Mum's dog bit my LO

sulphate

tesuhoha wrote: »

That's really sinister. Sounds like a horror film.

Well, actually... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Licked_Hand

duchy wrote: »

And in the OP's shoes I'd feel affronted that my mother put the safety of my child before the wants of a dog and if it was uncharacteristic behaviour I'd be wondering if it was down to her illness as putting anyone or thing in danger is odd(and her actions put the kids in danger of getting hurt AND the dog in danger of getting put down) or if I'd just never noticed before how selfish she was.

I don't see the OP insisting on bringing her son - more that if there is an expectation she will help her mother and childcare isn't always available or affordable at the times her help is needed. More logistics than insisting.
But you are doing your usual taking a contrary stance rather than applying normal reason anyway .

Exactly. OP is expected/feels obligated to go and help her mother out whilst she is ill, and takes her child for ease. But now she has to arrange childcare which is inconvenient and may be a real hassle/expense to her to sort out, depending on her family situation. Simply because her mother won't take steps to resolve the situation with the dog (and I don't mean necessarily put the dog to sleep/rehome, but Granny hasn't exactly shown willing so far in getting a crate/behaviour training/everything else people have mentioned so far on this thread).

tesuhoha

catkins wrote: »

We don't know if the dog is walked for a start. It could be walked wearing a muzzle or it could be walked very early in the morning or late at night when there is hardly anyone around.


The dog may just not be happy with children in it's home and not bothered by children outside of home. Also I doubt the mother lets the dog wander on such a long lead it can jump at and savage a child outside.




We don't know if the little girl did something that the dog was no happy about though do we? Of course it's awful but if a dog is really vicious it is quite likely to attack immediately. Otherwise it could be that the child has startled or hurt the dog.





If the dog is locked safely away - a secure room or a crate then it can't get to a child can it? Timebomb! Why not blow it totally out of proportion

At the inquest the mother said that she was sitting with the child who was off school not well. The dog just started staring at the little girl before the attack. I believe there is some connection between eye contact, dominance and aggression with these bull type dogs.

Am I blowing it out of proportion? Sorry I thought this dog had already bitten three children. What does it have to do to be taken seriously? Kill someone? We don't know what sort of dog it is and it may well be a dog that will only nip but equally every time it gets away with aggression it could become bolder in its attack.

minimacka

j.e.j. wrote: »

Oh dear I can see this thread turning into World War 3 between the dog lovers (who will think poor doggy can't POSSIBLY be to blame) and the rest of us who think your mum should be protecting her grandchldren from the temperamental mutt.

I would be furious too if it were my child, and I'm afraid I'd have to tell her.

As a dog owner I feel this comment is rather unjustified, I also have children and would never put the dog over my children. The dog has bitten 3 times unprovoked and the mother doesn't seem bothered by this then I would not put my child in danger by taking them to my mums and I would tell my mum this. I'm sorry ill or not your mum is putting her dog before her grandchildren, how many times does the dog have to bite and how much damage does it have to do to the child before she will see sense.

BarryBlue

TopQuark wrote: »

Exactly. YOUR children, YOUR priorities.

Your children don't even register on MY list of priorities and thus my animals come way before them.

ALL children take priority over ALL animals. The law recognises that. Unfortunately, some selfish and inconsiderate dog owners are so misguided that they fail to grasp the point. This is why dog owners (and by association, dogs) get such a bad press at times.

TopQuark wrote: »

Perhaps we should do the same with problem kids needing homes too? Get rid and give the good ones a fighting chance.

And perhaps, instead of putting animals down, maybe we should be putting more kids into care, if their parents evidently cannot keep them out of harms way and protect them from being bitten?

Ridiculous.

Seriously, some people posting have clearly got less intelligence than the average dog!

A point that is demonstrated perfectly by the comments you have made.

EmmyLou30 wrote: »

Once a dog bites, it needs putting down, end of. Report the dog, get it sorted, and even though your family might not agree you have to act in the best interests of the kids.

I'm afraid I would have to agree. If a dog bit my child without provocation then I would require the dog to be destroyed. Parents, of course, need to supervise and train their children to be responsible around dogs. Dog owners have an even greater responsibility in the control of their animals. Far too many owners seem to think that everyone should love and tolerate their dogs whatever they do.

Person_one

tesuhoha wrote: »

And we had a much loved family dog too, a Labrador. He was beautiful and never harmed anyone in his 12 years of life. However, to keep pitbulls in a home with very young children is taking an unnecessary risk. These are heavily muscled dogs with a mechanism in their jaws which makes it very difficult to unlock if they clamp onto someone. Also they are bred as fighters.

The jaw locking thing is completely made up, it's not true. Yes, they have strong jaws, but so do all dogs. If my 7kg bichon frise chose to bite hard and held on it would seem like a 'lock' too.

FBaby

duchy wrote: »

And in the OP's shoes I'd feel affronted that my mother put the safety of my child before the wants of a dog and if it was uncharacteristic behaviour I'd be wondering if it was down to her illness as putting anyone or thing in danger is odd(and her actions put the kids in danger of getting hurt AND the dog in danger of getting put down) or if I'd just never noticed before how selfish she was.

I don't see the OP insisting on bringing her son - more that if there is an expectation she will help her mother and childcare isn't always available or affordable at the times her help is needed. More logistics than insisting.
But you are doing your usual taking a contrary stance rather than applying normal reason anyway .

Not at all. As it's been said there are easy solutions that have been suggested but some posters seem to prefer to focus on more dramatic ones. OP's mother is not putting her love for her dog before the safety of the child since she accepted that OP will not bring her child along any longer. OP stated that she didn't want to come without her son because she feels she already doesn't spend enough time with him. Clearly it is nor so black and white since her sister who is in the same situation than OP seems to have a different stance on the matter.

I do find it sad that some people can't seem to appreciate what an animal mean to some people usually those lonely. I don't feel this way but I have seen to my surprise how attached my mum got to her dog after she lost her husband much more than to any of the dogs we had when I was growing up and I couldn't have imagined putting pressure on her to get rid of it unless she was moving with me (obviously assuming I had an issue with the dog).

fufu_banterwaite

Pollycat wrote: »

C'mon, 'fess up.

It didn't really happen to a friend of yours, did it?

Pure Jackanory.
I'd stick with the 'jokes' if I were you. :rotfl:

I consider myself both a storyteller and comedian, a bit like a cross between Walt Disney and Bobby Ball.

tea_lover

fufu_banterwaite wrote: »

a bit like a cross between Walt Disney and Bobby Ball.

That's more sinister than the dead dog story! :eek:

Pollycat

tea_lover wrote: »

That's more sinister than the dead dog story! :eek:

Now that is funny! :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Tropez

fufu_banterwaite wrote: »

I consider myself both a storyteller and comedian, a bit like a cross between Walt Disney and Bobby Ball.

You lose some serious points for originality though. I read that same story on Snopes.com about seven years ago.