If one spouse wants to rehome a dog, and the other doesn't, who should get their way?

I genuinely could not continue a relationship with someone who would just discard an animal like that. I would think so little of them as a person that I’d realise we weren’t compatible. Some exceptions apart such as aggression, etc after training advice had been sought.

I’m not a dog person or even a pet person. And I think rehoming or euthanising an animal is far from the worst thing that can happen to it.

But this is completely unfair to the dog - a commitment was made to the animal, the drawbacks of which are very obvious to anyone with any sense. It’s not like dog is aggressive or you had a massive change of life circumstances. It’s not fair to pull out just because dog is hard work and curtails your freedom - sometimes in life you take on things you regret or things are harder than you expect but you just have to stick with it because that’s what decent people do.

Who’s the main carer for the dog - the re-homer or the keeper?

This ^

Agree with many other comments about commitment to pet ownership, should be in it for the long haul and so on.

But if, for example, it was a case of DH/dad and DC wanting a dog, DW/mum not wanting the dog, mum being overruled, and lo and behold mum ends up becoming (as is so often the case) the main carer for the dog despite never actually wanting the poor dog in the first place....then actually I think rehoming would be fair.

At the end of the day it's about the dog's quality of life.

If you don't have the dog already then the person who doesn't want one gets their way. If you already have the dog then the person who wants to keep the dog gets their unless there are proper mitigating circumstances.

As you already have the dog then I'd expect a bloody good excuse from a spouse to rehome it.

In cases where a couple disagree on having another child say, on here the consensus is that the one who doesn't want one should get their way. Would the same principle apply here?

As another poster pointed out, this principle only applies at the stage of thinking about getting a dog.

Well, in order to keep the dog, some changes need to be made. Can you sit down and discuss how to make those changes without getting into an argument?

If the appropriate changes really can’t be made, the dog would be better off with owners who can adapt to its needs.

Unless one person bought the dog off a bloke in the pub and brought it home as a fait accompli then I'm guessing this was discussed .

As it is not an aggressive dog , just too much work and someone simply CBA then shame on that person.
Animals are not disposable toys and it is not as hough Rescues are queuing up to take your unwanted dog .

Who is it in your house that wants to rehome the dog

Not sure what you thought taking on a puppy would entail tbh.

Sounds like you haven't had the poor thing long, the first few months are really hard.

Not sure what the solution is here because you either put the poor pup to be rehomed and probably fuck up the dogs life and your marriage, or keep the pup, be resentful and probably fuck up your marriage.

How does this situation play out time and time again on MN!? I don’t even like dogs mostly because I’m aware how freaking hard work they are. How can your partner have not realised??

I suppose it depends how far this will travel. Do you think your partner would walk out on you vs keeping the dog? If it came down to them vs the dog who would you pick? And could you ever forgive your partner if you did get rid of the dog?

Sounds like you’ve not had the dog too long? Is it a puppy? Could you contact breeder who could find a suitable owner?

How did you not have these conversations before you got the dog? Had neither of you had a dog before?

This!!!

I think it's so important for people to appreciate how much commitment a dog is before taking one on.
I took on an elderly rescue (now sadly passed) and the adoption centre were great; did a home visit before allowing me to take her, checked my job allowed for me to leave her no longer than four hours in a row etc.

If you didn’t have the dog, the one who doesn’t want the dog is the one who should get their way. Once that person has agreed, they’ve made a commitment and should honour that. It is an ongoing discussion between the two where the one struggling would say what their problems are. It’s not about getting their way, it’s that you’ve entered into a commitment together and so now you need to communicate to find a way of adjusting to this commitment. Same as if you’d had a baby but it was more full on than you’d originally planned.

Getting your own way is a really childish way of phrasing and is automatically going to mean the other isn’t open to discussion. It becomes about winning and not compromising to find a solution.

How old is the dog? How long have you had it? What have you tried to help your situation?
Generally speaking, I'd say status quo wins.

What an idiot. I've never owned a dog but none of that would come as any kind of surprise.

Totally different to not wanting a child. You've already got the dog, like if you already had a child.

I view taking on an animal like having a child. One would not just rehome a child they didn't want anymore, so same for a dog.

I concede that a dog is "only" an animal, but it would have to be very extenuating circumstances.

Training can easily be accomplished as part of normal life, so it's only walking then. Presumably walking was considered before the dog arrived?

How long have you had the dog? (And we need pictures to give an accurate answer).

If a puppy, then things do improve with time?

Who’s the main carer for the dog - the re-homer or the keeper?

Absolutely depends on the reason for rehoming - and the arguments for not

A partner who couldn't see they were providing a miserable life for their dog but wanted to keep the dogs as 'I luffs him' I'd rapidly find unattractive

Equally if dog had bitten my child or child had a serious allergy. Dog then doesn't come first.

However if you both committed to the dog and one of you now doesn't want to walk it in the rain, dog stays as you committed to it and that includes walks in the rain.

How old is the dog and how long have you had it op?

Very much depends on the reason. Aggressive dog that holds a risk to you and others - re home or PTS in extreme cases. Dog that barks excessively annoying neighbours and no amount of training helps (or similar) - re home.

No particular issues but just a change of mind - no. You’ve committed to this dog and only really extreme circumstances should change that.

Edited as just seen your update: no. All of this should have been thought out before committing to a dog. It’s really awful to get rid of it because of these reasons.

Absolutely this. So sad.

Poor dog should be rehomed rather than being forced to live in a house where he/she is not wanted.