SPCA: And you were complaining about the RDCO?

[Amarow121]

The couple never said they got the dog from the SPCA...and the dog was recieving veterinary care.

So then why are you upset with the SPCA?

A couple (we'll ignore their age) adopts a pet through whatever means.
They get their dog vet care, but don't bother to spay it.
The dog gets pregnant (because the owners are unwilling to spay it, and also unwilling to keep the dog indoors while in heat).
The owners (correctly) realize they are in over their head.
The owners (CORRECTLY) surrender the dog to an organization that is willing to clean up the mess they created, taking care of the dog the way it should have been cared for from the get go.


What part of this am I to be outraged about?

[zookeeper]

Janalta, an animal with a condition is a lot of work as well a financially and emotionally exhausting. They didn't notice the dog was pregnant. I am not suggesting people of a certain age shouldn't have pets, I also know many with pets that say when they go they are smart enough not to get another one (age, time, responsibility, money etc). Making out like the SPCA has done something wrong because a senior couple gave up their rights to a dog they couldn't take care of NOW is letting emotions get in the way of what truly is best for this dog. I am not a huge fan of the SPCA but in this matter I think the interests of this dog were taken in to consideration. I am no where near 79 years old and have already decided that my door to animals must close, one gets to an age when it becomes unfair to the animal.

[janalta]

So then why are you upset with the SPCA?

A couple (we'll ignore their age) adopts a pet through whatever means.
They get their dog vet care, but don't bother to spay it.
The dog gets pregnant (because the owners are unwilling to spay it, and also unwilling to keep the dog indoors while in heat).
The owners (correctly) realize they are in over their head.
The owners (CORRECTLY) surrender the dog to an organization that is willing to clean up the mess they created, taking care of the dog the way it should have been cared for from the get go.


What part of this am I to be outraged about?

No, they did not get around to having the dog spayed yet...and they openly admit what a huge mistake that was.
they realize their mistake....so....they should not be allowed to have their pet due to this one mistake?

They are worried about the health and safety of their pet when she delivers....so...not knowing about whelping or newborn puppy care...they ask for help from an animal welfare organization to get they dog and pups through this safely.
They are told that the shelter will not help the dog unless they sign the papers.
They make it very clear they do NOT want to give up their pet and are told that they can, for a price, adopt the dog back after the pups are born.

They are then told by the shelter that the dog has already been adopted out to a new home that is better able to care for it....that the dog is young and they are too old.
There is absolutely no proof whatsoever that this couple did not have the means to care for the dog, provide veterinary care and medication....they simply did not know how to care for a whelping dog and newborn pups.
They were mislead by the SPCA from the start.

[janalta]

Janalta, an animal with a condition is a lot of work as well a financially and emotionally exhausting. They didn't notice the dog was pregnant. I am not suggesting people of a certain age shouldn't have pets, I also know many with pets that say when they go they are smart enough not to get another one (age, time, responsibility, money etc). Making out like the SPCA has done something wrong because a senior couple gave up their rights to a dog they couldn't take care of NOW is letting emotions get in the way of what truly is best for this dog. I am not a huge fan of the SPCA but in this matter I think the interests of this dog were taken in to consideration. I am no where near 79 years old and have already decided that my door to animals must close, one gets to an age when it becomes unfair to the animal.

They knew the dog was pregnant. They prepared a nest box for her in advance. They then became worried about her safety and health because they were inexperienced in whelping or caring for pups.

These people had rescued this dog and had nursed her back to health.

They were not aware that they were surrendering her permanently.

[Amarow121]

No, they did not get around to having the dog spayed yet...and they openly admit what a huge mistake that was.
they realize their mistake....so....they should not be allowed to have their pet due to this one mistake?

They are worried about the health and safety of their pet when she delivers....so...not knowing about whelping or newborn puppy care...they ask for help from an animal welfare organization to get they dog and pups through this safely.
They are told that the shelter will not help the dog unless they sign the papers.
They make it very clear they do NOT want to give up their pet and are told that they can, for a price, adopt the dog back after the pups are born.

They are then told by the shelter that the dog has already been adopted out to a new home that is better able to care for it....that the dog is young and they are too old.
There is absolutely no proof whatsoever that this couple did not have the means to care for the dog, provide veterinary care and medication....they simply did not know how to care for a whelping dog and newborn pups.
They were mislead by the SPCA from the start.

When has the SPCA ever advertised itself as an organization that takes your pets when it's inconvenient for you?
I would say that Bill and Ardyth's friend who recommended the SPCA did the best thing possible - got a dog away from a home that was poorly suited to dog ownership.

There is ample proof this couple did not have means to care for this dog. They were unable to get her spayed. They were unable to recognize the signs of a dog in heat. They were unable to keep her from getting pregnant. They were unable to think of a better way of caring for the dog than to drop her off at the SPCA at the last minute.
None of those things indicate responsible dog ownership to me.

And since you seem to want to bring their age into the equation, let's address that too.
They themselves listed their age as a reason why they couldn't properly care for the dog in the first place. Why are they upset that one of the reasons they gave to the SPCA is now being brought up as a reason why the SPCA won't give them the dog they neglected back to them?

[dlarrivee]

There is absolutely no proof whatsoever that this couple did not have the means to care for the dog,

Except that they surrendered it to the SPCA...

Good thing you're not a lawyer Janalta, you'd be terribly embarrassed in court.

[janalta]

Except that they surrendered it to the SPCA...

Good thing you're not a lawyer Janalta, you'd be terribly embarrassed in court.

They were MISLEAD into believing it was for temporary care...they were very clear that they did not want to give up their pet. They were told the dog could not be helped if they didn't sign the papers. They were told that they could just re-adopt her after the pups were weaned.

And Amarow...no where did they ever state that their age was a factor ! That was sprung on them when they went to readopt her after 6 weeks, as instructed by the shelter.
They did NOT say they were unable to get her spayed...just that they were sorry they had not taken her in to get it done yet. They did NOT say they did not know she was in heat.
Do you know how she got pregnant? Do you have information that they just let her out to roam free? Do you know for a fact that she was not in a securely fenced yard that a rougue stray may have scaled the fence to get at her without their knowledge?
You sure are all quick to make up allegations against this couple.

[Captain Awesome]

When kids get their parents to buy a puppy for them but decide it's too much of a hassle to walk the dog in the morning and tell their parents they don't want to do it - should they be given another puppy?

You give this couple a dog, and the next medical problem they have, they'll run back to SPCA - because they didn't know dogs get sick, or cause they're sorry they didn't know how to help the dog, or have no money to help the dog. But hey, let's give them the dog back, they seem responsible.

[Bsuds]

No, they did not get around to having the dog spayed yet...and they openly admit what a huge mistake that was.
they realize their mistake....so....they should not be allowed to have their pet due to this one mistake?

They are worried about the health and safety of their pet when she delivers....so...not knowing about whelping or newborn puppy care...they ask for help from an animal welfare organization

They could have gone to a Vet for help with the birth of the puppies but the chose to take her to the SPCA.
That indicates to me of another poor choice by these people, of which they made several.
Your continual bashing of the SPCA does nothing to help.

[janalta]

They could have gone to a Vet for help with the birth of the puppies but the chose to take her to the SPCA.
That indicates to me of another poor choice by these people, of which they made several.
Your continual bashing of the SPCA does nothing to help.

You're right, they could have and should have. They were given poor advice, no doubt about that.
I have not continually bashed the SPCA at all....just pointing out the facts...this case was handled wrong from the start.
The couple was mislead into thinking this was a temporary surrender for maternity care....they did not understand they were signing their dog away forever. The SPCA staff should have made sure of their intentions and should not have made false statements about them being able to come back in for her.
The staff member that told the couple that they were too old to have her back should be fired...age discrimination is against the law.
The SPCA has made severaL conflicting statements...not bashing, a fact.

[Amarow121]

They were MISLEAD into believing it was for temporary care...they were very clear that they did not want to give up their pet. They were told the dog could not be helped if they didn't sign the papers. They were told that they could just re-adopt her after the pups were weaned.

They were not told by the SPCA that they could readopt her after the puppies were weaned. They were told that the SPCA would note on Fifi's file that the people who surrendered her would be interested in her, once she was done with her puppies. That is not a guarantee. That's just a guarantee that they will make a note on the file.

Again, where did this couple get the idea that the SPCA was a service for dog owners to dump their pets when owning a pet was difficult or expensive?

And Amarow...no where did they ever state that their age was a factor ! That was sprung on them when they went to readopt her after 6 weeks, as instructed by the shelter.

You've got me there - I was incorrect, I'd understood that they'd listed their age as a reason why they couldn't cope with a pregnancy and delivery. As I understand it from watching the clip, they stated that they couldn't cope with the pregnancy and delivery, and didn't mention anything about their age.

They did NOT say they were unable to get her spayed...just that they were sorry they had not taken her in to get it done yet. They did NOT say they did not know she was in heat.

I'm glad they realize not getting the dog spayed was a mistake. Perhaps the next dog they own, they will recall this incident and learn from it.

Do you know how she got pregnant? Do you have information that they just let her out to roam free? Do you know for a fact that she was not in a securely fenced yard that a rougue stray may have scaled the fence to get at her without their knowledge?
You sure are all quick to make up allegations against this couple.

Leaving your un-spayed, in heat female dog in a secured backyard doesn't take the onus off of you if the dog gets pregnant. If your dog gets pregnant THAT'S YOUR RESPONSIBILITY AS A DOG OWNER. I don't care how it happens, IT'S YOUR RESPONSIBILITY!
If it's something you can't deal with, then get your dog spayed. If your dog gets pregnant anyway, then speak to your vet. They can terminate a pregnancy.

[Bpeep]

Do you know how she got pregnant?

Umm... this is about the easiest question to answer I ever saw...

As for the peeps who surrendered their dog to the spca, they surrendered it. At that moment they gave up all claims and rights to the dog.

[GenuinelyInterested]

Umm... this is about the easiest question to answer I ever saw...

As for the peeps who surrendered their dog to the spca, they surrendered it. At that moment they gave up all claims and rights to the dog.

Sometimes the easiest answer is the best. I agree totally with the above.

[zebrawoman]

You're right, they could have and should have. They were given poor advice, no doubt about that.
I have not continually bashed the SPCA at all....just pointing out the facts...this case was handled wrong from the start.
The couple was mislead into thinking this was a temporary surrender for maternity care....they did not understand they were signing their dog away forever. The SPCA staff should have made sure of their intentions and should not have made false statements about them being able to come back in for her.
The staff member that told the couple that they were too old to have her back should be fired...age discrimination is against the law.
The SPCA has made severaL conflicting statements...not bashing, a fact.

Janalta, I think the one of the reasons that it's being suggested that you are bashing the SPCA is that you seem to be labouring under the idea that prime responsibility for the entire fiasco lays at the feet of the SPCA. You seem to be acting as if the couple had no agency in any the decisions they made. I'm suggesting that the the couple made numerous and persistent mistakes in the handling of their dog, sought advice from poor and/or ill-informed sources and completely misunderstood what they were doing when they surrendered their dog to the SPCA. if these folks were recent immigrants or spoke English as a secondary language I might understand their actions but that doesn't seem to be the case here. They had the ability to make different choices and they didn't make them. I fail to see why this is the SPCA's fault.

[gardengirl]

They could have gone to a Vet for help with the birth of the puppies but the chose to take her to the SPCA.
That indicates to me of another poor choice by these people, of which they made several.
Your continual bashing of the SPCA does nothing to help.

You're right, they could have and should have. They were given poor advice, no doubt about that.
I have not continually bashed the SPCA at all....just pointing out the facts...this case was handled wrong from the start.
The couple was mislead into thinking this was a temporary surrender for maternity care....they did not understand they were signing their dog away forever. The SPCA staff should have made sure of their intentions and should not have made false statements about them being able to come back in for her.
The staff member that told the couple that they were too old to have her back should be fired...age discrimination is against the law.
The SPCA has made severaL conflicting statements...not bashing, a fact.

I think someone at the SPCA made a mistake. They appear to have not explained things adequately to this couple.
It doesn't sound like they understood that by surrendering the dog, it would then become available for anyone to adopt.

As for their age, I don't see what that has to do with anything. My mother is 79 and gets up at 5:30 every morning to walk 3 miles. We got her a dog about 2 years ago and she is the best pet parent you could imagine. Everyone in the family also loves the dog and should anything ever happen to mom, the family would pretty much fight over who got to take the pup.