from any real or imagined threat. And a bunch of kids running around in the house or yard made her insane…she nipped heels and a few hands.
A good, well bred lab or golden retriever is a good bet. So are spaniels. Very mellow, big enough to play with and up for it, tolerant of children, not overly protective.
Sorry, meant to write Filas and not Tosas.
my vote would go for the Fila Brasilero. I have been researching them just out of curiosity and this video shows ‘temperament testing’… this is what they are SUPPOSED to do. No thank you.
Rabid
The Caucasian Sheperd Dog would be a poor choice, an aggressive dog that weighs as much as a man: Caucasian Shepherd Dog - Wikipedia
Dead on. For starters, the citation referred to shows a picture that’s arguably not even a pit bull, as there is a current debate about renaming the super-wide outcrosses as a new breed entirely (“American Bully”) The weight range given is also the absolute tip-top of the breed standard for American Pit Bull Terriers – I guess the author took the liberty of making them sound as scary as possible.
Pit bulls are famous family dogs and have been so for over two hundred years, pretty much until the coming of Internet rumor mill. This (thta they have been so regarded historically) is a checkable fact. To say otherwise is to succumb to propaganda and fear.
I agree with Acid Lamp’s assessment about small fragile dogs, big outdoorsy dogs, and recently-suburbanized trendy newcomers.
edit: I also agree that the human commitment to the dog (or lack thereof) is more important than the breed