News about a dog dragging baby out of crib..
I"m not really sure how I feel about this...doesn't seem like anybody is at fault (I don't really know I don't have an infant)...but I reckon the dog is going to be in real trouble soon! If I had a yard I'd take him!
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=8135441
sorry if I've mis-filed this under general..let me know where it should go.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=8135441
sorry if I've mis-filed this under general..let me know where it should go.
Comments
How does a dog, even a dog as large as a Native American Indian Dog, retrieve a newborn baby from a crib?
Was the dog properly introduced to the child when it was brought home?
Why was the dog allowed to interact in the child's room with no supervision?
And how did the dog and baby get from inside the house (upstairs, mind you) to outside in the backyard with no one noticing?
This just seems a bit odd to me...
This whole story really doesn't sound right
When it comes down to it, the dog should not be able to access the babe at any time when you have not socialized the dog with infants. & Even then it sounds like the babe is so young the dog still shouldn't have been around it. ~
What bugged me as well though: "...he acknowledges that the animal may have to be destroyed." No offense to Americans (seriously, because it's not you. Unless you're the editor of the article.), but THAT is why I don't like American news. Why does the word have to be "destroyed" and why does the dog all of a sudden just become "the animal"? That line could have very easily been "... he acknowledges that the dog may have to be put down". Is it that difficult, or must everything turn into an over-glorified statement?
Sorry the Mini-vent, but as a writer that stuff drives me nuts.
Someone should stamp a gigantic red "FAIL" sign on the parents foreheads then have the parents fixed. I swear there should be a test you have to pass in order to have babes. [ & in order to have dogs / cats / etc!~!! ] ~
I did watch the video - and I thought he was very nonchalant about the whole thing, or at least appeared so to me.
And the poor dog was obviously not trying to hurt the baby. I wonder too, if the baby was crying and the dog tried to tend to it? Or perhaps the dog was just trying to carry off another prized possession. We had a dog who used to get really bothered by crying. She would be very motherly about it. It's such a shame all the way around.
I don't know. I guess I don't want to judge because everyone forgets things or slips up sometimes. It just seems like a really horrible and avoidable situation. If he was only four days old, then I guess the dog wasn't used to him or something.