“Happily Ever After, Together” did not happen for Great Danes Lily and Maddison after the blind Lily turned on Maddison and attacked her.
You’ll remember the touching story of blind Great Dane Lily and her companion Madison; the news reports were dripping with saccharine anthropomorphisms of how Madison is Lily’s “seeing eye dog” and how they were “inseparable for the past five years” and destined to be “friends forever.” The story goes on to document how Maddison “took the sightless [Lily] under her wing” and how “devoted” and “close” Maddison is to her, “touching her to let the blind pooch know where to go.” We were told of how they “cuddle at night” an “curl up together.”
Most other dog blogs and media outlets focused on the hopeful prospect that such a love story could continue and that the perfect new home would be found for these two dogs. No such nonsense here at BorderWars:
There are very few homes equipped to adopt one Great Dane, let alone two. Add in advanced age and congenital blindness, and it’s not surprising that the former owners just couldn’t handle the onus any more and ditched blind Lily and her seeing-eye-dog Maddison at the shelter.
…
This is the burden created by breeders who mate merle to merle, merle to harlequin, and harlequin to harlequin. They afflict their puppies and the big hearted owners who adopt them with a lifetime concern. Dealing with a blind puppy might pull at the heart strings enough, but compassion fatigue and mounting veterinary bills can quickly make the prospect of caring for two middle aged or geriatric dogs more burden than bliss.
After spending 4 months “looking for a new home” (how a blind dog looks for anything is beyond me) the pair made international headlines when their story went viral on the internet last October and within days they had a new home.
A new home at last for the blind Great Dane and her devoted guide dog
- Couple decided to take in Lily and Maddison after reading about them in the Daily Mail
- Dogs can now look forward to holidays in France and the Lake District
It’s the happy ending that Lily the blind great dane and her trusty friend turned guide dog Maddison deserve.
When the Daily Mail featured the heart-warming tale of the two great danes, who were looking for a new home, more than 2,000 dog lovers responded by offering to take them.
Now Lily and Maddison are moving from the Dogs Trust centre in Shrewsbury to live with the Williams family 35 miles away in Crewe, Cheshire.
It seemed the couple had good intentions and had at least thought about the pitfalls I had highlighted:
Anne Williams, 52, and her husband Len, 53, a retired fireman, fell in love with the dogs when they read about them in the Mail and their offer was accepted by the trust.
Mrs Williams, a business manager for an insurance company, said: ‘We’ve always had two dogs together, I like them to have company and so taking on two of them wasn’t a daunting prospect.
‘My daughter moved out five months ago, taking her two English setters with her, so the house has felt a little quiet without them.
‘We live in the countryside and I miss having a reason to go for a walk – I can’t wait to take the dogs out with us. We’ve also got a lovely big garden so it’s the perfect setting for two huge dogs.’
The couple plan to take the great danes on holidays to France and the Lake District and ensure they both enjoy life with their new family.
Louise Campbell, manager of the Dogs Trust in Shrewsbury, said: ‘This is the happy ending we were all hoping for and everyone is delighted for Lily and Maddison.
‘The Williams family were the perfect match and we know they’ll give the dogs all the love and fuss they so deserve.’
After only one month in their new home, Lily turned on Maddison and the couple who adopted them returned her to the shelter.
Do you want to know how long those feelings of good will and togetherness lasted once the two dogs were placed in their new home? All of three weeks.
Blind Great Dane turns on her guide dog companion
Blind Great Dane Lily is looking for a new home after attacking her guide dog.
The six-year-old and her companion, another Great Dane called Maddison, had been rehomed together after an appeal by the Dogs Trust.
They were adopted by Anne and Len Williams from Nantwich, Cheshire, but were returned to the charity’s home at Roden near Shrewsbury.
Mr and Mrs Williams will now keep Maddison, but Lily is at the dogs’ home because the two cannot be reconciled.
It’s worth noting here that the dog the couple returned is Lily, the blind Great Dane, and not the comparatively easier to re-home Maddison. It’s no secret that disabilities are causal factors in behavioral disturbances in humans and animals, and best intentions coupled with a desire to not stigmatize disabled animals unfairly might appeal to egalitarian leanings, but they can’t trump reality. It’s worth noting that many pigment disorders have been associated with neurological problems and behavioral issues irrespective of their effects on sight, so not only could Lily be reacting to being blind, she could also have concomitant neurological disorders associated with being double merle.
“Despite the best efforts of staff and the very committed new owners, it became evident that Lily and Maddison were no longer happy to live together.
“The nature of their relationship changed in their new home environment and after careful consideration, and many attempts at re-introduction in different surroundings which continued until very recently, the decision was made that they would need to be rehomed separately,” she said.
‘Stress and uncertainty’
Lynn Barber, the head of canine behaviour at the Dogs Trust, said initially the dogs had been happy together but moving to a new home had proved stressful for Lily and she struggled to adjust to the new environment.
“The stress and uncertainty Lily felt during the move resulted in her attacking Maddison.
“Unfortunately some fights in the dog world are so distressing that it becomes too difficult to forgive each other.
“For the safety and well being of the dogs, Lily and Maddison will be rehomed separately.
“Human company and affection in their new homes will help take the place of dog companionship and ensure their happiness,” she said.
The Dogs Trust is now looking for a new home for Lily where she would be the only pet.
This should give pause to those who advocate for finding homes for all disabled puppies versus putting them down. As much as the knee-jerk bleeding hearts think that all life is so precious and that once the crime of breeding dogs like this is committed that we can’t then “punish” the defective offspring by killing them, such decisions have consequences that have to be weighed against the humane concerns of other dogs, owners, and trainers who are all impacted by raising and keeping a dog like Lily. Even the question of humane treatment of Lily does not fall all on one side of the balance.
It’s all roses and light when you can spin the story as a caring companion dog and a no-frills adoption where a blind dog won’t be inordinately burdensome on a prospective family. But that’s not what happened here. Lily was obviously so tormented that she lashed out irreconcilably with her new home and her old friend. Maddison was also terrorized by Lily and the new owners clearly sided against the much more sympathetic Lily in their decision to keep Maddison.
Why should Lily be kept alive? She’s already worn out her welcome with two families who thought they cared enough and were equipped with the skills necessary to keep her and she’s already benefited from the efforts of the Dogs Trust and an immense media campaign to find her a new home. Ten tons of sympathy doesn’t weigh very much against the practical concerns of this dog who has proven to be too much of a burden again and again.
This isn’t a call to kill every dog that might be a burden, rather it’s a call to be objective in our assessments of just how difficult such a task really is and just how rare the right home for a dog like Lily will be to find. There is no rational place here for absolutes, every dog need not be “saved” at all costs any more than every dog need be put down.
The original Daily Mail story was shared over 100,000 times of Facebook. The news of the pair’s adoption a week later was shared 35,000 times. The BBC story which documented Lily’s failure in her new home was shared less than one thousand times.
So remember that stories of feel good empathy and hope and sympathetic helpless animals are about 3 times more interesting than their happy endings, and 100 times more likely to gain traction than the brutal, unhappy, but entirely real and forseeable outcomes of unethical breeding and unreasoned “life at all costs” attitudes. While it’s politically incorrect to discuss the very real burden of disability in humans, we can’t let etiquette trump ethics. There needs to be two sides to this debate and that means being honest about the costs and yes BURDEN that comes with coping with dogs like Lily. If we never acknowledge the burden, how can we hope to appreciate and aid those who choose to carry it and how can we forgive and not stigmatize those who choose not to?
* * *
If this post made you think and you'd like to read more like it, consider a donation to my 4 Border Collies' Treat and Toy Fund. They'll be glad you did. You can subscribe to the feed or enter your e-mail in the field on the right to receive notice of new content. You can also like BorderWars on Facebook for more frequent musings and curiosities.
* * *
Nora
Jana
Jess
Pam
Kali
retrieverman
Lori Ziemba
Was there word on exactly how this was determined to be an “attack?” I’ve heard that word used for a number of actions by dogs on other dogs, or even people, and sometimes it is accurate but other times it is a gross overreaction. I knew someone who said she was “attacked” by a very excited, teenage labrador mix who ran to her too fast and jumped on her. He had somehow broken loose from his harness, the owner said. The dog was desperate to play and sorely under-stimulated. I can completely understand how this could terrify someone walking down the street, not expecting this, but she kept saying she was attacked when there was no intent of aggression, no attempt to injure and no resulting accidental injuries. It was clearly a misuse of language and/or a misunderstanding.
Having said that, I wouldn’t be surprised if there WAS a lashing out by the blind dane. A lot of people truly underestimate how the changing of environments can affect behavior, or bring out new ones, relax former ones, and so on. THe former owner of my kelpie swore up and down that he LOOOOVES children of all ages. Well he sure as heck shows fear in my neighborhood when little kids bounce and scream in their normal play and I will never allow them to bum, rush my dog as is their wont to do oftentimes. Tucker just can’t take it. When I asked the old owner EXACTLY what the circumstances were in the past with kids, she said he always sought out the neighbor kids to play. I said “Oh, so are these the only kids he’s ever known, on your quiet country property?” I received no response.
Even two sighted Danes might, for whatever reasons, have a lashout under enough stress and being dumped in a shelter and then a new home, are all major stressors. But blindness and potiential neurological issues are, sure, ADDED stressors that are completely unnecessary. There would have been no shame in putting Lily down at birth. She would have never known what she missed, because when you’re gone, you’re gone. You could put her down NOW and she wouldn’t know what was coming, only the people do, and that’s just it. People make it about their OWN guilty feelings on the subject, and not about what is really best for the animal.
I’m not sure we’re going to get a detailed account of what exactly happened. But let’s look at the facts: the people got rid of the dog after only 3 weeks and even with the help of the shelter they all agreed that the two dogs were now unable to live together. That really says it all.
It could have been worse, obviously, this dog could have been deemed unable to be homed with anyone and put down for the aggression on the spot.
You’re entirely right about people making it about their OWN GUILTY FEELINGS… so true. This actually fits in with some other posts I’m writing. It’s like a munchausen by proxy thing, or even when the parents of a sick child (that they did not make sick) still form a narrative around their own suffering.
I’ve ran into too many parents who chose to reproduce, even when they knew full well that in their particular case, there was a risk of deformities, but they went forward, had the kid, and the kid DID in fact have said issues; congenital heart defects, trisomy 21, etc.
They cried beforehand if a doctor advised them against reproducing or enhanced warnings. One even said to me “Can you BELIEVE that doctor told me not to have children?” and was shocked and angered when I said “Actually I do. The doctor is there to give honest medical advice.”
These folks then cried when they took the risk and lost, whining “Oh, I think about my poor child every day.”
Oh REALLY?
I wonder if Sarah Palin bothered with amniocentesis before having her last kid and ignored the results, or skipped it because it was “in god’s hands?”
Funny you bring up Sarah Palin. I evoked her as an example on Facebook where Gina Spadafori posted a link to this post. For some reason people like Heather Houlahan never want to engage in debate on my posts despite having well formed arguments. I’ve never censored anyone (can’t say they do the same), and am always up for a debate. Anyway, here’s my Down syndrome observation:
Of course from the perspective of the individual animals they are sympathetic. If we watch a movie about a seal family and then a polar bear eats the baby seal, the bear is EEEEVIL. If instead we watch the same situation first from the perspective of the Polar Bear family and we see how the cubs are starving and mom needs a kill and she finally gets the seal, well then the bear is no longer EEEEEVIL, we’re rather pleased with the seal being killed.
Well, there’s more than one perspective here. I see the knee-jerk life at all costs attitude as very destructive. Just look at the human cost of this one dog. Breeder couldn’t deal with it, the first home couldn’t deal, the second home couldn’t deal. The dog is obviously not dealing well with it all. And this dog is a one in a million who happened to get a viral campaign to save it.
I don’t color breed but if I was staring down at a fresh litter and there were double merle puppies, I’d look at all the rescue pages full of Danes and Aussies that are defective and I’d say, “I’m not going to add to this problem, I’m not going to make my mistake someone else’s problem. It sucks the dog has to pay the price, but that crime was committed when I allowed the breeding to happen.”
Parents of ADHD and Autism Sectrum Disorder children are ~twice as likely to get divorced than the average parent. Parents of Downs syndrome children are not. Ponder why and I’ll bet you will come to the same theory I have. I suggest this is because there are no prenatal tests for the first set of disorders and parents get caught unaware.
Only 10-15% of informed parents decide they are prepared to raise a Down syndrome child.
So, I’d ask someone like Heather, who comes from a political sect that is perfectly willing to criticize someone like Sarah Palin’s life-at-all-cost attitude, somehow find the same issue with her rescue dogs so above reproach.
I definitely do NOT believe in life-at-all-costs. I’m more a quality-of-life girl. Of those informed parents who chose their down’s syndrome child, how many thoroughly thought out who would care for that grown child after they die? Does it make them feel okay knowing they may end up in state care? Would that be part of god’s plan?
A lot of parents suck, but when someone is lucky enough to have truly loving, devoted parents, we know there is no replacement for that. Even siblings don’t see it the same way. They have their own lives to live. Most caring parents don’t want to see their healthy children burdened with care of a disabled adult either. They certainly don’t HOPE for it.
And true, you don’t censor. Not that I’ve seen so far anyway. You welcome folks and if they seriously disagree, you let them know where you are coming from and what the blog is about. That IS more than I can say for most.
maybe the BREEDERS are the problem. I believe in breeding enough to keep the breeds distinct and to keep them from becoming extinct, but why breeders breed their dogs 4, 5 times (and MORE) producing dozens of puppies (some with the best and some with the worst traits), when there are millions of loving adoptable dogs in the shelters, and why people feel they must have a certain type of dog (like it’s a status symbol in the same way they must have a mercedes when we know its no better of a car than one 30k cheaper), is the question we should be asking. shameful.
This IS a problem about breeders. But not in general, in specific. The breeders of Great Danes who follow the breeding guidelines allowed by their registry and encouraged by their culture and enshrinement of color families which makes Harlequin x Harlequin which IS Merle x Merle, allowable. This leads directly to crippled animals.
Otherwise this is not an issue about how many shelter dogs there are, breeding dogs in general, the concept of purebreds, etc. Off topic and bordering on obnoxious.
I hate this debate and Chris is right, it is off topic. However I have a problem not responding, sorry Chris.
Many people need a dog with predictable body type, coat type and BEHAVIORS. Choosing a dog of a particular breed oes not mean that you choose it as a status symbol in most cases, It often means that you choose the dog breed because you thought it would fit in with your life style, housing family structure, etc.
I do not know how much actual experience you have with the ” millions of loving adoptable dogs in the shelters” but in my local shelter, when I was last there 3 months ago helping to rehome some setter crosses there were some 25 dogs there and (counting the 3 setter crosses) only 5 of them were not “pit bulls”, or pit bull crosses.
Owning a pit type dog in our area is, among some people “a status symbol” so why do we have so many in need of rehoming? One reason is a ruling in our state court system that these dogs are “inherently dangerous” and that liability for attacks can be passed on to the landlord. In addition if you are a home owner and not a renter you may find that your home owner’s insurance is canceled if you have certain types of dogs. No home owner’s insurance, no mortgage.
So you want to get a dog of a certain size and predictable personality, you do not want some one’s 11 year old pet that became available because the person died (as in the case of the above mentioned setter crosses), you want a dog that you can use for duck hunting, etc. A lot of the predictablity of a dog is due to its parents being selected for certain desireable traits – not its sire being the toughest and most aggressive intact stray male dog in the neighborhood.
If some one is looking for a family pet and they have children, in general they want to either get a young dog they can train and socialize to be reliable with the children or if they adopt an older dog they want to get it from a situation where the dog has a known history in relation to children.
This is really important. Our state legislature was working on a bill to overturn the breed specific aspect of our court ruling and the day before the state senate was to vote on it March 10, 2013), someone with a 20 month old child is visiting a friend who owns a pit bull cross and the dog ends up severely biting the baby in the face.
Guess what this did to the anti-BSL dog bill…?
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2013-03-10/news/bs-md-co-pitbull-bites-child-20130310_1_pit-bull-baltimore-county-animal-control-dog-bit
The purpose of Chris’s blog is to discuss the need for education in sound practices of animal breeding among dog breeders and the need for empathy for the quality of life that dogs produced by controlled breeding practices will enjoy.
This means that a lot of dog breeders need to learn more basic genetics in my opinion and that they should be looking at the whole dog, not just a specific subset of cosmetic traits.
New rule: If you send my dogs food and toys you can be as off-topic as you want. Thanks again, pictures soon.
And I split my DogTime post into two, the second and upcoming part deals with this very issue, smearing breeders.
It is a popular thing to do from pit bull people now. Their hearts bleed for pit bulls and they choose to blame all dog breeders in the most righteous and vile manner.
Dana’s position is very typical of people who do not understand dogs and who do not see dogs as animals with personalities, do no understand genetics, do not understand breeding, and do not understand the dogs long history as an adjunct or a tool to humans. To Dana and her ilk, all dogs are the same; ergo, any dog will do for someone seeking a puppy, and therefore anyone wanting a dog should be perfectly to pop down to the shelter and take whatever happens to be on offer.
Dana even tries (lamely) to pay lip service to ‘breed preservation,’ even though her references to ‘status symbols’ etc make her position a big, fat, hypocritical LIE.
Either all dogs are interchangeable and we should all be perfectly happy with any generic dog from an unknown background, or NOT. Pick a position, because insisting that ‘any dog will do’ puts the lie to having, developing, or maintain breeds or types at all.
IOW, ask for a hammer and Dana and her little feewing fwends would likely offer you a screwdriver.
Jess recently posted..Guest Post: Suzanne Phillips: Why dogs develop food allergies
Jess mentions:
However the shelters I am familiar with mostly do NOT have PUPPIES. What they have are adult dogs that are strays or were given up by their owners. So popping down to the shelter to obtain a dog is much less likely in our state to yield a puppy that the owner can raise and train to their needs.
The BEST consumer is an EDUCATED consumer. Dana and her little soft-hearted and soft-headed buddies do not care about making a match that lasts, through education and research, through consideration before the sale, all they care about is how they feeeeeeel about ‘things.’ All those poor homeless doggies make them feel bad. Denigrating someone who wants a certain kind of dog or wants to raise the dog themselves makes them feel good.
Dana sez: “why people feel they must have a certain type of dog (like it’s a status symbol in the same way they must have a mercedes when we know its no better of a car than one 30k cheaper), is the question we should be asking.”
Yes, this is an excellent question ANY dog buyer should be asking! Why do you want that breed? Why that particular puppy? Why do you want that rescue dog? But Dana willingly falls into the trap of believing that all dogs are the same, one dog is ‘no better’ than another, and such a trap will not allow the asking of those questions.
One dog is not better than another? Better for whom? And why?
Dana lives in a very black and white little world. God forbid she should be confronted with anything murky and grey that compels her to stretch her brain cells a bit. God forbid she should consider another view other than her own. God forbid that she should shove her feelings down where they belong and consider things with her intellect to guide her instead of her bleeding heart.
Jess recently posted..Guest Post: Suzanne Phillips: Why dogs develop food allergies
I give up on America. Everything published has to be black and white.
Dave recently posted..For One Allele
Downs kids are much less stressful to deal with than autistic children. I think that is a more important factor than the predictability of a deficit.
Depends on the level of autism; it’s a spectrum.
Look up the definition of Munchausen by Proxy. Parents of MBP kids do make the kid sick!
I’m aware of Münchausen by Proxy.
http://www.astraean.com/borderwars/2012/06/munchausen-by-harley.html
Everything in your post indicates that you are only concerned about what’s best for YOU, not the animals, despite your belief to the contrary. Dogs at shelters most certainly do know what’s coming, as they can smell the death and fear all around them. Thus your argument that a dog doesn’t know what’s coming would only apply those dogs who are privately euthanized. Regardless, by your logic, there would be no shame in killing a human infant, as they “wouldn’t know what was coming.” Likewise, we could shoot adults as well, perhaps with a bullet to the back of the head when they’re not looking. Your reasoning is completely ludicrous. Also, a dog’s desire to live far exceeds that of a human’s and we know because decades of animal research have proven it to be true. Thus, we know what Lily wants; she wants to live. If an animal is suffering and the suffering cannot be alleviated, then by all means the ethical and humane thing to do is to euthanize them. Euthanizing a dog simply because YOU don’t want to be inconvenienced or because you believe the dog’s life is insignificant is unethical, immoral, and incredibly selfish.
Erik recently posted..Hello world!
“Also, a dog’s desire to live far exceeds that of a human’s and we know because decades of animal research have proven it to be true.”
Citation, please.
Jess recently posted..2012 in Review
I’d also like to see these multiple studies measuring ‘How strongly dogs desire to live compared to humans’. Fascinating science, I’m sure. =P
Such studies would be enormously useful for owners dealing with chronically ill (not going to get better) dogs. I can do an assessment according to a pain scale, but ‘desire to live’ is something I cannot assess. I’d like a handy chart, please.
Jess recently posted..2012 in Review
I hear that the Soybean plant has a particularly marked desire to live. The wholesale slaughter of Soy to create ToFu constitutes mass genocide by the Vegans. How long will YOU stand silent?
Plants actually have some fascinating defense mechanisms. Plus they communicate!
Jess recently posted..2012 in Review
It was in the animal’s best interest to never have been bred from two Harlequin parents. Don’t shift the blame here.
Gosh, you stumbled upon my weltanschauung! I am absolutely, as a rational and moral agent, concerned for what is best for me. Duh.
I do not believe it is moral to endlessly sacrifice time, money, and resources to the maintenance of this dog’s life for the sole benefit of self righteous back patting of do-goodery. Get real, this dog was not bred for its own benefit and it’s not being “saved” or “rescued” for its own benefit either. It’s simply a toy in other people’s messiah fantasies.
All that I wrote… and all you get out of it is that I kill for convenience? Wow. Talk about twisting things.
If I found animals inconvenient, wouldn’t it be easier for me not to bother owning any in the first place? I don’t need them for any practical purpose. They are my companions. I’ve fed all my cats premium cat food, I paid numerous vet bills for them when they had treatable illnesses that with surgery, would add QUALITY years to their lives, such as fibrosarcomas and Sub-Q fluids given at home.
I now have a kelpie that I pay hundreds per month for on real, whole raw foods, dogwalkers, I paid for lessons, vet care ( I drive over an hour out of my way on a non-traffic day for one particular vet clinic, just because of their gleaming repuation), ah yes, I truly do put convenience first.
Animals and babies/children both are at the mercy of their caregivers. The hands they land in are a roll of the dice. The best one can hope for is that they land in the hands of people with a good balance of love and sense. That balance is working towards a long and healthy life w/o suffering.
I’d be quite happy with a bullet to the back of the head if my suffering were unlivalbe, incurable, someday. I’m sure there are terminal infants out there somewhere, sadly, that would be better served if they were taken off of life support. And yes, that they don’t even know what is coming would only be a good thing.
Jess, Pai and Chris have the right added comments.
Hey, im sorry but i dont sleap anglish very vel , can you help me , becase i wanna now wher is Lily now . She have new home ? How ist posible to help she ?
Thank you wery much
Lily has a new home. The shelter is no longer providing new information.
Lilly má domov, ale ostatní psi potřebují pomoc (V České republice):
http://dog.rescueme.org/cz
Pokud chcete přijmout slepého psa, zkuste zde (V Británii)
http://blinddogrescueuk.webs.com/
Erik! Exactly!
Perhaps, whatever the presumed facts to be as reported, that these folks were not the ideal candidates, Despite their great compassion, there comfortable environment and all the financial capabilities to meet the commitment of such adoption, were they capable of managing the potential behaviorism dependencies that come with such a pairing and the transition et al?
As contrast to this situation, an astute dog person living in a hovel could perhaps been a better turn for such a dog..ok, I am being extreme and certainly don’t imply any disrespect toward the folks that stepped up in good faith..valiant as it is.
But where the tire hits the road, in the end, they were, perhaps, not fully capable..as harsh as that statement may be.
It appeared to me that the canine pair had a proven relationship of trust and accommodation and only after three weeks in an alternative environment under new guidance that altercations resulted. More often than not we fail to appreciate the human factor and relative cause to behavior detriment. Just saying.
That’s a very good point. There ARE only so many homes that are able to fully take care of a such a dog and despite the huge public response an a supposedly well trained shelter staff, they didn’t find the right home among all those candidates on the first try.
Very true. If you haven’t lived with blind/deaf dogs before, or two adult rescues before, it takes some getting used to.
Decide in haste, repent at leisure – the people “fell in love” after seeing all the cute pictures and news reports. Which happens to a lot of people, and is why Petfinder is such a success, with its easily searchable database of sad-eyed doggies (and is how I got my cat, for the record!).
IME, it takes at least three weeks for a new adult dog to settle into a home. I foster, and always warn the adoptive families that the first month is the most difficult – for dogs and people. Each side is testing the other out, deciding on boundries, setting a routine. With two dogs, you have twice the potential issues.
one of the things that isn’t discussed is that if these dogs were neutered after surrender, the hormone changes might have altered the “pecking order” of the two dogs. a change in environment or change in physical status can often initiate a shift in pack order. Lily wasn’t born blind and one does have to question the decision to operate on her eyes rather than to put her down at the time. I was recently asked to help find a home for a Queensland x who is deaf, barrier aggressive and aparently can fight with other dogs and is food aggressive. It’s possible this dog will find a home, but it is clear that it won’t be with an “average” owner. I don’t know that “Lily” was tortured, but she clearly should never have been bred and having been bred and kept alive, has negatively impacted the life of Madison.
My dog’s former person once told me she thought she had as high a rank in the pecking order as her husband, until he went away for a bit and then suddenly she found her home of dogs ( a BC, couple of kelpies and an LGD of some sort), getting sort of chaotic. The dogs were having some conflicts.
She felt the fact that the peace was disturbed said something about how the animals perceived her in the home; lack of peace in her presence meaning she was not respected after all.
I don’t know how true that really is. We can guess things but it’s always going to be hard to know EXACTLY what is going on in a dog’s mind. But they were all in the same living environment when this happened, and these were all healthy animals with intact senses.
A LOT of folks are not prepared to deal with these issues because the theoretical just cannot compare with the real, in-your-face dynamic.
I have owned many Borzois for a long time (since 1967) and I have also helped train handicapped dogs (blind). Currently I have an elderly Borzoi who has become blind with age. He and the other old (over 10 years) Borzois are house dogs at night. The blind dog has been attacked a number of times because he sometimes steps on the other old dogs. This was a real attack involving subsequent visits to the vet for stitching up – not just growls and snarks. Mostly we have the blind dog go to his own area at night so that he is not stepping on the other dogs.
It is important to realize that when dogs as large as Danes and Borzois get in a real fight, that a lot of damage can be done to the dogs, to people trying to cope with the fight and to the household. Reading the account of the two Danses and subsiquent conclusions by the shelter, I suspect it was a real fight and dangerous to the humans present, not just nosie and snarking.
Back to my blind Borzoi. Watching him, I think he may do a bit of echo locating and also uses scent to locate the other dogs. One of the old Borzoi is especially reactive to his presence and he is hesitant to try and pass her. She of course has the habit of lying in the middle of doorways and then coming up off the floor suddenly to snap at him when he approaches.
I can aid him in navigation in the house by (1) not moving the furniture. (2) using a leash at times (3) clapping my hands to get him to home in on me. The hand clapping is very effective. We also que him in by saying right and left as needed when he is walking.
A very interesting thing about him is that he is very very fond of his plush toys and he will explore to find them before going into his exercise pen “bed room” at night. They must have a scent as he will immediately pick one up if it is at his feet.
I have helped to train some blind dogs – we do things like have the owner put a bell on the handle of the leash and also teach the dog to track the owner’s scent and to walk just behind the owner rather than to one side. If they walk behind the owner then the dog does not walk into things. Personally I think the human companion of the dog is a better “seeing eye guide” than another dog. The pecking order is better understood and the human is (hopefully) smart enough to watch out for problems the dog might encounter.
I think the blind Dane should do fine as a single dog if the proper human companion can be found.
An important part of the decision as to wether to keep a blind dog alive really is the question of the quality of life of the dog. Does it still enjoy things. Does it enjoy walks, its toys, its interactions with people. These are much more important than some imaginary human idea of devotion between the handicapped dog and another dog.
We also know some deaf dogs – one set is a pair (not a breeding pair!) of white dalmations that belong to a deaf couple. One of these does understand sign language.
I think that a useful tool for a deaf dog would be a non-shock vibrating collar. One could teach the dog to look around for the owner when the collar vibrated and then the owner could sign commands to the dog.
After owning big dogs for many years the main factor that I find comes into play on deciding if the dog should be euthanized because of a disability is the “quality of life” factor. This is also influenced by the dog’s environment. One does not want to see an elderly owner damage their back trying to move a large heavy crippled dog up and down stairs for example. It is not fair to either of them.
I think Lily was adopted out a few weeks later to another family, and from what I’ve read, she seems to be doing fairly well with her new family.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/heavenlycreatures/2012/02/update-on-lily-and-maddison-the-blind-dog-and-her-doggie-guide-pal/
Thanks for the link. Here’s the quote from Dogs Trust:
I’m not sure how “extensive” their attempts could have been if the dog was dumped back at the shelter a mere three weeks after going home.
Sad story, no matter how you cut it.
Katie recently posted..Hawk Mountain hike
Three weeks is usually when trouble starts to appear with rescue dogs in new homes. My experience is if the trouble involves real fights and damage to dogs or people that one needs to separate the dogs. Big dogs like Danes can inflict real and permanent damage on another mammal and the potential for this should not be treated lightly.
One of my friends who became involved in rescuing Malamutes ended up with 5 dogs. They formed two mutually incompatible packs despite her experience and efforts over several years managing them. One day an error in letting dogs get together resulted in a fight which ended up with one dog with a bitten nose (not really a serious injury) but with her having permanent damage to her right hand.
This also illustrates why I believe it’s a fallacy when rescues to claim 2 dogs are ‘life bonded’ and will only adopt them out as a pair.
It’s also worth bearing in mind that it’s notoriously difficult to ‘sort’ two bitches that start fighting each other within the household, even if they were friends for years.
I guess I just don’t understand why in this case (re: this article), there is euthanasia being discussed. Dogs are returned all the time and go on to find great homes. Without a full veterinary and behavioral work up I feel it’s pretty irresponsible and a tad heartless to suggest it as an option to be honest. She didn’t do well in the home for whatever reason. Ok? I’m sure being in a brand new environment was quite unsettling for her along with bounced around. There is a process for adding an adult dog to a new home that MOST people don’t follow.
It appears she found just the family for her in the end. I wish her the best.
I think that falls under the “quality of life” issue. The vet and behavioral assessments you suggest are reasonable. But I think this situation was meant to exemplify the additional burden to everyone that intentionally breeding dogs that a breeder knows can result in blindness or deafness, incurs. And that burden includes the burden to the blind/deaf animal itself; especially so.
Peggy said this dog was not born blind and the piece said it was congenital. The dog was also said to be in advanced age. Does anyone know exactly how old this Dane is and when she became blind? What was the operation on her eyes and what was the point of it if she still, it appears, had sight issues?
Euthanasia is the quickest, cheapest, easiest solution to an unwanted animal. It’s also humane. Why should it NOT be included in the discussion?
There are arguments to be made for quality of life, and of course those are weighed with the dog at the center. Is it better for the dog to be alive or dead? This of course depends on the severity of the defect, pain, and possible neurological involvement. It also includes the possibility of this dog not finding a home or bouncing from home to home or languishing in the shelter.
But this isn’t the only lens we can view this situation through. These dogs are produced by human decisions, they are not wild animals under antonymous destiny. Someone bred this dog on purpose. I’ve written extensively here why such breeding plans are unethical and a mistake. I’d prefer we avoid decisions like this by not creating these situations to start with, especially when disabilities like this are easily avoidable. This was NOT some freak accident that could happen to anyone.
Should we double down on that mistake by insisting that these animals, once born, get a chance at a life? Are we to elevate life beyond valuable, through precious, to sacred? Is there some timeline on that decision such that if an animal grows to a certain age that it’s no longer ethical to kill it? Should not animals be subject to the whims and desires of man? If not, do you then believe that animals must be given rights and assigned advocates independent of their owners? Should you have to go to court and win a judgement to desex your animal? How about to get their teeth cleaned or their nails clipped? What if you want them off your bed, would you need a restraining order?
Do you think that breeders should be prevented from killing these animals (and I use that word only because “PTS” is a little too romantic, I do mean humane euthanasia)?
Do you think that it’s better for the shelter and rescue community to be beholden to people who continue to produce these animals in large numbers and charged with finding homes for all of them?
For that matter, do you think it’s inhumane to kill a dog that is healthy but no longer wanted? Is this dog fundamentally different than the millions of dogs that are killed for just that reason each year save for the daw factor for being disabled and that someone wrote a story about it? Is that our standard now, selective outrage for the causes someone puts in your face but apathy to the ones that aren’t popular or publicized?
I think it’s a little quick to jump to include that in my opinion. Talk about it all you want, this is just my own opinion. Look, I run a rescue and am no stranger to making the hard decision. I am also well familiar with the outrage for special causes and the silence for the ones not publicized. We deal with those dogs every day, they aren’t highlighted by anyone or anything.
As for your entire 4th paragraph, don’t be ridiculous.
This conversation is not so much a call to find this one publicized dog and kill it. It’s more to highlight that the typical reaction of “well, what’s the harm in letting it live?” … starting when it’s born… is usually not informed about just how hard it is to reach a satisfactory outcome for a disabled dog. I think it’s easier to say “let’s just try.” But just because it’s easy doesn’t mean it’s best.
I’m not even advocating that all these dogs should just be put down so they don’t bother anyone. It’s about making people realize that there are burdens and negatives that need to be weighed against one’s desire to do something noble for a disabled animal. In light of these negatives, the kicking the ball down the field attitude can lead to a rather grotesque melodrama where these disabled animals are go from bad to worse and ultimately are confused and adrift all because people want to indulge their own feel-good desires.
Again, people can do what they want with the dogs they own, they can spend their money or even waste it on a lost cause or long odds. The thing I see lacking is honesty about the balance here. Too many people who just assume that there is only one way and that of course we’re going to save every last animal we can and we never have to deal with budgets or limitations or the thought that we could be spending our time and effort into rewarding those who breed right versus making up for those who breed poorly.
Chris is not the real issue you attempt to bring into this discussion: The conditions here were preventable? I believe we all understand the work of Rescue Volunteer Workers. However, will these breeding practices ever stop as long as we continue to help those that produce them?
I know taking this one line out of your post is taking it out-of-context Chris, but it’s an important line. The very Danes you don’t purposely bred because of the risks of deformities those breedings pose, are done all because OF “the whims and desires of man.”
There are times when an animal can be saved and times when it makes more sense for the animals sake to put the down. It shouldn’t matter what the age, what the breed or who is to blame for the animal being born in the first place. Sometime it is just plain and simple that it is more compassionate for the animal.
This is not something people don’t know and this is not RARE. This is a simple case of if you breed Merle to Merle 25% of the puppies will be deformed. You will have half the Merle color and the other 25% will be not Merle.
You will get the SAME number of Merle by breeding a Merle to a non Merle — 50% but you will NOT have a quarter of the puppies deformed.
People who breed Merle to Merle should have their ability to register dogs PULLED.
?Yeahbut, actually–you will also get some dogs that are not merles. Merle is a modifier and an “add on”–I have seen genuinely accidental merle-merle litters that produced plain tricolors or bi-blacks (or whatever) along with a double-merle puppy. Not defending, just saying.
I mean, I do not want to see merle-merle EVER, but if you look at the calculator–25% double merle, which means in theory that 75% will be heterozygous merles or not merle at all.
http://www.athro.com/evo/gen/sheltiecalc.html
Nora, I certainly understand with the numbers what a complex mind twisting rationale it creates. It would seem if we are truly to understand the dangers to offspring one must consider the other avenue of double piebald and irish spotting being present. Likewise, now must watch out for the harlequin gene. The complex of color patterning and the desire for the white eye candy makes this far more complex than just a 25% margin of defectives from merle to merle breedings.
What really is frustrating if you have been observing the decades of this breeding program in varies pastoral breeds there is alot more horrors especiallly when you see or hear about entire litters are born with no eyes. We have the breeding tools today and some just refuse to back up their theories with proof. Such as the link that appeared on German Coolie breeder in 2007. Time for these breeders to back up thier claims with DNA and a Baer Test in my opinion.
Countrymae, when you say the German Coolie breeder link in 2007 do you refer to this page? http://www.coolieregistry.com/History.html
Sorry to have to check my own link that i provided but I missed the year 2007. Maybe it’s on another portion. Just checking.
http://www.coolieregistry.com/Health.html
What you want to know may be in this page.
Right. That’s another page of the same website I originally started posting here. Nothing regarding color-related issues on that particular page. The site was created by the same person, who speaks of coloration and Coolies with a dog named Oscar on another post in Chris’ blog; and she posted words that Chris refuted in some places.
I’m currently speaking with a lot of Aussies regarding Coolie origins. There is already a lot of hot divisions between folks, so much so that this German Coolie person is in fact a Texan, who decided that only she knows where the “pure” dogs are and decided to run off and make her own group, saying she has “German Coolies” and anything with “Australian Koolie” is another dog heavily crossbred with BCs or kelpies.
Meanwhile no one has given me any convincing evidence that these dogs are a breed in the sense people think of it today. It may in fact, be their version of a landrace, whether the Aussies want to admit it or not.
Oh, and still not seeing a reference to the year 2007. I’m sure I’ll find it eventually.
As some one who has fostered dogs for many years in my own multi-dog household, the issue of 2 dogs not adjusting has nothing to do with the physical limitations of the dog. Perfectly healthy dogs also don’t workout in foster/adoptive homes due to personality conflicts. I have great Danes and volunteer with great Dane rescues and to assume that this issue is a physical handicap issue is ridiculous.
Nothing? Ridiculous!
Being blind and/or deaf is not a neutral state. It’s a clear negative and it is without question that humans and animals with disabilities almost always face greater burdens beyond their specific handicap. You won’t find a single credible source anywhere that says “disabled kids have no unique issues in socializing with other children.” To say so, even though I’m sure your political correctness urges you to do so, denies not only reality, but creates an undo expectation that those with severe deficits should behave like everyone else, face no special burdens, their hills are the same height as everyone else and that they are in no way predisposed by their disability toward social problems.
They are. It’s a simple reality. Don’t victimize the disabled twice just because you want to pretend that the ability to mitigate disadvantages means that they are automatically done away with. By your insanely stupid logic any average owner is equally capable of raising a blind and deaf and neurologically impaired dog as they are one without those impairments. Great way to doom these dogs to bouncing in and out of homes.
Get real. Be honest.
I could not agree more be it human or dog do not burden or victimize the disabled with logic that is not reality. We know those special humans who can cope with these disabilities are not the vast population of human or dog. Get real
I have two blind dogs, due to age related cataracts and lens luxation. The fifteen year old is completely blind, the fourteen year is mostly blind.
All I can say is that there are most definitely management and behavior issues related to the blindness that a sighted dog would not have. To deny that their lives and interactions with the physical world and other dogs are affected by blindness is just naive.
I’ve own my blind dogs all their lives, and I’ve watched their behavior and demeanor change over the last year and a half or so as their blindness became worse. These are dogs that haven’t been rehomed, haven’t been placed into new surroundings with new people and unknown dogs, and their behavior has definitely been affected by their lack of sight.
Would you deny that the a dog with some kind of physical pain or mental trauma would experience behavioral changes and problems? Then why would you deny that lack of vision would affect behavior?
Jess recently posted..Afghan hounds, 1957
The dutch society for the protection of animals states that euthanasia is neutral in regards of wellbeing, whereas living isn’t.
Christopher…..all I can say is you are an idiot and hate for any dog of yours that isn’t perfect. You obviously have no idea what you are talking about….sad for the animals. There are so few people out there really for them that take the time to try to understand them. Obviously you are not one of them.
It’s not about the dog not being perfect, it’s about weak people putting their own insecurity above the welfare of that dog. I hope you never breed dogs because it’s clear from your comment that you don’t have the balls to do the humane thing.
If you get a puppy born with its intestines on the outside or with a cleft palate that will prevent it from nursing, will you allow them to linger until they die or will you put them down on the spot because you’re strong enough to know that it’s more humane than indulging your own sympathies which say that death can’t be better than such a compromised life?
So here, we get a dog who gets tossed from home to home, never given the extra care it would need as a blind, deaf, and possibly neurologically compromised dog, plus the other poor dog who gets ditched and then attacked right along with it. That’s not humane. This dog IS better off dead than to be paraded around as a fund raiser and DAWWWW story for slactivist jerks like you who can sit on the internet and pretend you really CARE enough but just like the people who stepped up for this dog, one week of REALITY was too much and they actually didn’t care enough to do what was right for this dog in any manner. They didn’t choose to keep her and rehab her and mitigate her deficiencies and they didn’t chose to put her down, no they just passed the buck.
Your comment just proves my point, there are SO FEW people out there and in this case it’s obvious that the dog is just continuing to suffer because of it. Shall we keep bouncing her around endlessly until we maybe find one? I say no. You’re welcome to disagree.
But I’m no idiot and I don’t hate imperfect dogs, so go suck a lemon.
Reading comprehension FAIL.
Jess recently posted..Are Mixed Breed Dogs Healthier Than Purebreds?
If lilly is still up for adoption, please let me know. I am a ample dog lover and have two dachsunds already, grew up with bassetts and boxers, would love to give this dog a home. I had a dog who grew up mentally disable and was aggressive and had seizures, but he lived to 14 and was a very loving and affectionate dog.
The shelter never responded to my initial inquiries and I’m not sure if they’ve advertised what has happened since.
Ok… Here is something to think about. There are soapy elderly people who are blind and incredibly combative . The families r unable to tend to their needs so they send them to a home. Where these people to are unable to take care of this person and their combativeness. This person is the. Transferred to another home, maybe a lockdown facility . But even there the workers are having difficulties tending to this elderly person due to blindness, combativeness, and more than likely some form of dimentia. Now, would u (put this person down) ( kill them)? This is not a different situation animals have souls too. They deserve a life as much as any human. Ur welcome!!!
The legal system and religious zealots in this country prohibit human euthanasia when quality of life is at a horrendously low state; be it having to do with mental instability or physical or emotional pain or stress of intolerable levels that can not be managed, controlled, etc. Even if management of suffering is temporary and there is no hope for improved quality of life, we rarely are given the luxury of control over our own bodies. A human in the full state you suggest of blindness, combativeness and dementia would result in someone deemed of unsound mind, and their requests for death would not be considered UNLESS, while in a stable sound mind, such a person had written legal documents such as a living will, DNR, or something along those lines at the very LEAST. At that point, it would likely simply be a matter of making no heroic efforts to keep the person alive; not a way of granting permission to perform a mercy killing, as the old term goes.
So would I kill that person? No, but that wouldn’t be my moral judgment necessarily. It would be a matter of my wanting to avoid a prison sentence. If someone could tell me my fate was blindness, combativeness and dementia and lockdown in a facility, you BET I’d want someone to kill me before the full onset came!!!
I don’t know how you define a “soul” but life for life’s sake, regardless of quality of life and the realities behind horrid medical suffering, I’m betting your idea of it is straightforwardly based on a religious viewpoint. Is it?
You are entitled to your feelings in a free country of course, but for myself, I find it to be hogwash! And there are plenty of other humans who feel just the same.
Bottom line you produce it, you take care of it. Breeder responsibility simple. You think it is o.k. to produce them …take care of them your choice first time and last your choice. You want to make excuses or state this is the Creator’s actions get real.
what happened to lily?
Christopher: Your knowledge of breeding Great Danes, as well as its aftermath, appears to be quite extensive. However, this pales in comparison to your assessment of humans with disabilities (emotional disturbances, social ineptitude, and even percentages regarding divorce rates in parents raising children who have particular disabilities, not to mention that of couples who choose to proceed with a pregnancy once Down syndrome has been identified via amniocentesis). What qualifications do you possess which warrant you to make such claims?
I can use The Google.
You mean you do ~research~ on these subjects?! I thought blogs were just supposed to be people’s uninformed rants and opinions about stuff! =P
Chris, I realize this is a blog, but if you want to add credence to your claims in reference to individuals with disabilities: (1) Properly cite your sources when including statistics and (2) Do “The Google” on “person-first language.” Why? I’m a Special Education teacher who researches emotional-behavioral disorders and intellectual disabilities in middle- and high-schoolers, as well as their families. Also, I’m not sure if this extends to dogs, but most individuals who receive services in conjunction with a “visual impairment” (in other words, what most of society would call “blind”) can often, in actuality, distinguish between different shapes in the visual field, as well as subtle variations in the intensity of saturation between one object to the next. So, as individuals who have this condition rely on these indicators to succesfully navigate their environments, perhaps dogs who are considered “blind” really do have something to look for!
I hear: “You didn’t document a comment on a blog like a thesis and I’m too lazy to use google to look up the statistics you cite myself so I’m going to complain and demand you do the work for me.”
Do your own work. Apparently you get paid to know these sorts of things. No one pays me, so unless you’re keen on putting money in my donation jar, I don’t feel like doing your clerical work for free.
But, of course, since you’re entirely unlikely to put your money where your mouth is and pay me for my time (should I be wrong about this, there’s a donation link right up there on the right), and for the benefit of my other readers, my comment is based in facts and studies.
For everyone else, here’s what my comment said:
Here are the studies which confirm all my numbers, compiled by another blogger:
As for aborting Down syndome fetuses, wikipedia provides the following cited statement:
Children and dogs that are handicapped is like comparing apples and oranges. This dog blog from my experiences, observations, and reviewing all references has nothing to do with these conditions in educating human beings..Sorry
Indeed some dogs adjust to being blind, but more frequently than not other serious organ disease. Examples in conjunction such as heart problems, kidney and liver disorder not excluding serious skin,muscle and bone abnormalies.
They are like apples and oranges which are both fruit which are commonly found in many households and which people make decisions on their acquisition and disposition. Dogs and children share many similarities, especially in terms of culture and ethics and parenting/ownership.
I agree on this platform that apples and oranges are both fruit. Likeewise, the high numbers of abortions when down snydrome is predicted has more parallels to breeding dogs, and decision to have an affected child or affected litter of blind and deaf dogs.
It is an interesting parallel you draw here. Comparing the choice to breed affected puppies with rescue situations placements with divorce rates in human couples of children with handicaps. It does relate with this parallel of thinking.
I am appalled at the callous tone of your article. You do not appear to know if Lilly is ill, or has another reason for being irritable. You also do not appear to know what level of skill the adoptive parents had, nor what behavioral interventions and/or assessments were undertaken. You seem more interested in seeing Lilly killed. You are very definite about that, despite having few details about the situation. It certainly does not make me want to donate money to “read more like this.”
If you read the article, you’ll see Chris did state that pigment disorders have been associated neurological problems.
Let’s look at the facts, the adoptive family sent back the blind dog, not the normal more easily adopted dog. Why is that?
You also seem to lack the understanding that the callousness you accuse Chris of is pragmatics and directed more towards the people that breed these dogs.
Let’s be real, if these dane breeders are going to be heartless enough breed together Harle and Harle knowing what the chances are of producing these defective blind and deaf dogs, they should at least have the heart to euth them at birth. That is the only kindness in torture breeding.
If he sounds callous, it’s because Lily should have never been born in the first place. And somewhere Lily has white blind and deaf nieces and nephews from her breeder who pats themselves on the back saying, well, I find homes for MY defective dogs, not even considering that they should be trying to AVOID producing defective dogs in the first place.
And when people take in these defective dogs, they give these torture breeders an out. They take the responsibility away from these breeders. Because surely, if breeders had to put their pups dog because of these defects, they would be less likely to produce more of them… Or at least one would hope.
It taken me some consideration of this complaint as being a callous tone. It seems in my opinion the only issue is the callous nature of breedings such as this without a life long commitment to the care. Dumping blind/deaf dogs on the public is more than callous. Expecting others to clean up a choice someone else made.
Let’s face it folks, some people are more stupid than others. That’s life.
Thanks for writing such an objective and HONEST piece. I have a pug with a leg that doesn’t work well and they really do require more of a commitment than our other pets. I love her like crazy and am so happy to have her in my life, but we have to be much more careful with her and she can’t do everything that the other pugs can do. People really need to think long and hard before rescue an animal with special needs, and sometimes living is more torturous than peacefully letting them go.
Here’s my littlest one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_abRyWE_GII
I love Great Danes and have had them most of my adult life. Life expectancy for a Great Dane is only 8 years, most of my Danes lived a few years longer and I considered every day after 8 years as wonderful. Great Danes are smart and loving dogs and should not be bred for peoples’ “entertainment”. People who don’t know about breeding should leave it to people who know what they are doing and quit creating problems with the breed. It makes me so angry to see this happen.
Joy, the problem is that these people DO KNOW what they are doing. It’s not just the ignorant and suspect breeders, it’s the cream of the crop. Please read my “Something Rotten in Harlequin Danes” post. The Dane breed club encourages this sort of breeding by their demands for breeding within the color families.
Is Lilly still available to adopt
I don’t believe so, the shelter stopped providing public updates. Given how wide this story was carried, I would think they found her a home.
Would you put down your child if they acted out? How about if you had adopted a child and that child acted out? Would you? NO! Thats all I have to say on that part! I had a dog that was dying and I couldnt afford to take care of him as to the surgerys were so expensive. I found a couple that took him in, even knowing he may die anyway, and had the surgerys done and he is alive now. Because there are people out there that can and want to take care of these animals, why kill them? Its not their fault their owners suck! Just like a child didnt choose its crack head parents!
It’s a blessing that dogs are not children, but your point fails even on its face. You elected to use the word child, I assume, because it has a certain ring of innocence and harmlessness. But dogs are not incapable of inflicting harm.
I don’t think very many people would have objected if the most recent mass shooter’s mother put him down before he killed her and all those other people.
I also know well of an adopted child, now adult, who likely has fetal alcohol syndrome or other drug use related inborn neurological disorder. They have been a miserable human from birth and have left a wake of tragedy, harming themselves and others, poisoning all things they touch, and leading to the dissolution of families and perhaps even murder.
Life is not so precious that we must sacrifice so many of the good, the innocent, the productive to preserve the evil and the broken.
A dog is not a child. It’s ludicrous to demand people treat their pets as if they were human infants and as if they were expected to sacrifice just as much to maintain their lives, no matter how defective and impoverished in quality. That’s not love, that’s selfishness.
It is really unwise to pose an ethical question by comparing canines to humans.
Is it really ethical to bring a child into a world of depleting resources? Is it really ethical to place a child in an orphanage which resonates of “The Dying Rooms” and “Bulgaria’s Abandoned Children”? We can go on forever with these questions.
Choose your straws carefully.
Dave recently posted..The Christmas Ham
I may one day be in a horrible situation health-wise where I would welcome the chance to end my life, rather than stretch it out with the stress, expense, and added pain of surgeries. I won’t know until I get there. It will depend on the individual situation and how I feel about it. It will be a hard decision either way because I have the burden of understanding what it really means to die. Dogs have no such burden, so why impose it upon them?
As someone who has been active in rescue for 15 years, I do believe there are fates worse than death. Spending years locked in a kennel is a far worse fate than death, for example, in my opinion. However, you can’t logically apply that same type of thinking to blindness. Dogs, unlike humans, don’t engage in self-pity due to their infirmities. A dog doesn’t care if he’s missing a leg or even blind. Nonetheless, the world can be a little scary for a blind dog and thus, such dogs do best with experienced handlers. The dog didn’t lash out because she was “tormented”; she lashed out because something frightened her. With so few details, we don’t even know if she actually “attacked” or if she was merely warning Maddison off. Obviously the owners didn’t possess enough experience that we can rely on their interpretation of the events. In any case, it would be senseless to euthanize the dog because she didn’t do well in ONE home. The previous owners dumped BOTH of their dogs at the shelter, so that has nothing to do with Lily’s adoptability. There is nothing to suggest that Lily wouldn’t do well in a home with owners who have experience with blind dogs. Furthermore, there are entire organizations dedicated to placing blind dogs with experienced owners. A dear friend of mine ONLY takes in blind dogs and they do just fine with her, her husband, and their 2 small children. Anyway, you’re certainly entitled to your opinion, but in this case, it really shows your ignorance on the subject.
Erik recently posted..Hello world!
If dogs don’t engage in self-pity, why are we to believe that they engage in other complex self aware emotions like the fear of non-existence? If they don’t care about being lame or blind, do they care about being dead?
She failed two homes. How many go-arounds should this dog get when other dogs are put down on first admittance to a shelter for conditions as simple as Ringworm? A fungal infection is certainly easier to treat and CURE than the incurable blindness and the obvious lack of socialization and therapy necessary to integrate this dog into a third home.
Sure, she COULD have been adopted by some amazing family who has an entire resume filled with dealing with old blind dogs. But she wasn’t, even after hundreds of thousands of people read her story. If there was a dog who had an amazing chance at the perfect home, it wasn’t found in this case despite a rather unprecedented and epic volume of publicity.
It’s not ignorance, it’s a different world view. Your points don’t change my argument and my argument doesn’t change due to what you perceive as ignorance, I know what you’re claiming I don’t. I _know_ there are entire rescues out there for dogs like this, I’ve profiled them before. There are multiple readers of this blog, friends on Facebook, who are raising double merle blind dogs RIGHT NOW, I wish them well, but that doesn’t change anything. The crime was breeding this dog, it is not a crime to put it down. I don’t think it’s unethical, immoral, or even a poor option to kill this dog humanely.
Should we move mountains just because of an outpouring of sympathy? Let’s spend a few million on this dog and we’ll make a Disney movie about it in a few years just so we can pat ourselves on the back.
We can go into what system of morals you or I would use to justify our positions, but I’m not unaware of the belief systems which drive positions similar to yours (mainly influenced by the writings of Peter Singer and Tom Regan). I don’t find them convincing.
You people are fucked. It’s not her fault she was blind. She didn’t “fail” 2 homes. The first home she was in fucking ditched her at a shelter because she was a “burden”. If you have a special needs child do you ditch them at an orphanage!? She didn’t fail at anything. Humans failed her. All she wanted just like any dog was to be loved and fed. As far as her attacking her best friend is crap. My dogs have little squabbles all the time over bones and shit. THey would never really hurt each other. And one time? Come the frick on. Poor baby. I would have loved her no matter what. Soulless jerk offs. Some people do not deserve to have pets. It’s not about the money. It’s about the compassion and bond.
What fairy-tale land do you live in? Dogs aren’t mere objects, they are part of a relationship and that has two directions. Dogs have to hold up their end. Your point about special-needs children? Yeah, in the real world people choose to abort special needs children and those that are born increase the odds that one or both parents will abandon them. Is it fair? No. Is it the dog or child’s fault? No. But it’s a reality.
Of course humans failed this dog, you must have missed the part where this entire post is about not producing these dogs intentionally in the first place. This is what happens when breeders are too callous to (1) Not produce these dogs and (2) Not put them down at birth when their disabilities are clear. You might scoff at this, but they also clearly failed the alternative (3) Find a home that has the experience and ability to give the dog a good life, if that’s even possible.
Blind, deaf, and neurological issues don’t make that likely. Bouncing this dog around is not fair to the dog, the people whose hearts are obviously bigger than their brains, and the other dog that was victimized.
Keeping this dog alive is actually the EASY choice. It’s much more difficult to find it a situation that will allow it to thrive, again, if the impairments even allow that to happen. If you can’t appreciate that, back to the kiddie table with you.
“What fairy-tale land do you live in?”
Silly Christopher! Obviously L lives in “I am better, more tolerant, more noble, and more self-sacrificing” fairy land. See?
“Come the frick on. Poor baby. I would have loved her no matter what. Soulless jerk offs. Some people do not deserve to have pets. It’s not about the money. It’s about the compassion and bond.”
L doesn’t have to go through the pain of recognizing their own limitations in regards to dealing with animals, because they are perfect.
Jess recently posted..Guest Post: Suzanne Phillips: Why dogs develop food allergies
It’s so easy to play a God Amongst Mere Mortals on the internet.
I can’t say as I understand what you’re getting on about not being able to find a suitable environment. Last I heard she’d been adopted on her own and is doing fine. I suppose I’m one of those “bleeding hearts” that doesn’t like to kill animals because they don’t function like the other animals, just seems kind of lazy to me. I work at a no-kill animal shelter, we don’t euthanize animals for any reason except for except for extremely low quality of life (simply having a disability doesn’t come even close to qualifying) or if they have an extreme and persistent aggression problem. Let me tell you, it’s not uncommon AT ALL for dogs to have to try 2 or 3 different homes before they find the right fit, you never really know how a dog is going to react to a new environment until you put them in it for a little while so they can get their barrings, this is especially true of the dog has special needs of some kind, But in my experience we’ve been able to find people who can take care of a dog/cat with special needs pretty regularly, it does take time and effort granted but it’s pretty worth it, in kill shelters animals aren’t really given the time required to find an suitable home, and instead are just put down after either they’ve been there for a certain period of time or they got sent back after a home didn’t work. It’s a very lazy yet rushed way to go about things, and I’m glad I don’t work at a place like that.
My point is: I’m not exactly sure how much you actually understand the issues at hand when it comes to finding dogs homes and such, I dunno maybe you do, but the way you talk about it sure doesn’t seem like it. One thing I do agree with you on though, irresponsible breeding needs to be stopped, it’s a very real problem that’s causing catastrophic damage to different breeds of dogs.
You have a screw loose.and these people did not take the time and care to make the readjustment easier. What skin is it off your back if ppl want to care for a disabled puppy or dog. You are some piece of work, a shitty piece of work. And BOOOO to these people. The agreement should have been together or not at all and if returned returned together. Some dogs who have been abandoned or are grieving loss, require more than 3 weeks to become adjusted to a new home, probably less constant attention and a different way of doing things. That trust also sucks ass.
Pleas help me somebody i dont speak very well . how ist posibl to help Lily ? my mail ist barbora.3108@email.cz i dont speak very well but i cant understant. Ist posible to adoptit her ?