MY baby bitten on the head by friends dog.

Rick Rod

ShaneSheep555 wrote: »

I presume not. Again it was not 100% true that the dog was responsible.
Did you ever think outside the box? Maybe the child tugged at the dog's ear or angered the dog?

Again you come down on the side of the dog and have been proved WRONG

DBB

Good point Ms Pingui!
I'll confess to having only very briefly glanced at these pics earlier without really taking them in.
I hope, I really hope, that the pics were taken with a dog who is known to be cast-iron around kids, from the resorting to biting viewpoint. I have a dog here who would give off all those signals you see in the pics, but would not bite. I don't know what would have to happen to her to make her bite. However, I still wouldn't allow her to be used for such photos... Very unfair on the dog.
I would seriously draw the line at allowing the child hug the dog, as in the last photo, for the sake of a photo opportunity, and yes, either way it was madness to use a small child, when the adult owner could have elicited the same signals and photo ops!

DBB

Rick Rod wrote: »

Again you come down on the side of the dog and have been proved WRONG

Can we please stop the shouting, the one-upmanship, the triumphalism, and moderate our posting so that we're treating each other with some modicum of respect?
This doesn't just go for the quoted poster, but their post illustrates what I'm talking about.
I am getting really, really fed up with it. I doubt I'm alone.
One more post like this, and the thread will be closed, and the author of the screechy post banned.
I have already asked for people to cop themselves on in previous posts. There will be no more warnings.
Do not reply to this post on-thread.
Thanks,
DBB

Tea Tree

Ms. Pingui wrote: »

It's great to create awareness about dog body language, especially around children, but does anyone else think it was completely irresponsible to use a real baby and dog in the pictures?!
It's getting loads of "likes" and shares on Facebook, and from people I thought would have more cop on. Unbelievable really!

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=625556257486866&set=a.329436093765552.72228.329379537104541&type=1&theater

I was assuming that this was a real set of pictures that someone took thinking it would be cute to see baby + dog and maybe the signs were only seen in the photographs after and not at the time and the images subsequently used as example.

I wouldnt have thought anyone would set up the scenario just to make a point... would they

DBB

Tea Tree wrote: »

I was assuming that this was a real set of pictures that someone took thinking it would be cute to see baby + dog and maybe the signs were only seen in the photographs after and not at the time and the images subsequently used as example.

I wouldnt have thought anyone would set up the scenario just to make a point... would they

It'd be interesting to find out. I do feel there's value in showing real pics of a real dog giving off the signs, but lordy, I hope that these pics weren't staged! I'm inclined to think they're not. The dog has the patience of a saint in any case!

Tasden

cathy01 wrote: »

I should.im her mam.its MY Job to look after her.
I didn't leave her alone or out often reach or my sight .
She was beside my foot with a friends friendly family pet.
He turned.
Even if she had been bitten and needed to go to Gp or hospital I would foot the bill.its my fault I failed her.i took a friends word.i should have waited observed and used my own judgment .
Im not the type of person to ever sue .id give out moan nag but never sue ESP a friend. Thank God we still are and my daughter slept grand last night.well if she did cry she didn't wake me.

The dog didn't "turn". The dog behaved like a dog and the child acted like a child. They are two different creatures with different behaviours and fears. I feel sorry that the dog was put in a position where it felt it needed to display warning signals as is normal for dogs. The child was put in a position where it was left vulnerable too obviously. Babies and dogs don't naturally mix. They can, without a doubt. But it needs to be supervised at all times because its not natural, they communicate in different ways and the adult needs to distinguish it and act accordingly. The dog is still the same dog, it didn't attack or turn, it acted like a dog.
I think op you're wonderful for accepting responsibility. And you obviously wont make the mistake again. But I honestly think that the dog is being seen as the "cause" of all this when he was only being a dog. It wasn't like he jumped on the couch and bit her. They were on equal level and left to interact/play as puppies and dogs would and that involves nipping etc. or snapping and warning if one dog feels threatened. They say if parents want to babyproof the house they should get down to baby's level and see it from their eyes, same with the dog. It wasn't looking up at a person it was in the same space as the baby at face level.
Anyway I'm going off on a tangent. You've had a big scare and are acting with alot of grace. You're obviously a brilliant caring Mam and friend. Hope you feel a bit better soon.

Sligo1

DBB wrote: »

However, I still wouldn't allow her to be used for such photos... Very unfair on the dog.

Very unfair on the child aswell....

ShaneSheep555

Tasden wrote: »

The dog didn't "turn". The dog behaved like a dog and the child acted like a child. They are two different creatures with different behaviours and fears. I feel sorry that the dog was put in a position where it felt it needed to display warning signals as is normal for dogs. The child was put in a position where it was left vulnerable too obviously. Babies and dogs don't naturally mix. They can, without a doubt. But it needs to be supervised at all times because its not natural, they communicate in different ways and the adult needs to distinguish it and act accordingly. The dog is still the same dog, it didn't attack or turn, it acted like a dog.
I think op you're wonderful for accepting responsibility. And you obviously wont make the mistake again. But I honestly think that the dog is being seen as the "cause" of all this when he was only being a dog. It wasn't like he jumped on the couch and bit her. They were on equal level and left to interact/play as puppies and dogs would and that involves nipping etc. or snapping and warning if one dog feels threatened. They say if parents want to babyproof the house they should get down to baby's level and see it from their eyes, same with the dog. It wasn't looking up at a person it was in the same space as the baby at face level.
Anyway I'm going off on a tangent. You've had a big scare and are acting with alot of grace. You're obviously a brilliant caring Mam and friend. Hope you feel a bit better soon.

Very good point! Some people on this just don't get it.. and it's pointless trying to explain over and over again.

Pretzill

OP this was a dreadful thing to happen - you must have all got a terrible fright. It is one of my greatest fears as a dog owner that they would ever bite a child or grown-up. You have been sensible in your outcomes of this situation.

This is not totally on topic but I have just introduced a new pup to the family - we have two older dogs - the middle dog was a little suspicious of this bundle of fur that moves quite quickly and jumps towards her for play so she showed the pup in no uncertain terms she wasn't happy about it by being what looked like to me agressive. I intervened for fear the pup would be hurt. He wasn't thankfully and since then he's keeping his puppy distance. What I'm trying to say is you always have to watch a dog when someone new enters their space, there can be a host of reasons why they react in a rough way. For me I was already aware that my middle dog had a tendency to be stroppy in this situation - but I turned my back for a second. I wouldn't encourage small children to be in her space, even though she's a loving dog.

It would break my heart to have to pts/rehome a dog for biting someone but I know it would have to be done if the bite was severe.

Thankfully your little girl is okay. I'm not saying I wouldn't trust any dog with a child but a I'd be very hard pushed to encourage a very wee child around my dogs even though I trust them, children flinch, move quickly just like young pups/kittens and some dogs may not behave as you think they should. I wouldn't risk leaving them in the company of small children without close supervision.

Hopefully you can introduce your little girl to dogs in the future and she grows up to love them.

wexie

Postman Patrice wrote: »

Kids and dogs don't mix

funny, mine get along great and have a very rewarding relationship for both sides.


Mod edit: sorry Wexie, to hog your post, but as it's the first to answer, and quote, the posts made by Postman Patrice, it seems like the obvious spot to intervene.
Postman Patrice has been site-banned as a re-reg of Rick Rod, who was also site-banned for trolling.
All of Postman Patrice's posts have been deleted in the banning process, so users who can see no posts from him, but his posts still in quoted posts, please ignore them... This user has been dealt with. The flow of the thread may seem a little odd now, but now you know why!
Thank you to those of you who reporting the trolling.
Thanks,
DBB

borderlinemeath

Postman Patrice wrote: »

Kids and dogs don't mix

Children and dogs, once they are under close supervision can live in perfect harmony in the same households. Once a dog is socialised from puppyhood with children and the noises that babies and children can make then it is so much easier and less stressful, in particular for the dog.

It's attitudes like above that have a lot of dogs shipped out to the rescue or pound once the first child comes along. It's wrong on so many levels.

njs030

Postman Patrice wrote: »

Kids and dogs don't mix

In my opinion owning and taking part in looking after a dog can teach a child many important life lessons such as responsibility, kindness and love as well as being a very rewarding experience if it's done correctly,.

fatmammycat

Postman Patrice wrote: »

Kids and dogs don't mix

That's mad Ted, I grew up with dogs and always had a ball with them.

Tranceypoo

Postman Patrice wrote: »

Kids and dogs don't mix

Hmm, think my friends kids would disagree with you, they just spent half term week here with us and our 2 dogs and had a ball, dogs have been pining for them since they left....

UrbanSea

Not reading the whole thread.

Think it is OTT having the dog put down. Has the dog been around young children before?

You were in their house, it's not as if the dog attacked a child on the street. The first page of the thread screams apocalyptic exaggeration.

TooManyDogs

Postman Patrice wrote: »

Kids and dogs don't mix

My child is in big trouble so, I'm rearing her with 6 of them! plus whatever fosters I have in at the time so 8 dogs in the house at the moment

ShaShaBear

I think Cathy (OP) that we need to get back to the behaviourist that your friend has employed.

If they have truly advised your friend that the dog is given too much free-reign and thinks it's the "boss", then they have employed a liar, an idiot and definitely not a reputable and properly qualified behaviourist. I'd recommend you let her know this ASAP, as someone like that "training" her dog could make things ten times worse.

Children wake up screaming in the middle of the night for a plethora of reasons including but not limited to getting a bang on the arm off the cot bars when turning, getting the nose of a teddy bear stuck in their eye while tossing, a sudden bright light in the room from a car passing the house with full beams on, their first dream (images forced into your head that you have no control over is bound to be startling), a dream about pretty much anything that the child does not understand at 2 years of age, remembering that really terrifying piece of broccoli you tried to make them eat at lunch today, losing their dummy or teddy or comfort blankie, teething, ear infections, dirty nappies or looking for attention.
If your child is not waking up screaming every time they close their eyes, I doubt they even realise what happened!

It sounds like your baby is fine, I'm more worried about the dog now, as it appears he is in the wrong hands.

Etnies

Have almost read all the thread and no ones seems to have asked is their children in the home of the dog? Doesn't sound like there is, the dog just didnt seem to know how to react these things happen, both parties were distressed and won't be putting the dog or the child in the situation again, the dog is going to be retrained to be extra vigilant, everythings fine.

Also delighted that Rod guy is now banned.

Tasden

Postman Patrice wrote: »

Wonder was breed it was? Would influence my take in it. Pit Bull vs Poodle, Rotweiler vs Lab etc

Are poodles not more inclined to snap than pit bulls?

borderlinemeath

Postman Patrice wrote: »

Wonder was breed it was? Would influence my take in it. Pit Bull vs Poodle, Rotweiler vs Lab etc

Why would it make a difference? A dog is a dog, and its temperament and behaviour are mostly down to its home environment and socialization.

Tasden

Postman Patrice wrote: »

Well why are some dogs on a dangerous list and are subject to different laws so ???

Because ignorant humans couldn't be trusted to train them responsibly.

mosi

Postman Patrice wrote: »

Well why are some dogs on a dangerous list and are subject to different laws so ???

There's no dangerous list, but a restricted list. Anyway the reason some dogs are on the restricted list is because of populist, knee jerk reactions by politicians who don't have a clue about dogs.

borderlinemeath

Postman Patrice wrote: »

Well why are some dogs on a dangerous list and are subject to different laws so ???

There is no dangerous dogs list. There's. A restricted breed list thanks to a snap decision by politicians who based it on a similar list in the UK. No research was done or experts consulted, it was to appease the uneducated public opinion on dogs that is fuelled by tabloid journalism

Tasden

Postman Patrice wrote: »

No. It's because certain breeds have more aggressive traits.

Tendencies, that when trained responsibly aren't an issue.

ShaShaBear

Postman Patrice wrote: »

Generally I would go by the laws rather than anon dog loving posters. Guess it safe to assume we are dealing with a dog from this restricted list here so?

It is most certainly not safe to assume.
The chances are, if the dog went for the face of a toddler, that this is a small to medium sized dog. I'd wager a terrier before most other breeds.

Tasden

Postman Patrice wrote: »

Generally I would go by the laws rather than anon dog loving posters. Guess it safe to assume we are dealing with a dog from this restricted list here so?

Also, I'm not a dog lover. Was terrified of them and hated all dogs til my early twenties when I overcame my fear because my partner wanted a dog. I only loved that dog. Every other dog I still find to be pretty irritating, but they're an animal and they're not there for my entertainment.

sillysmiles

borderlinemeath wrote: »

it was to appease the uneducated public opinion on dogs that is fuelled by tabloid journalism

+1

Also in terms of the OP, Cathy has already said that was no point to declaring what breed the dog was.

fatmammycat

Postman Patrice wrote: »

How......very......convenient.....

It's hardly convenient is it? Knee jerk legislation rarely is.

fatmammycat

Postman Patrice wrote: »

No his argument is.

Which part do you deem convenient?
It's true there is no 'dangerous dogs' list, it's also true the government acted in haste and picked dog breeds willy nilly ( how many Japanese Tosas do you meet out and about on your travels?).
Dog attacks by certain breeds are sensationalized, while dog attacks by others ignored. A sterling example of this is when the lady who runs EGAR (a rescue for bull breeds) was savagely attacked and sent to hospital, the press went galloping to her door, and retreated when they discovered the culprit was a yellow lab. The highest pay out for a dog bite in this country was against a collie- I could go on. So, what part of the argument did you deem 'convenient'?

borderlinemeath

Postman Patrice wrote: »

No his argument is.

I'm a she.
I've a degree in canine training & behaviour & experience with various breeds of dogs. I would be certain that I know far, far more than you do on the topic. It's not "convenient", its the truth.