Who Wants A Problem Dog?

[rottnpagan]

Originally Posted by Bruce Lanthier

You would rather have neurotic, unstable dogs than ones that were stable and with the correct temperament?

I'd rather have these two dogs, that are alive and well with me, until their time runs out, yes.

[Bruce Lanthier]

Originally Posted by rottnpagan

I'd rather have these two dogs, that are alive and well with me, until their time runs out, yes.

Yes, but when their time runs out are you gonna go looking for more unstable, neurotic dogs or are you going to try and find dogs with the correct temperament?

[rottnpagan]

Originally Posted by Bruce Lanthier

Yes, but when their time runs out are you gonna go looking for more unstable, neurotic dogs or are you going to try and find dogs with the correct temperament?

Actually I'm already on the waiting for list for my show pup, a male. He'll be whelped next year. So no, I wouldn't be going looking for 'more unstable, neurotic dogs'. However, if someone was to tell me about one that needed rescueing, I wouldn't turn my back either. They'd be coming home with me.

[Bruce Lanthier]

Originally Posted by anna&jacksmom

I might have taken the dog back but she would have just been passed on to someone else. And tortured while she was waiting to be adopted again. Emotions also got in the way. We figured it was our fault for taking her and now we were stuck. In hindsight we probably should have made the hard choice and had her PTS. However, now that we put the effort into fixing her (effort that may have been better served training a non-broken dog) it is kind of pointless to have her put down now. We are well aware that she is not perfect and we along with our vet are watching her mental health closely.

I truly understand what you are saying but really, that only perpetuates the problem. Sure, they might have given the dog to someone else. But, since you kept the dog that means they had room to get another unstable, unsafe dog into the system and give THAT dog to someone else. Now there are TWO unstable, unsafe dogs being pawned onto unsuspecting people and these people are still NOT held responsible. If they have to take one back that prevents them from getting another. The reason I am saying this is more for someone else that may be reading than for you. I know it is too late for you to change things now but it may not be for someone else reading this.

[TrishB]

Please also know that I did have a rescue I was 'tricked' into getting. I wanted a medium dog, short hair, just as a pet, that I might be able to do some obedience training with. What I got was a dominant bitch, HIGH prey drive, fearful dog with separation anxiety.

Would I have given up Bridget? No, I didn't. She wasn't easy nor a joy, but I made a commitment to her and I lived it through. I loved her dispite her behaviour and destructive tendencies. That being said, I have NO intentions of EVER having another like her.

[anna&jacksmom]

But, since you kept the dog that means they had room to get another unstable, unsafe dog into the system and give THAT dog to someone else. Now there are TWO unstable, unsafe dogs being pawned onto unsuspecting people and these people are still NOT held responsible.

I do agree with this especially where the "rescue" is concerned. I even feel guilty about it. I only hope that since it was the GWYNETTE COUNTY ANIMAL SHELTER near Atlanta GA that adopted out this dog and Southernhope dalmation "rescue" that recommended her they will get enough negative feed back to change. I did not take the dog from rescue the rescue just highly recommended her. Maybe a good dog got her spot in the shelter. Probably not....but maybe.

[rottnpagan]

Originally Posted by TrishB

Please also know that I did have a rescue I was 'tricked' into getting. I wanted a medium dog, short hair, just as a pet, that I might be able to do some obedience training with. What I got was a dominant bitch, HIGH prey drive, fearful dog with separation anxiety.

Do you think you were really tricked or do you think perhaps that rescues, while well-intentioned, are just not experienced/understaffed/overworked/overwhelmed that they aren't able to accurately assess these dogs? Just curious for thoughts on that. :)

Originally Posted by TrishB

Would I have given up Bridget? No, I didn't. She wasn't easy nor a joy, but I made a commitment to her and I lived it through. I loved her dispite her behaviour and destructive tendencies. That being said, I have NO intentions of EVER having another like her.

That's how I feel. Unless a situation were to come along and the dog would have no other chance at life. Both of mine were saved from death row. Even for that, I'm grateful that I was in a position to take them and do what I can with them. But I won't 'actively' look for another, lmfao!

[TrishB]

Originally Posted by rottnpagan

Do you think you were really tricked or do you think perhaps that rescues, while well-intentioned, are just not experienced/understaffed/overworked/overwhelmed that they aren't able to accurately assess these dogs? Just curious for thoughts on that. :)

Yes, I honestly feel this way. I was tricked. They told me that she would run away if left off leash. That wasn't an issue, because I had no intentions of letting her off leash. There's no way that they couldn't have known she wasn't house broken or that she had separation anxiety. She went through doors, chewed window frames, shredded carpet, broke bars in her crate, lacerated a paw.... There's no way that they had this dog for 48 hours and didn't know. Add to that, I was 20 years old at the time, my first time living away from home in a rental situation. I was set up and lost my damage deposit.

Originally Posted by rottnpagan

That's how I feel. Unless a situation were to come along and the dog would have no other chance at life. Both of mine were saved from death row. Even for that, I'm grateful that I was in a position to take them and do what I can with them. But I won't 'actively' look for another, lmfao!

You know what? If it were a problem dog, I wouldn't take it at this point. A dog is a 10 - 15 year commitment. There's no way I'm going to sentence myself to that punishment again. Like I said before, there are too many NICE dogs out there, being put down every day because there aren't enough homes. Why should a nice dog be put down (of any age) when I can offer it a home? Is it not just as deserving? Am I not deserving of having a nice dog?

I'd rather have a nice dog. Why take on a risk of property damage, life limitations, social limitations and add the risk of possible physical threats or attacks?

If I'm in the market for a dog, I'm going to get a nice dog (either breeder or rescue) and give it the home that it deserves.

[rottnpagan]

Originally Posted by TrishB

Why should a nice dog be put down (of any age) when I can offer it a home? Is it not just as deserving? Am I not deserving of having a nice dog?

On that same note, aren't these dogs (problem dogs) just as deserving? Who are we to say that they don't deserve a chance? That's akin to saying that only healthy children should be adopted out.

I guess we're just not going to agree on this. I'll take my fancy show puppy and he'll live in my house with my 'neurotic and unstable' rescued dogs. And we'll live happily ever after.

[MonteRiehl]

I have the utmost respect for those who do rescue.
I feel that I cannot. I have a little girl, and I can't be there to supervise her with a problem dog at all times. Unfortunately, many rescue org's do push dogs out the door as quick as they can, all with a "K" description. That would be a nagging doubt in my mind while I'm at work, etc.

If I was in a different situation, I'd think about A, B, C, D or K but I'd still likely go for option 'Z'. A dog from a known lineage from one of the COE breeders, with correct temperment.
I completely respect what it takes to be a forever home for a rescue, but as they say "know thyself", and it's not for me.

Big nod's and respect to Bruce, rottnpagan, and all you others who have rescued dogs. It's a tough road, but it does have great joy too.

[TrishB]

Originally Posted by rottnpagan

On that same note, aren't these dogs (problem dogs) just as deserving? Who are we to say that they don't deserve a chance? That's akin to saying that only healthy children should be adopted out.

It's not the same at all. Children aren't dogs.

Originally Posted by rottnpagan

I guess we're just not going to agree on this. I'll take my fancy show puppy and he'll live in my house with my 'neurotic and unstable' rescued dogs. And we'll live happily ever after.

I think you and I actually agree. While we end up with neurotic animals in our lives, we never intend to end up with them. But we made commitments and will live up to that commitment. It doesn't mean that we go out looking for them or that we'd choose to punish ourselves again.

[Cash]

I don't want a 'problem' dog, who really does? Not to say if I ended up with one I wouldn't manage it to the absolute best of my capability. Unfortunately problems arise, or come with the dog or are allowed to manifest. Personally, I would manage and take on dog A thru E. I don't see option K as a problem.
The rest of the options I ditto Bruce.

I am a bit confused by what you are looking for in answers Trish? Are you wanting to know how far down the list some experienced owners are willing to go and why, hypothetically or historically, or both?

As far as rescue goes, the rescue I am involved with turns down more people than I can count. We don't push our dogs out the door, in fact it's harder to get a dog through rescue than some breeders I know of. (And it's no surprise that many of those dogs end up surrendered and at the rescue kennel.) It does not benefit the dog in the least to have him in a home, only and unless it's the RIGHT home. And as few good homes as there are out there, there even fewer qualified people to assess dogs and their potential future owners.

[Miabella]

I would take on A,C,D, and possibly E, depending on the severity of the resource guarding issue.

For me, B) Constant Barking is a deal breaker. In my opinion, constant barking is not correct temperament for a Rottweiler, and I would be suspicious that there is reactivity and anxiety behind it.

[Cash]

Originally Posted by Miabella

For me, B) Constant Barking is a deal breaker. In my opinion, constant barking is not correct temperament for a Rottweiler, and I would be suspicious that there is reactivity and anxiety behind it.

Excellent point Laurie and I'm glad you brought that up.
There was a dog at rescue that barked more than you want to see in a Rottweiler. But now that he is in his new home, he doesn't bark, but rarely. However, that dog was for all intent and purposes a 'constant barker' and had to be presented to potential homes as such.
Interesting...

[flyballmom]

Knowing what I know now, which is some, but not nearly enough and if I didn't have the likes of Blitz who requires so much of my time...actually I guess if I had my current experience level but no dog....I would consider a, c, d and possibly b depending on WHEN the barking was occuring. Some people consider "barks all the time" to be when the dog is left outside alone for hours on end. If it's neverending alarm barking, then no, not my cup of tea.

The other options are things I would certainly try to work thru if I had a dog that came up with those problems, but I wouldn't volunteer to take them on.