AIBU to keep my sister’s former dog after she moved back?

You make some good points about the sister's mental health and I think it could be said that the OP is showing a lack of empathy to her situation. But this may be repeated behaviour and the OP may be burnt out by these reoccurring episodes. It's easy to be empathetic when you are not involved and haven't been involved for many years, as the case may or may not be.

But unfortunately no one is going to take anything you say seriously now because you keep insisting that you were concerned about @ThreadGuardDog's mental health. And everybody - even you - knows that you were really having a go at her.

On another note, no one has explained to me how someone who works in rescue gets to see dogs reunited with their original owners. I can think of one or two instances but I would have thought it was extremely rare.

Last thing, if I can be so bold, I'd like to suggest a new name for @Ilovelurchers How about: I love lurchers (but I wouldn't act in their best interests if it meant upsetting another human being)

Except she didn't make her bed! She sounds like very selfish and entitled

You have picked on OP and other posters. You still are.

You are desperate for OP to ask for this thread to be deleted aren’t you? I agree with a poster who said some people want it deleted due to their own behaviour on it but they’re hiding behind ‘concern’ for OPs sister. These posters have proved they’re not kind by the comments they’ve written so I don’t believe their faux concern.

Anyway, well done OP. Your sister was always going to do what she was going to. You protected your kids and your doggos.

Expat here active on many expat websites. I also moderate on one. I haven’t seen this mentioned.

You’ve done the right thing OP. I hope the dog has a very happy life with you.

@redboxer321 Several instances.

The saddest of which was someone who had a debilitating illness. They surrendered their dog. A few years later they happened to be at the same event as their old dog, and the dog recognised them - breaking free from their new family to get to their original owner. The dog then didn’t want to return to the new family. It was incredibly distressing.

These things happen, particularly in a breed specific world where lots of us know each other and go to the same events. Many people outside of those rehoming due to their kids who re-home are re-homing for the dogs benefit (bereavement, illness) and are still involved in the world. Plus it’s regional and it’s a working breed - it’s not like Battersea where your dog could end up anywhere.

Anecdotes aside my eldest hadn’t seen DH in nearly four years due to various things happening…but when she saw him again, she recognised him instantly and it was like no time has passed.

You don’t think expressing ‘concern’ over my mental health is personal ? I took the time to reply to your criticism of me, as did a couple of other posters - why on earth would l have it deleted ?

I took offence, because offence was what you intended. You launched a personal attack in which you questioned my mental health and personal circumstances simply because l was taking part in the thread and engaging with the discussion. You called me rude and aggressive and suggested the moderators should remove my posts. You even accused me of using bad language when l had actually sworn, very mildly, a total of three times and descriptively, rather than directly at other posters.

And no, your comments weren’t from a ‘place of concern’, they were a public and targeted attack because you disagreed with my point of view. Can we leave it there please. I’ve no wish to derail OP’s thread any further.

Thanks. And I can well believe it. Difference between the person with the debilitating illness and the OP's sister is that one sounds like a good owner and the other does not. Much of this info came later in the thread admittedly although there were clues.

Also, just an idea, when my ex and I split, it was incredibly painful. We wanted to go to the same events and we agreed that one would go one month, and the other the next. Maybe ex and new owners could use a similar system. New owner and dog go to one event, previous owner the next.

If not, then it could be argued on this point at least that general rescues actually work better than breed specific. It's not unusual for rescues to state, this dog cannot be homed in the wherever region, which seems a good idea to me.

It didn’t happen with OPs dog when he saw his old owner though. He wasn’t arsed with them.

OP has been told a few times that herdog will want to be with her sister more, in quite a nasty tone by some posters, but the dog didn’t want the sister when he had chance on multiple occasions.

One of our dogs used to belong to my cousin. Our dog actually hides when my cousin visits. My cousin didn’t mistreat our dog. Our dog just has a much nicer life with us, walks in the forest, swimming in lakes, other dogs, constant company. He couldn’t care less about his old owner.

Some posters were relishing in telling OP the dog wouldn’t care about her when he saw OPs sister again and seemed to get more angry when they realised they were wrong.

Well said.

Must admit, l wondered that too.

I'm not angry. Why do you think that?
I think it's really awful the way OP has dragged her sister online, and that others on the thread are cheering her on.
I think there's an extraordinary lack of empathy displayed on mumsnet a lot of the time, and I'd like to be a different voice.

But I never said that about OPs dog. Ever since the drip feed, I’ve agreed the dog is better with OP.

Drip feed? See, you are still being passive aggressive. OP has given more information when asked or when things happened.

You have been unpleasant to OP and other posters, then saying you are doing it because you care.

People are allowed to disagree with the OP. The forum is to invite discussion and different perspectives.

I think you’re reaching now. It is called a drip feed. It’s what everyone calls it when more, relevant, information is added after the initial posts. It’s used on every thread on here. Hardly passive aggressive

Agree. I’ve been on MN for several years and it amuses me that posters like this don’t realise that they can be seen for what they really are. They couch what is essentially vitriol ever so reasonably and sweetly, and when they’re called out, or, as in this case are proved wrong, they insist that their nastiness came from a place of concern. There are a few posters here eating their words, desperate for the thread to be deleted, and dressing it up as ‘concern’. We see you 👀.

After being tagged and having my mental health and home circumstances questioned, allegedly from that same ‘concern’, am l the only one wondering how a poster who allegedly works in dog rescue is also such a mental health expert that they feel able to diagnose and advise people they’ve never met and don’t know the first thing about ?

There is a big difference between a drip feed and adding in more information to provide context as the thread progresses. It happens all the time and here OP has provided a lot of information at the request of other posters. That’s why MN have provided a ‘see all’ button, so that posters can read an OP’s updates and have all the relevant information before posting. If OP had attempted to include everything she’s posted here in her opening post, either we’d all still be reading, or posters would be responding with TLDR.

Which is based on the premise that posters read and understand what the OP is actually saying, and follow updates. Instead of which, some posters are making up their own narrative - in some cases very clearly based on a dislike of OP, rather than the facts at hand.

I thought you’d stopped engaging with me 😉

But that's not the case. It's perfectly possible that someone can read all of OP's posts and not come to the same conclusions as you. Nobody here knows the OP, why would personal dislike come into it?

Agree. Well summarised.👍

I personally do think it was a drip feed. If you look at the OP , it wasn't about the dog or the dogs best interests. There was one line right at the end that reads "I don't think it would be in the dog's best interests anyway" , a quick , final aside, with no further context given.

The post was all about the OP, her family and their feelings about giving up a dog, versus the feelings of the sister and her family.

Then when a minority of people said OP should give the dog back all this stuff came out about how sister doesn't have the capacity to look after a dog, is in a mental health crisis, doesn't care about the dog (or her children!) , the dog doesn't care about her, she's a terrible dog owner etc etc. That's why I question the OP's narrative a bit.

if OP had started with an opening post setting out the situation from the perspective of the dogs care and which home could better meet dogs needs, the responses might have been more unanimous. However , I personally don't think that's what this is really about anyway, otherwise she would have started with that.

I very rarely comment on here but I have read the thread and did vote OP is not being unreasonable yesterday.

I couldn’t not post regarding this comment from the above post I think there's an extraordinary lack of empathy displayed on mumsnet a lot of the time, and I'd like to be a different voice.

When I read through the thread I thought how horrible this persons posts were, so to hear them say they would like to be a voice of empathy was both shocking and funny. So, just to let you know @Lacksie, you are failing miserably if you are trying to sound empathetic.

Thank you for your feedback :)

The personal dislike displayed by some posters is very clear IMO. Look at some of the responses. OP has variously been selfish, a terrible sister, has no regard for her family and only wants to keep the dog to spite her sister. There have also been various comments about OP’s lack of concern for her sisters’ mental health. None of which has been the case, and all of which has been belied by OP’s subsequent posts.

It sounds very much as though sister does have some mental health issues, and it’s often the case that those with such problems are self centred and so absorbed with their own wants and needs that they have no regard to the chaos they bring to others. OP has clearly been dealing with that chaos - and maybe not for the first time. She appears to have had good judgement as to what is best all round given the circumstances and has steadfastly stuck to her guns.

The fact that she has been proved right in doing so has disgruntled a lot of posters so the criticism continues. My background is in disability support, including mental health, and FWIW I’ve seen enough of the abuse close family members suffer at the hands of those with MH issues to understand that there is a limit to the support that can be given. And it seems to me that some posters wouldn’t have been happy with anything less than OP setting herself on fire to keep her sister warm. There comes a point when support becomes enabling and OP clearly recognised that point. Good for her.