To think that putting to sleep very difficult dogs is not the most awful thing for them?

I agree. A dog does not have anxiety about death , they dont know its happening. Much better for them to just be put to sleep in a calm manner with gentle people around them than potentially go through months or years of stressful or anxiety situations.

For what it's worth (and I'm not setting us up to be some paragons of virtue here), we've taken on a number of dogs over the last 20 years who'd be considered unsafe or unadoptable.

One was even in his last two days before being PTS at the shelter at six months old - he had warnings all over his paperwork and we were told there was no way he'd ever be safe, especially with children. The only time he ever came to the front of his enclosure instead of hiding at the back and baring his teeth, though, was when our daughter went to look at him. Nearly bent himself in two wagging at her. We had to sign a waiver, but there was no way we were going home without him. Damn dog hated me for 15 years (until he had dementia and forgot he hated me every morning), but only had two minor bite incidents - and those were people who ignored all of our warnings and shoved their hands in his face.

Then there's the Akita, who was unadoptable because of her size and "scary" posture. Most well-behaved dog we've ever encountered. She basically raised the feral Chihuahua (who's now the most placid example of the breed we've come across), and the traumatised Romanian rescue (who would apparently never accept human contact, but now can't live without fuss and sitting with us at every opportunity).

Point is...we aren't miracle workers, and I know there are many dogs out there that we wouldn't be able to rehabilitate, but for an awful lot of them it's because the environment we provide isn't what they need. I'm convinced that many "unadoptable" dogs just need to find the environment or people that suit them most, and they suddenly become unrecognisable from the scared, fear-aggressive selves they showed everyone else (and us, to begin with) - for the dogs we've had (all of them), it's been down to treating them as individuals instead of seeing teeth or a bite incident and thinking "Yep, aggressive" and writing them off - by rescues, fosters or adopters.

I don't think that applies to the OP's experience, though, because it was doomed to failure the instant the rescue decided to hold back the dog's history. That's just bloody stupid and irresponsible.

Agree completely. We adopted a dog, were told he didn't like going outside and wasn't fond of other dogs ... Actually he loved going outside and would jump out the window if you weren't careful and as for not being fond of other dogs, actually they meant he would try to rip them to pieces at every given opportunity. It took a lot of management (and a muzzle) but we did keep him but it would have saved a really nasty attack on another dog if we'd been told the truth.

Completely agree

YANBU.

A couple of years ago a friend was looking for a dog. Out of curiosity we checked one of the rescue centres. They held about 30 dogs at that time and each of them was marked as „unsuitable for children or the other animals”. She got a puppy.

I've stopped giving to two dog charities because of their no kill policies. One was in Romania and they'll let puppies die of malnutrition/cold while spending a fortune on 12 year old dogs. Some of the very aggressive dogs, who could easily be a danger should be pts once a certain amount of time has passed, unless they can be fostered. I say that as someone who adopted two German shepherd's who had behavioural issues, at different times. There's too many people who don't have a clue and won't do consistency with rules. There's too many dogs vs potential owners.

I’ve worked with vets and they tend ti be much more practical and less emotive about those things than the general public, I’ve worked at a practice that was responsible for euthanising dogs from a dogs home and no one looked forward to it but it was necessary and done with care and kindness.

Yes I had to make a very difficult decision 20 odd years ago to have my dog PTS for aggression. I really did give him many chances and it broke my heart but he could never have been rehomed. My mum wanted me to tie him to a fence somewhere so she wouldn’t have to cope knowing he was PTS which would have been cruel. The final decision was taken in haste as he attacked me but it was always the right decision. It broke my heart but I know it was the responsible thing to do.

I 100% agree, pts is better than a scary stressful life in kennels for years and years. My dog is very nervous and would hate to be in kennels if I had to choose that for the rest of her life or PTS I’d choose PTS.

I love dogs, all kinds, bit of a soft spot for the big ones (the ones that worry people)

i do agree with you in principal, but 'no kill' shelters are the first ones over run & where most people would want to place a dog.

plus who decides 'how long' they get on 'death row'? & how many vets are going to sign up to pts?

Another thing the rescues need to do is be more open to people actually adopting a dog, some of the reasons they refuse for are absolutely ridiculous, it's no wonder people give up & buy a puppy when they would have been very happy to adopt one.

I do agree. Some, though probably not many, can cope with multiple foster homes, or with life in a shelter with the strong ( to them) smells and sounds of other dogs; many though will get stressed.

This stress will play out in different ways but may make it harder to find a home.

I completely agree. Far worse things can happen to a dog than a peaceful and humane death. If a dog has issues to the extent it will never safely be rehomed then put the poor thing to sleep. Don’t leave it festering in a rescue centre indefinitely.