That’s an unsupportable reaction. Sure, it’s easy to say when it’s not your dog. You have no emotional ties to this dog whatsoever, and all you know about this dog is that it’s become aggressive. But you would not be so quick to proscribe death if it was YOUR pet, whom you’d known and loved for nearly a decade.
After all, if push comes to shove, she can simply give the dog away, to someone without cats or kids, and see how that goes.
I’m telling you, one of those uncrossable divides seems to be between “animal people” and non.
Are you serious…that you would possibly put your human family members at risk (particularly little kids) of a grumpy pet? At what point would YOU consider it a ‘last resort’….after it had attacked your toddler?
Fer fuck’s sake…animals are great and wonderful assets to family dynamics. There comes a time though when they are a liability, and a direct threat to the safety and health of that family, and the OP here is exemplifying that.
Comes a time for all things to die, and in this case, it’s the dog. Now, before it does any damage to the toddler.
A baby is totally defenseless against a dog. I’m saying get rid of the dog for this reason, because the child’s safety should be the number one concern here. It’s not because I’m against having pets. I default to the children’s safety first above all pets. This dog has attacked the cats and is growling at the baby. It’s an easy next step to attack the baby.
What? Are you a moron? It’s not a divide between ‘animal people’ and ‘non’ as you are so quick to ascribe.
I’ve had pets for many years, some that I have had to put down for various behavioural problems, but more that I have seen through to ancient ages who then died of natural causes or were euthanazed in the last hours to alleviate pain and suffering. My kids have lived harmoniously with all of these pets (except the ones who showed any signs of aggression) and are now here to tell the stories…there are many little kids who do not have that privilege, who’s parents think that the dog has as much of a ‘right to life’ as they do, or who minimise the risk that the dog poses: they’re either dead now, or severely maimed because of the attack by the dog.
My first thought was old age related pain or senility. I hope it turns out that it’s something you can manage with extra supervision and maybe pain medication.
I am as big of a dog lover as you will find around here. I have three dogs and no kids and I wouldn’t have it any other way. However, if one of my dogs ever growled at a toddler she would never be unrestrained around kids again. You *must *separate your dog from your child.
I’ve seen old dogs who became blind and deaf a long time before their owners realized it. They can get around amazingly well on familiar turf, but react aggressively to encounters like the ones you are describing.
For those who are suggesting re-homing the dog, that is a good theory that suffers a bit in practice. I work with dog rescue groups, and finding a home for a young healthy non aggressive dog is hard enough. Finding someone to take in an old dog who has shown aggression towards a human may well nigh be impossible. The best idea may be to crate the dog, or otherwise restrain her, while the kid is moving about the house.
To animal people, there is never (or almost never) a time when it is acceptable to say “It’s just an animal!”.
This is not negotiable.
Sure, the non types might have pets, be fond of them, enjoy them, treat them well, and never hurt them. But to them, it’s still just an animal.
If you’re an animal person, a critter lover, saying “Kill the dog before it hurts the baby!” is like saying “Kill one child to protect another”. It’s that simple.
The non tend to think we animal lovers are nuts. That’s fine. I think the same about the non. Fair’s fair.
But if anyone ever says to me, “For crying out loud, it’s just an animal!”, then they have failed a very important test and I will never trust them.
I’ll join the amen chorus on the vet check. I have personal experience with a dog that developed old age aggression from a brain tumor.
Neurologic problems can cause aggression directly; chronic pain can cause it indirectly by creating a psychological overload.
Also, count me in with the ‘juice the dog’ crowd. Either situation I described above means the critter is terminally ill. If the dog mauls the toddler, it’ll get the needle anyway, plus you’ll get a criminal conviction for endangering the kid.
See, now you’re talking sense. I never said “no, let the dog eat the child, it’s the only way”. I just object to people immediately rushing to “KILL THE DOG”.
We’re not cavemen protecting our precious young ones from a wolf in the night. There’s a lot more options than just KILL KILL KILL.
This is not a difference between animal people and non-animal people. It’s a difference between retarded people and non-retarded people. A dog is not a child. If you can’t see that, then you need significant psychological intervention.
The dog is growling menacingly at a 10 month old child. Growling menacingly is a very short step away from attacking. A shepherd type dog attacking a 10 month has a good chance to kill the child in one bite, and will almost certainly disfigure it for life. There is no other option. The dog needs to be removed immediately. It’s a danger to the child, and a child’s safety is the parents’ first and foremost responsibility.
Realistically euthanasia is the only option. No one is going to take a 12 year old dog that is showing signs of being people aggressive. And that can not be used as an excuse to keep the dog in the house. Supervision and separation are fundamentally flawed ideas, and shouldn’t be risked. The dog needs to be removed this minute, and likely the only option is to take it to the pound where it will be euthanized.
The dog could be kept outside, in a separate, childproofed enclosure.
It need not be killed.
Even taking it to the pound might work. So far, it’s only been aggressive toward one human being. It might be that the dog would be fine in a different environment.
I’ve read the OP and skimmed the thread, I didn’t see anybody mention that the dog needs a little training here. Sounds to me like the dog has taken over. If the dog considers herself the leader of the pack, she’ll growl at and bite anybody she damn well pleases.
And it doesn’t matter that she’s 12. She can be re-trained to be a follower and not a leader. The dog just needs to learn to be submissive.
I don’t see this situation as an automatic “get rid of the mutt” deal. If the training is too much to handle – and I see how it might be what with dealing with an infant, etc. – or if there’s some physical condition (as others have surmised) that’s irreversibly causing her to be this way … then consider giving her away.
