AIBU to refuse Christmas visits because of the family dogs?

Actually it does make a difference to the point where it is tolerable. It would be extremely limiting to never go anywhere that has had a dog so there is an element of suffering that needs to be endured. If the dog is shut in another room and the host has hoovered beforehand, it is manageable with strong antihistamines. It is not the case otherwise. Why would you presume to know how other people experience their allergies?

I think this is true. He can cope visiting a household with one dog, with his medication. I’m aware that this isn’t the case for someone with a more serious allergy.

There’s no way we could visit a household with 10 dogs, though!

Had a cat allergy my whole life. I only get mild symptoms, thankfully. BUT the cat being shut away in someone's home makes no difference honestly.

The cat lives there. The allergen is everywhere in the house, cat behind a door or not!

If someone truly has an allergy to an animal, they would require the person to not own the animal at all. (Obviously an unreasonable ask of your friends!)

All this "but I have an allergy so put the dog/cat in another room" lark is rubbish. If you actually have an allergy it won't make a difference.

His allergy probably isn’t that severe - it’s a spectrum from a light sniffle to full blown anaphylaxis for some people

He’s not anti dog then? He has an allergy but takes medication rather than demand the world around him makes allowances.

The majority are polite and don’t moan about their allergy online. My DH is allergic to dogs and mostly doesn’t mention it. He just takes his antihistamines before going somewhere where he knows there will be dogs.

One dog is just about bearable if it's well behaved. Can folk not go back to collecting stamps instead of dogs.

The anti dog brigade aren’t polite. MN has shown that.

They’re being polite - around 15% of the population have a dog or cat allergy. Obviously to varying degrees of severity.

And I would add that tradesmen very often ask me to “release” them to play! Which I can do one at a time or en masse if that person is feeling particularly brave 🤣🤣🤣

I don’t need to lock them away when tradesmen, or indeed anyone comes. I can place them in their beds and they stay there until I release them, they don’t need to be in a different room. Same goes for “jumping all over people”, they don’t do that. As for someone with an allergy, I have so many dogs that have free run of the downstairs of my house, it would be impossible for an allergy not to be triggered, even if the dogs were in another part of the house, so they’d be better to stay away. Funnily enough, in more than 30 years of multi dog ownership, and as someone who hosts very often, I’ve never come across any visitor with an allergy.

I'd shut my dog in the room with me whilst the tradesperson did their job.

Happy to shut the dog in the room with me when a friend comes round, but not sure how that helps...

I don’t need to sit and have coffee with the tradesman. The dog and I would both stay out of the way. Takes minutes to open the door and show them what’s what.

Agreed. I foster and/or rehome dogs that have been badly treated. It’s not as black and white for some. I would love it if people truly considered what dog ownership can sometimes look like then took the responsibility seriously.

I'm pretty sure those of you who claim you'd never shut your dog away would if you needed work done in the house like your boiler fixing or new sockets installed.

So why wouldn't you do it if a friend came around who was allergic or just didn't want your dog jumping all over them?

If you don't, I bet tradespeople hate having to deal with entitled owners and their out of control dogs.

I think the dog owners who are openly vocal and honest about not being able to leave their dog with just any old person, or for longer than 4-5 hours alone, or explaining how they have ended up with a dog who is too nervous to be stuck in kennels or get distressed at being locked away are doing a good deed tbh.

Some dogs could be fine with any, or all of the above. But there is an element of "you don't know what you're going to get" that you sign up for when you get a dog.

And yes, they are all tie. You can't fuck off out for the day or do whatever you want, whenever you want, wherever you want for however long you want. Dogs are a massive, massive tie.

The more people are vocal and honest about this, the more widely known it is and the less dogs would end up in rescue.

I think you’re filling in gaps that aren’t there. That poster has said she will decline invites if a suitable sitter isn’t available for her dog. What’s wrong with that? She’s also said she won’t lock her dog away if visitors turn up. I wouldn’t either. Just because you would it doesn’t make you right and us wrong.

Also, gently? With your sly digs?

I disagree with most of your opinions on Mumsnet. But on dog threads, you are my absolute hero! If all dog owners were like you, they would be far fewer dog threads on here.

You're not reading my posts, are you?

I don't prioritise my pet over people, but I have a hard line of not causing my animal distress, so I won't leave her alone for more than 4 hours, nor lock her away, nor leave her with people that she's not happy or comfortable to be with. This is being a responsible pet owner.

I never want or expect to take my dog places she's not welcomed. I offer plenty of compromises - dog free venue where logistically we can travel & do the activity within 4 hours, changing dates so one of us is available for dog care, coming without one family member so they can stay home with the dog etc. And as a last resort, if the other side won't compromise, I politely decline the invitation.

I've literally never said the dog needs to be with us all the time.

If other people refuse to compromise when I offer so many compromises myself, if the relationship breaks down because we don't see each other, it's on them!

You have made it clear yes that you prioritise your pets over people but some of us are trying to gently tell you that is not a good idea.

What if you have grandkids who were allergic to dogs or just didn't like them. What then, would you seriously stick to your hard-line of stance 'accept my dogs will be around you or don't visit'?

You need to try to be more flexible or else it could well damage relationships.

Our dog is lovely but family and friends are important and their feelings count.

If dogs aren't truly actual "real" responsibilities, then I guess the owner can't be held responsible if their not-real-responsibility-of-a-dog jumps up at you, slobbers all over your clothes, covers your jumper in mud and takes a shit in your handbag.

Like you said, they're "made up responsibilities" after all.... 😅

I wonder what reasons for turning down invitations isn’t RUDE? Lack of money? A child? Not enough annual leave? I reckon it’s just dogs, what with them being a made up responsibility.

It's really not. No more so than constantly declining events because there will be a dog there.

Again, you are only seeing this through the lens of "I WANT" without seeing that what you want doesn't trump what other people want.

You understand what convenience means, no? You want others to do things that aren't appropriate for them, because it makes it easier for you to get what YOU want. You want them to do it for your convenience. Good Grief!

You are not the centre of the world. Your wants do not trump other people's wants. The fact you cannot see this says an awful lot about you.

Expecting people to drop everything because you say so is RUDE.