Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
By neglect, I mean threatening to send the dog to the pound... for no sound reason. Well, the reason is out of retaliation of a relationship gone sour.
Finds out the dog's suffering from heartworms, states they will get the dog treated, but never does.
Finds out the dog shot records are expired, but fails to get them up to date.
Decides to give the dog to new owners (after someone begs and pleads for them not to send the dog to the pound) but the owner doesn't disclose to them the dog has heartworms.
This same person can't stand watching the abused animal commercials that are asking for financial support
I try to give people the benefit of the doubt, but in this case, I can't. I am looking at this superficially. While a majority of people will defend a child if the above happened, not everyone looks at animals the same way. Some don't think it's cruel to do the above. I have provided the scenarios above to some people, but sometimes the reaction is uncaring. Can you all provide me some deeper reasons/ pyschologic studies as to why the above is cruel and considered neglect? Thanks
I don't think you need deep reasons why it's cruel. It's pretty obvious. Dogs need someone to care for them, and when you bring a dog into your home you're committing yourself to do that. Dogs are loyal and would never turn their backs on their owner that way. Why someone would be touched by the sad faces of the animals in commercials, and not see the love and need for them on their own dog's face, I can't say. I guess that's where the psychological study would come in.
People who say it's just a dog, it's not important, well they were probably raised like that. It's sad when people just see dogs as personal property no different than a decorative item or a tool to use for a certain job. But in some places it's pretty common. I think those attitudes are getting a little less common, although way too slowly. If the rest of us keep speaking up we can help in a small way to get others to see things differently.
In all the years of rescue, I've asked that question myself more times than I can remember. How? How could someone be so cruel? In many of the cases, the person or people seemed incapable of understanding the pain they had put their animals through. I've had my stomach turn when picking up "owner surrenders" that were in such bad shape, its wasn't sure that they would survive. Some dogs so emotionally scarred that they always seemed to carry a haunted look in their eyes.
The only common denominator I've ever noticed was an incredible amount of self absorbtion and lack of empathy in these people. Everything about them was "me, me, me". I guess if you spend your whole life only caring about how world impacts you, you never notice how your actions are impacting the world.
This is a very big question, so I will limit my response to the situation mentioned in the OP.
In the above case, the owner sounds very uneducated, inexperienced and dependant: this isn't someone who grew up with animals, learned how to respect and care for them and/or sees them as a companion. This actually isn't an insult to that person, who is ignorant: he/she did not have the luxury that many of us had when growing up of learning to respect and care for an animal. It really is a luxury that not everyone in this country is afforded and one should always be mindful of that.
However, the real problem is that it sounds as if the animal is associated with the [broken] relationship. In such a case, neglect of the animal is displaced resentment towards the partner who left: the partner is no longer around, so the hurt person who was left takes his/her anger out on the only reminder of that person, the dog, in much the same way that a person's possessions (clothes, etc.) are sometimes defiled when a relationship ends.
It may not make sense to us but the cases in which people take their anger out on those who can't fight back are innumerable. In fact, it is a huge and, sadly, growing problem in our society. Much of this behavior goes back to negligent childhood education in which parents did not successfully teach their children to channel or handle their anger in healthy ways, resulting in people who bully the defenseless, be they other people or animals.
If a person doesn't get the proper care for their dog they likely don't have the money AND/OR they are actually cruel. Period.
Convince them if possible to let someone else adopt the dog..
They will (hopefully) then be relieved of the responsibility they cannot handle.
Get them a sack of flour to love instead.
As I think about it, this was not the first time this dog owner has done this. When he got tired of his other dog ( a sweet Lab) he drove around a neighborhood and let her loose.
Whenever I would bring it up, he would just say 'she's just a dog. She will be alright' ; however, he couldn't understand why someone would physically harm a dog. He felt that it is cruel to do so, which it is, but I don't think cruelty only falls in the realm of violence.
As I think about it, this was not the first time this dog owner has done this. When he got tired of his other dog ( a sweet Lab) he drove around a neighborhood and let her loose.
Whenever I would bring it up, he would just say 'she's just a dog. She will be alright' ; however, he couldn't understand why someone would physically harm a dog. He felt that it is cruel to do so, which it is, but I don't think cruelty only falls in the realm of violence.
No, it doesn't; negligence is a form of cruelty.
However, I think that the best way to understand the situation and/or his mindset is to consider that the issue is not black-and-white: cruelty has many degrees and forms; consequently, it exists along a spectrum rather than as an absolute. Hence, while he would be considered cruel in comparison to someone who does not neglect his/her animals, he would not considered as cruel as someone who physically or emotionally harms, or even kills, his/her animals.
The issue is also complicated by gender and gender socialization. The above comments reek to me of a man who is decidedly masculine and/or immature: there is no nurturing in him. In fact, he seems to have projected the human, masculine ideals of self-sufficiency and resilience onto the dog that he abandoned; such a rationalization was also a great way for him to dodge guilt and/or feelings of inadequacy for not being able to take care of her.
Either way, this guy really isn't ready to own a dog.
Since its against the law to Litter & in some place to dump animals....Did YOU Report him??
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Love your Dog or give it up
