This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Wise Guy on 07 November 2011 - 14:11
Have you ever heard of a dog trainer being able to evaluate a dog as being abused/mistreated so it can be seized by AC and removed from its owner, AND then be given to the same dog trainer?
(Note: no history of abuse/neglect exists aside from said dog trainer's evaluation. The dog is healthy, of a normal weight, well-trained, licensed, fully vetted, and had no aggression/behavioral problems prior to being seized.)
Do you think this action poses a conflict of interest?
Should this be enough to remove the dog from its owner?
(Note: no history of abuse/neglect exists aside from said dog trainer's evaluation. The dog is healthy, of a normal weight, well-trained, licensed, fully vetted, and had no aggression/behavioral problems prior to being seized.)
Do you think this action poses a conflict of interest?
Should this be enough to remove the dog from its owner?
by BlackthornGSD on 07 November 2011 - 14:11
If it's already been done, does it matter what anyone thinks?
Of course it is a possible conflict of interests.
Of course it is a possible conflict of interests.
by SitasMom on 07 November 2011 - 15:11
Animal Control has too much power.
by Two Moons on 07 November 2011 - 15:11
I have never heard of a dog trainer being used to determine abuse through evaluation so that animal control can seize the animal regardless of who would take the animal.
Should this be enough to remove the dog from its owner?
Hell no, not now , not ever.
You need to prove abuse, not take some idiots word for it because he claims to have evaluated a dog.
Conflict of interest?
How about a violate of a persons rights and due process?
If this kind of thing is going on and people are doing nothing about it That's just plain sad.
Should this be enough to remove the dog from its owner?
Hell no, not now , not ever.
You need to prove abuse, not take some idiots word for it because he claims to have evaluated a dog.
Conflict of interest?
How about a violate of a persons rights and due process?
If this kind of thing is going on and people are doing nothing about it That's just plain sad.
by VonIsengard on 07 November 2011 - 15:11
Absolutely a conflict of interest. If I wanted a dog in that position, I would actually refuse to evaluate so as not to jeopardize the adoption process for me.
That is, of course, if the facts the OP presents are completely true with no major omissions.
That is, of course, if the facts the OP presents are completely true with no major omissions.
by Two Moons on 07 November 2011 - 15:11
Is this dog in the hands of it's owner or a shelter?
by hexe on 07 November 2011 - 18:11
How the hell can a trainer determine whether or not a dog is being 'abused/mistreated', unless said trainer actually witnesses the abuse or mistreatment themselves? You can't make that call just based on a dog's behaviors--I've known dogs that were hand-shy from the moment they first opened their eyes and could focus them on something, without anything having happened to them to cause that behavior.
This is one instance where the fact that the law views dogs as property might work to the dog owner's advantage--if the owner is willing to take the case into the courts. Property can't just be seized and redistributed by a government entity without due process, and without proof of just cause...in this case, the owner would need the have a opposing evaluations to present as rebuttal to the claims of the trainer animal control used. The dog can probably be recovered, but it's not going to happen without a fight, and probably not without the help of an attorney.
This is one instance where the fact that the law views dogs as property might work to the dog owner's advantage--if the owner is willing to take the case into the courts. Property can't just be seized and redistributed by a government entity without due process, and without proof of just cause...in this case, the owner would need the have a opposing evaluations to present as rebuttal to the claims of the trainer animal control used. The dog can probably be recovered, but it's not going to happen without a fight, and probably not without the help of an attorney.
by VonIsengard on 07 November 2011 - 21:11
It depends on the abuse. It is true that many dogs are hand shy, jumpy, uncomfortable around men, etc. without ever having been abused. There is also a big difference between a dog who has been badly negelcted physically and socially (a form of abuse), a dog who has been handled unfairly/too roughly, and a dog that has been very seriously harmed and beaten within in an inch of its life. The tricky part is various temperment issues can create the exact same symptoms in a dog's behavior. An experienced trainer can make an educated guess, but without seeing it firsthand, it really is all speculation.
Since I'm on a bit of a tangent, anyway- it's interesting to note that most dogs I have seen or worked with who have been severely harmed through deliberate violence (broken ribs/legs, mouth taped shut, thrown from a moving car, kicked, tazed... yes, these are all actual cases) usually become aggressive when people try to touch them. The fear and complete lack of trust makes them lash out. Now, dogs who have been treated with an unfair hand, but without the owner going to extremes, and dogs whose socialization has been badly neglected, will be more likely to show the more cowering, fearful behaviors.
But as hexe points out- without knowing the facts, the dog could have a faulty temperment gentically and show the same behaviors.
But wise guy is saying the dog is cared for and shows no sign of abuse, if this is true, that would be very disturbing.
Since I'm on a bit of a tangent, anyway- it's interesting to note that most dogs I have seen or worked with who have been severely harmed through deliberate violence (broken ribs/legs, mouth taped shut, thrown from a moving car, kicked, tazed... yes, these are all actual cases) usually become aggressive when people try to touch them. The fear and complete lack of trust makes them lash out. Now, dogs who have been treated with an unfair hand, but without the owner going to extremes, and dogs whose socialization has been badly neglected, will be more likely to show the more cowering, fearful behaviors.
But as hexe points out- without knowing the facts, the dog could have a faulty temperment gentically and show the same behaviors.
But wise guy is saying the dog is cared for and shows no sign of abuse, if this is true, that would be very disturbing.
by Pirates Lair on 07 November 2011 - 21:11
Define Abuse?
Most Humane/SPCA/Animal Control, State or Provincial Laws require a minimum care of adequate food water & shelter.
Physical Abuse is another story, and a little thing called Evidence is required.
Kim
Most Humane/SPCA/Animal Control, State or Provincial Laws require a minimum care of adequate food water & shelter.
Physical Abuse is another story, and a little thing called Evidence is required.
Kim
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top