Ellen Degeneres under fire for giving away dog

[2luvmy]

I understand that the rescues have rules in place for the protection of the animal that they invested time and money into, but some of the rules make no sense.

I had to adopt one of our dogs from a shelter outside of our city because our local no-kill shelter will not adopt out dogs unless the owners have a fenced in yard. There are a lot of small rules that doesn't allow good people to enjoy the companionship of special animals.

 

[BOESP]

I understand that the rescues have rules in place for the protection of the animal that they invested time and money into, but some of the rules make no sense.

I had to adopt one of our dogs from a shelter outside of our city because our local no-kill shelter will not adopt out dogs unless the owners have a fenced in yard. There are a lot of small rules that doesn't allow good people to enjoy the companionship of special animals.

Fenced-in yards are for the safety of the dog and they also help ensure a pet doesn't destroy someone else's property. Chained dogs don't have much of a life. Neither do those who run loose and get stolen, eat something poisoned, get run over, or any number of other gruesome outcomes. If the owner only allows their pup out on a leash that's one thing, but to let them roam free creates many problems.

Ellen reneged on a contract. All she had to do was call the adoption agency and put the dog first and not herself.

 

[eve]

This is form over substance. The important thing is that Ellen, a great person, found the dog a good home. Absolutely silly to take the dog away without cause that it wasn't in a good home. This would turn me off from going through an agency such as this to get a dog.

Eve

 

[2luvmy]

Fenced-in yards are for the safety of the dog and they also help ensure a pet doesn't destroy someone else's property. Chained dogs don't have much of a life. Neither do those who run loose and get stolen, eat something poisoned, get run over, or any number of other gruesome outcomes. If the owner only allows their pup out on a leash that's one thing, but to let them roam free creates many problems.

Ellen reneged on a contract. All she had to do was call the adoption agency and put the dog first and not herself.

I understand fenced yards are for their safety, but I don't have a fenced in yard. My dogs don't roam, they are not chained up all day, they enjoy walks and playtime at the dog park. I just think some shelters are eliminating a lot of potential homes based on some overly strict criteria. I am sure there are plenty of elderly and others that live in apartments, condos, etc. that would like to resuce a pet.

 

[BOESP]

This is form over substance. The important thing is that Ellen, a great person, found the dog a good home. Absolutely silly to take the dog away without cause that it wasn't in a good home. This would turn me off from going through an agency such as this to get a dog.

Eve

Allowing Ellen to give away the dog would also set a precedent that might not always end up with giving a dog to a good home. Also, suppose the dog doesn't work out in the second home?

Ellen is no better or worse than anyone else. Being a celebrity doesn't mean you get special treatment. Animal rescue groups have the best interest of the animal at heart, not the best interest of a human who may or may not put the animal first and live up to their signed agreement. There are reasons the rescue groups do the things they do and the general population may not always agree with those reasons. Many do make it hard to adopt but that isn't always a bad thing.

 

[Amraann]

One rescue agency I wanted to adopt from turned me down...why? Because my husband and I work outside the home and the dog would be alone for 10 hours each day. Well... I don't think they are going to find too many people in California that can afford a home and have one parent at home all day. That rules out about 80 percent of the potential adopters! My two doggies have each other to play with at home during the day and they are just fine.

That is just ridiculous!! How many animals are in turn put down?
A rescue can only house so many animals at once .... By not placing animals others are put to sleep.
Plenty of people have pets and work outside the home.

 

[BOESP]

I understand fenced yards are for their safety, but I don't have a fenced in yard. My dogs don't roam, they are not chained up all day, they enjoy walks and playtime at the dog park. I just think some shelters are eliminating a lot of potential homes based on some overly strict criteria. I am sure there are plenty of elderly and others that live in apartments, condos, etc. that would like to resuce a pet.

Overall, the rescue group's loyalty lies with the best interest for the animal. It is commendable that you always walk your pet on a leash (I believe I mentioned leashes in the original post as being acceptable to my viewpoint). Rescue groups have to make generalized rules that provide for the safety of the dog. There can't be a lot of ifs, ands, or buts, or we'll-make-an-exception-for-you rules. Also, please consider that in many communities there are leash laws. The rescue groups can not operate under guidelines that do not take into consideration local ordinances. Not everyone even walks their dogs let alone on leashes unless they live in a large to moderate-sized town. There's a lot to consider with the issues of rescue adoptions. It isn't for everyone and especially not for those who won't live up to their contract -- the contracts are written as they are for good reasons.

 

[BOESP]

One rescue agency I wanted to adopt from turned me down...why? Because my husband and I work outside the home and the dog would be alone for 10 hours each day. Well... I don't think they are going to find too many people in California that can afford a home and have one parent at home all day. That rules out about 80 percent of the potential adopters! My two doggies have each other to play with at home during the day and they are just fine.

That is a discouraging rule but maybe that particular agency has found that "only dogs" left alone (particularly rescue dogs) tear up furniture and carpet and pee and poop everywhere. The unsuspecting new "parent" comes in and decides to whip the dog senseless for doing what is "normal" dog behavior when left alone in a house. Not everyone is understanding of this type animal behavior.

I'm not trying to sound mean or hateful here but there are two sides to the story. There is good and bad on both sides. If it weren't for these rescue groups and shelters there would be a LOT of abandoned, sick, mistreated and abused animals that would have no hope of ever having a decent life. Very often these folks spend their own money for health care for the animals they are trying to find homes for. Many of them are in pitiful shape when rescued. They'd otherwise be left to starve, suffer and die on their own without the groups and shelters. Please, those of you who feel strongly about this, write your local and state politicians and bring it to their attention that there is a pet over-population problem in your region. Make suggestions about how to solve the root of the problem and follow up. Believe me, the rescue groups are not the bad guys here.

 

[Squishified]

I never knew these rescue agencies kept tabs on the animal after it has been placed in a home. I'm glad nobody comes to my house to check on my pets!

 

[Hopeful One]

This is form over substance. The important thing is that Ellen, a great person, found the dog a good home. Absolutely silly to take the dog away without cause that it wasn't in a good home. This would turn me off from going through an agency such as this to get a dog.

Eve

I completely agree. I think this is absolutely ridiculous.

 

[lovemykids]

Turn Ellen on....she's talking about it.

 

[BOESP]

I never knew these rescue agencies kept tabs on the animal after it has been placed in a home. I'm glad nobody comes to my house to check on my pets!

I don't know of any groups who physically visit unless it was a part of the agreement the adoptive parent signed in the beginning. Some areas have laws that forbid such activity and it could be trespassing. Usually, rescue will do a telephone follow-up and ask how things are going and if you still have the dog and ask if you are happy with the adoption. Any unannounced or surprise visits should be reported, unless you agreed to it in the beginning. The rescue groups operate very nearly like baby adoptions and rescue is required to follow the law.

 

[Paladin]

Even though it may not seem like it, I think the organization was just looking after the best interests of the dog. I'm sure the hairdresser and her family were a fine match for the dog, but from the organization's perspective, they don't necessarily know that.

It sounds like they prefer to know where their placed dogs are located, and by passing this dog around they lose track. Imagine if for some reason the dog was too much for the hairdresser and in turn they gave it to another family. At this point it would be harder to track down the dog and ensure it's getting the proper love and care that it deserves.

Reading the quotes from Ellen, I've gained alot of respect for her. I absolutely love the fact that she told the truth on her show. It shows she obviously cared for that dog enough to find it a good home, and it shows that she's human too in that she made a mistake not reading the entirety of her contract.

I hope everything can be worked out and that Iggy is somehow placed with the hairdresser and her two daughters.

 

[luthersmama]

I would never be allowed to get a "rescue" pet. My cats are allowed to go outdoor and my dogs have access to a fenced pen during the day, but are then allowed to frolic in my unfenced 7-acre yard when we are home. They are all happy and healthy, but I would be regarded as a bad parent by the rescue folks.

 

[Lauren]

They would probably make me get rid of my kids before I could get an animal from them. Picky Picky Picky......

 

[Monica Mouse]

I don't post very often, but I find it ridiculous the media has made such a huge deal out of this. I think we all understand why the agencies have rules, but she found the dog a good home, didn't read the fine print, made a mistake, end of story. Ball in their court and if they are smart, they will end this media circus, give the girl back the dog and everyone is happy - clap clap. If I got crucified the way Ellen has for the dozens of times I failed to read the "fine print," I'd be hung by the nearest tree or stoned to death by now...

 

[Dena]

Not at home right now, what did Ellen say about it?

I have adopted 2 cats from one shelter, so I don't have a whole lot of experience in this. However, I did have to sign a paper and it included a rule that I could not give the animal away.

I think this is silly since you can buy a pet from a pet store and there are no rules attached to it. If an animal needs a home, it needs a home.
We adopted a rabbit over the Spring and it isn't working out. I sent an e-mail out to friends and coworkers and my brother actually wants him. I did this because I don't want to bring him to a shelter and certainly won't post an ad on the Internet.
I think it's wrong to be in trouble for wanting to find a good home for an animal, especially if the home is a good one. Regardless of her reasons, if there are problems, then it's not good for the animal. I really want to keep my rabbit, but it would be selfish, IMO, since he doesn't get the attention he deserves and if someone else can do that, then it's better for my pet. In the end, that's what matters.

 

[tlstcb]

How anyone can say it is in the best interest of the pet to be taken back to a shelter and away fom a loving child is beyond me. If someone is seen as exceptable enough to adopt and raise a pet they should also be qualified to find it a good home if it does not work out. If the pet shelter thinks they aren't qualified enough to make that decision then they should not let the person adopt. Poor puppy, just got deprived of the love of that little girl in its best interest.

 

[catsmeow]

While I completely agree that the dog was probably in a great home when Ellen gave the dog to her hairdresser, this probably had a lot to do with the guidelines that the organization has to follow. I know that 2 years ago when I fostered 10 puppies, I had sent all of the paper work from the people to the rescue and about 6 months later I got an email asking if I could re-fax them the paperwork for one of the 'adoptee's'. They were getting ready to file all of their paperwork for the year and could not locate the paperwork for one of the pups.
They have to dot all of their 'i's' and cross all of their 't's in order to keep their nonprofit status and keep their funding and it may have been something as simple as since she came on air about Iggy being given away, now their paperwork was not correct because the dog was no longer in the home that it was 'placed' in and this could have placed them in jeapordy. Personally, I still believe the group should DEFINITELY allow this family the opportunity to adopt this dog before any other prospective family but I do know that they have to follow guidelines in order to keep their nonprofit status.
I know that many think that rescues are very strict but for the most part they try to protect the animals as much as possible and place them in good homes that will match them.

 

[Paladin]

I don't post very often, but I find it ridiculous the media has made such a huge deal out of this. I think we all understand why the agencies have rules, but she found the dog a good home, didn't read the fine print, made a mistake, end of story. Ball in their court and if they are smart, they will end this media circus, give the girl back the dog and everyone is happy - clap clap. If I got crucified the way Ellen has for the dozens of times I failed to read the "fine print," I'd be hung by the nearest tree or stoned to death by now...

How was she crucified? I only read this article so I don't know if there was any other fallout from it.