ZOMBIE THREAD ALERT: This thread hasn't been posted on for a while.

In thinking that a couple living in a one bed flat with 2 kids should not have decided to get 2 dogs ?

(253 Posts)
nevereatbrownsnow Mon 08-Feb-10 21:45:53

Am watching tower block of commons and really don't see the logic in this.

Both dogs are peeing everywhere, those children have no beds and there little playspace is saturated in dog urine.

Children deserve a bed at least and cleanish floors to play on, makes me feel sad

Seems selfish, they have little money and feeding two dogs of that size is not cheap.

Feel really sorry for the poor girl in temporary accomodation tho. sad

onagar Mon 08-Feb-10 22:04:19

It's what people do if they are short of money and space and can barely look after the kids. They get a dog.

Never understood it myself.

Cadelaide Mon 08-Feb-10 22:12:31

When I was in the small maternity unit after having DS the woman in the next bed had a big row with her baby's father. She stormed out of the unit after him, leaving the baby behind, and returned about 30 mins later.

Anyway, they were reconciled and the next day he came to see her bearing gifts, namely a puppy.

I just don't know what to say, really.

Vallhala Mon 08-Feb-10 22:16:23

I don't know the programme so have no idea of the background but is it the case that they got the dogs after moving into a flat or before?

If afterwards, they need their heads examining and a kick up the ass, if before, maybe they are seeking to move on but took a flat in the short term (perhaps in emergency) and are desperate not to give up loved dogs.

Many years ago my first dog and I moved into a flat for 6 months owing to having no suitable alternative. Not fun but we coped, though he never peed on the floor! To let the children live without beds is another matter - thats deplorable. And is it just me or do such people often claim not to be able to afford beds but have a flash TV, Sky subscription, money for a night out etc?

dayday Mon 08-Feb-10 22:22:42

i had a two bedroom house with four small children, me and the kids all slept in one bedroom. I dont think i was 'common' it was a happy home were we spent alot of quality time together and were happy and grateful for everything.My kids are well mannered and behaved and the kids who have everything r ungrateful and dont appreciate anything. Think ive gone off the topic its just the idea of u looking down at these 'common folk' which wound me up.

pooexplosionsareimproving Mon 08-Feb-10 22:26:09

Unless you had dogs pissing all over your kids toys, you can be sure no-one is talking about you dayday.

Vallhala Mon 08-Feb-10 22:29:30

Ditto, poo (may I call you poo? ).

This (hopefully) isn't about class, it's about common sense, decent treatment of children and the intelligence of having dogs in a flat.

amber1979 Tue 09-Feb-10 10:08:29

Shouldn't it be about why the council have failed to adequately house them? Shouldn't this family be in a two bed room flat at the least?

NotAnOtter Tue 09-Feb-10 10:09:24

dp said that...
i said that he was being unreasonable

sarah293 Tue 09-Feb-10 10:11:24

Message withdrawn

pooexplosionsareimproving Tue 09-Feb-10 10:14:17

Of course Val grin

Council duty to house them? Well yes, but that doesn't mean you negate your own responsibility to behave like a minimally decent parent. It wouldn't matter if I had to sleep on the street with my children, you can be sure I'd make sure I didn't bring dogs to piss all over their cardboard boxes!

I don't see how they would be much different in a 2 bed anyway, thats a red herring IMO.

expatinscotland Tue 09-Feb-10 10:15:23

i agree with poo.

yanbu.

amber1979 Tue 09-Feb-10 10:19:27

"I don't see how they would be much different in a 2 bed anyway, thats a red herring IMO"

Well, at least they could have a bedroom for themselves and one for the kids... Basic requirements I would have thought, considering that we are not actually a third world country.

Sounds like you want to punish them for being "common".

expatinscotland Tue 09-Feb-10 10:31:28

Why does it always have to be us v. them and common v. ponce and all that?

Whenever someone's values are so skewed that they keep big ol dogs like that when they can't afford to feed or house their children appropriately (because that's teh government's job hmm) they need lessons about personal responsibility and priorites, be they living in a crumbling palace or a one-bed council flat.

What's responsibility have to do with 'class'?

pooexplosionsareimproving Tue 09-Feb-10 10:33:35

Thats ridiculous amber and completely unwarranted. Punish them for being "common"? Thats offensive. angry
Its also offensive to all of us who live in less than ideal circumstances and yet manage to actually be half decent parents. It has nothing to do with money or class whatsover.

Do you have any idea what you are talking about, or are you just flailing wildly? hmm

EcoMouse Tue 09-Feb-10 10:34:09

YANBU.

However, someone commented about it often being struggling families who get dogs? It often is and I can't say I disagree with that.
It can be so enriching for all concerned and when children have little, a dog can be everything.

Still, in this instance it doesn't seem healthy for the dogs or the children.

People are usually trying to do the right thing, life just goes very wrong sometimes.

amber1979 Tue 09-Feb-10 10:36:38

It is the governments job actually. They should fullfill this responsibility in two ways:

1, Keep employment/education/housing costs at a level by which the majority can afford to house themselves.

2, Private a safety net of adequate housing for those who fall through the net.

The government is failling on both of those. The gap between rich and poor is getting worse.

In the 1950's, my Nana was judged to be living in over-crowded conditions and given a three bed flat. Two adults, two kids, one bed flat.

How things have changed.

GypsyMoth Tue 09-Feb-10 10:37:36

i'm on benefits with 5 dc....but nobody really knows. we don't look in any way poor,simply because there is no need. they need to take some pride in themselves. and their home...why should they be re-housed if they cant take care of what they have? there really is NO excuse.

i manage very well on the benefits we recieve...i save for nice items,dont waste money on cigarettes or dogs which are not necessities!!

i would love a dog!!

expatinscotland Tue 09-Feb-10 10:39:07

It's also one's personal responsibility to do what he/she can to look after one's kids properly.

When you can't feed them or you put dog maintenance about feeding them as well as you possibly can or the dogs eat into the food budget, then the responsible person takes them to dog's trust or what have you and lets them know they can no longer afford to keep them.

pooexplosionsareimproving Tue 09-Feb-10 10:39:50

But amber what on earth has that got to do with the point at hand? You haven't said! confused

expatinscotland Tue 09-Feb-10 10:41:47

Amen, tiffany!

Thing I hate about that show is a) not a word about the working poor, much less featuring a working poor family b) bitching. The gal last night who did nothing but bitch about asylum seekers. She lost a council house over rent arrears. Who do you do that unless you really fuck up? We're HA tenants. We don't get LHA/HB but plenty do and you get the benefit sent directly to the landlord! If you get into arrears b/c HB cocked up, it's very easily sorted and the HA bends over backwards to keep the family in their home.

LoveBeingAMummy Tue 09-Feb-10 10:43:18

imvho the problem is more than just the dogs. Anyone who spends money on treats for them selves when their children are going without is a twat. Whats really sad is the fact that animal workers would problem be able to do more and quicker re these dogs and how they are living than what will ever be done for the children.

amber1979 Tue 09-Feb-10 10:43:34

" But amber what on earth has that got to do with the point at hand? You haven't said! confused"

I just think that it's a sad indictment of the world we live in, when the fact that they stupidly have two dogs is considered more worthy of comment than the fact that this is a glaring example of how we have been royally shafted by the powers that be regarding housing.

Right, getting off my soapbox lol

EcoMouse Tue 09-Feb-10 10:45:56

Amber, I agree, housing's a difficult one.

There are currently many under occupied properties because people have the right to remain in council/social housing accommodation. I agree with the right to remain but I'm experiencing first hand the issues with lack of larger properties confused many families are stuck in accommodation that's too small while many people rattle around in larger properties.

GypsyMoth Tue 09-Feb-10 10:46:17

my mil had a council place from the 50's onwards....and the council came round once a year to check the house was being cared for. this should still happen now in my opinion.

people should look after their homes. its not hard

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now