To say no to dog on holiday

@@sophiasnail / my experience of several is very different. Barky, nippy and certainly not disinterested.

And since when have houses in Britain been called villas.

It’s in common use in Scotland, which the last time I looked was indeed part of Britain.

What's that got to do with anything? It is unusual for a poodle of any size to be "nasty" (whatever that means). But they are complicated dogs and tend not to be terribly interested in people they don't know. My toy would be sat on my knee if we had visitors and wouldn't move unless someone tried to lure him away with something tasty.

Unless you're a postman?

@sophiasnail - some of the nastiest dogs I have known have been poodles.

You are completely tone deaf. The OP is paying. Dogs don't need to be everywhere.

Tone Deaf. The baby will be the highlight of the holiday.

However much you love your 'fluff ball' other people don't like dogs. They shouldn't come before people.

Nope. When I got my dog, my friend's daughter had just had a baby.

Jeepers, in the first few weeks, an hours visit was hell on earth. He got so excited about the baby, everyone was on tenterhooks that he'd jump on the baby, scratch the baby etc. Everyone was so vigilant for the entire visit.

There's no way I'd have been comfortable taking him away with a small child. The holiday would have been a nightmare for me as well as well as everyone else, nobody would have been able to relax.

If he's not even got the dog yet, it takes months for them to settle into a new home. A trip somewhere else is going to mess that up too.
It's such a unknown situation, stick to your guns OP

The villa doesn’t allow dogs…oops 😉

Agreed. So boring isn't it.

Well clearly OP doesn't agree with it...

As someone who has had a baby in the not too distant past, you would be amazed how entitled some dog owners are. We had a similarish situation with a family member (involved staying at our house) and they still haven't quite forgiven us for prioritising our newborn over their fur baby.

I agree on no villas in the UK though 😃

Honestly I'm getting to the view that half the posts on here are made up. Who in their right mind would consider taking a new dog to a house full of folks they don't know including a BABY.
What parent of a little baby would even consider agreement to this?
And since when have houses in Britain been called villas.

I mean - wound you ever give it a rest?! I am
not on the clock here to provide a legal opinion…..

if people want to leave their kids alone with a dog, I can’t be responsible for such stupidity. It’s not, pardon the pun, a nanny state. People will do what they do - I cannot imagine that one very minor mention on a thread on MN, which was
made by more people than me, is going to sway the nation 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

"I am.holding my ground, there is no way I'm agreeing to the dog. I suggested we get accommodation of our own but the grandparents and the other siblings want to be in the same house. So BIL is saying he's being excluded."

Mr Drama Llama is excluding himself. Well done you, for standing firm!

Yep, it matters, because perpetuating bullshit means that false information seeps into the public consciousness.

You may be 100% clear that leaving a dog to look after the babies is bloody stupid, but plenty of people are not, and you are perpetuating the bullshit.

Just because an apparently reputable organisation puts out information, that doesn't automatically mean that the information is correct.

Research skills include weighing the information and checking it if it looks questionable.

You could end up with a bill for cleaning if this dog hasn't been properly trained toilet wise.
You could end up with shit all over.
Stand your ground op. You are right to be concerned and your child comes first

A crawling baby whose routine has been disrupted and is meeting a bunch of new people + a young dog in a new, crowded place = recipe for disaster

this isn’t how you introduce a baby and a dog. BIL is setting his dog up to make an honest mistake and the consequences for that could be dire for his dog, even if no one is seriously hurt.

No, op says the dog “will be around 1”. I assumed she meant by the time they are due to see it, in spring? If so, it could be a puppy they are buying now or one that is a few months old and has been “run on” from a breeder. Makes no difference either way though. The child won’t know if the dog is rescue or not.

See below.

You better get onto Battersea dogs home quick smart.

The term nanny dog was used to refer to pit bulls….and gradually Staffies were joined to that.

It was not a term invented in the 1970s.

but does it actually matter????? I have very clearly disclosed my personal view that NO dog should be left with a child on its own. It’s not something that I, nor any other respn dog owner would I imagine find acceptable behaviour.

Quite a lot of dogs can be a bit funny around crawling babies anyway, so I'd not have the dog there for that reason.

Whilst it seems unlikely anyone would be frightened of our tiny poodle, I would not be shutting him away if a visitor was frightened of him. If they've chosen to visit his home then he will be there. He isn't the sort of dog who would make a big fuss of visitors though, so they wouldn't be very close to him unless they wanted to be.

I fully respect anyone's wishes for us not to take him with us to visit their homes, but this means in 99% of cases we would decline an invitation.

As it is, everyone invites him everywhere. If he isn't mentioned, I always ask (politely) and all our friends and family say "of courses!"

It's not my research skills that are the issue here, but the word 'contemporary'.

I said, 'None of the sources seem to be able to refer back to any contemporary sources.'
Contemporary, in this context, means, 'of that time'. you're claiming the term came from the late C19th. Can you prove this? Because none of your sources do - they just use the term.

staffieclub.com: 'Despite its tough origins, the Staffordshire Bull Terrier’s reputation as a nanny dog was born out of its remarkable bond with children.' A present day use, no evidence that it dates from C19th.
Staffordshirebullterrier1935 website: "From being a fighter to becoming the beloved nanny dog"
Doglistener: It has a nickname, “The Nanny Dog”

Sorry for the hijack, OP, but I've never found an origin for the 'nanny dog' myth prior to an article written in the 1970s.

Staffies are probably at or close to full size by the time they're a year old (as this one is).

It's more likely to be a teenage arsehole than a puppy. Plus unsettled by the recent rehoming. Not a dog to take in to a unfamiliar and busy household (as this one will be for the family gathering).

It's simply not fair on the dog!

Especially as this one's temperament and level of training are complete unknowns.

Is this dog a rescue? Op didn’t say that?

The OP says the dog is a year old and they are in the process of bringing it home. That must mean a rehoming.

It could be a private rehoming rather than via a rescue. But that would mean a lower chance that the dog has been assessed and matched to approved prospective owners.