AIBU to refuse Christmas visits because of the family dogs?

A license wouldn't make any difference because the people who don't put the welfare of their dogs first won't pay for one and they were never enforced anyway.

What we need is just to keep trying to educate dog owners. Dogs aren't toys to perch on the settee, they need walks and training. Owners need to be responsible and sensible.

We have a dog. She doesn't lick leftovers from plates as is a favourite thing with some owners on mn, she isn't forced on others when we visit and she can be left alone for short periods when we pop out as she is well exercised. When people visit we ask them if they're ok with the dog if not she goes to bed in another room. Manners and common sense all that is needed.

Yes, education is key - dogs aren’t toys to shove in another room or leave alone for hours if they’re a bit inconvenient for the humans.

Sadly, you are right. Dog owners who don't care won't bother.

You sound like all the dog owners I know - kind and considerate.

I agree.

If you choose to have a pet, you have to realise that it changes your lifestyle, but it shouldn't change other people's.

So that means using kennels, dog sitters, dog walkers, training them to stay at home for a few hours.

Also agree we need dog licences back. I'd favour ring-fencing the revenue to pay for dog wardens as a lot of councils have done away with them. One of my neighbours has a barky dog and there's precisely nothing I can do about it. If we had a dog warden I'd have reported it months ago.

Yes a lot of people would. Dogs come before family all the time on here.

But it is difficult at Christmas - because it's not easy to get doggy daycare. Something people should consider before they get a dog but don't, I agree with a pp who said cats are a lot easier!

Agree with this - I don’t think previous non enforcement is a good enough reason not to bring back dog licences. They would need to be done differently (I favour a points based system like a driving licence).

Well I do know some people do through previous bitter experience but I agree / it’s like they suddenly realise it’s going to cost money or inconvenience them so they decide to project onto everyone else that they should suddenly be accommodating of this pet they chose to purchase.

It doesn't change other people's. We are happy to decline invitations which aren't compatible with our respinsibilities to our pet. Kennels are not suitable for all dogs, and responsible pet owners (and indeed decent human beings in general) don't consider forcing an animal into extreme distress for their convenience acceptable.

I will never, ever take my dog somewhere it's not allowed or welcomed (and I will never argue they should be allowed if the homeowner or venue owner doesn't want them there). But, it's perfectly reasonable to turn down invitations if they aren't compatible with my responsibilities to my pet. I'm happy to compromise and meet in a pet free venue instead as long as it's logistically possible without having to leave my pet for longer than is reasonable (max.4 hours).

Can people really not see how unreasonable and entitled it is to demand, without compromise, that someone must do something they don't want to do (for whatever reason) for their own convenience? In the words of Mumsnet, it's an invitation, not a summons. People can (and should) politely decline if the event does not meet their needs.

Because sometimes it is reasonable to expect you to put the needs of people above your beloved animal. Christmas, birthdays, weddings - it is not at all unreasonable to expect you to sort something for the dog and attend which yes, in the case of something like a wedding, is probably going to be more than 4 hours. It’s such a weird way to limit your life and show your family you don’t care about them.

They are dogs. Not humans

The modern delusion that dogs are equal to humans or perhaps even more important to some, is an increasing and insane belief in this country. They truly believe that dogs are equivalent to human beings and their entire lives are built this way. It is such a change from 30 years ago when people could see the difference between a person and an animal!

The only change is that friends and family might see me less if they don’t want to see the dog. I wouldn’t not have a dog in my life because it’d mean I couldn’t see my aunt Betty on Christmas Day. Madness.

Do you all consult with extended family when making other life choices? “If I move 10 miles further from you Aunt Betty, would that make it awkward for Christmas Day 2027? If so I’ll stay put.”

You're advocating that an innocent animal should cruelly forced into being scared and distressed so that an entitled spoiled madam can dictate that someone must attend an event (that they would rather not go to) for their convenience! That's a brave stance.

Luckily I don't mix with anyone who thinks animal cruelty is OK, so I'm guessing our paths won't cross...

You keep using the same phrase “for their convenience” and it’s very peculiar. Yes - sometimes you have to do things for other people or are you now saying you would decline an important event such as a wedding in favour of sitting at home with your dogs? Plenty of options available for their care - daycare, boarding, rover, house sitting. You’re the one being unreasonable if you think nothing at all would suffice for a day for your precious dog. It’s not cruel for gods sake!

Guests should be considered though, at least ask if they're ok with dogs. If they aren't keen on pets it is nice to put the dog elsewhere. Some of us have social skills, some do not.

Anyway the thread is about 10 dogs on Christmas day. I hope you'd agree that isn't fair on any of the dogs and a recipe for disaster.

No but if you moved away from most of your family you could reasonably be expected to be the one who did most of the travelling

Do you have to do things for other people too? Like sit in the same room
as their dog when they invite you over for lunch? I’m sure you can’t think this self sacrifice too much to show a family member you care.

Guests are considered in as much as they can decline my invite without me whinging.

I have allergies - they make me extremely unwell. It wouldn’t be reasonable would it?

Meh, take an antihistamine and show you care.

If you're supporting the situation the op describes 10 dogs all in the same house then you're advocating a bit of poor treatment tbh. Dogs like their own space, their own territory. They don't want to be in packs in noisy get togethers just because their owners havent trained them to be alone sometimes.

If you can't or won't consider other people's feelings at least try to put the welfare of your dogs first.

What's with dog cages? We never had them when I grew up with dogs in the 1960s and 1970s.

Agree with this. My dogs live here. I can shut them away, they have their own spaces and are very well trained, but I simply don’t want to. And funnily enough, no one has ever refused an invitation to my house! I regularly have 20+ guests and even with many multiple dogs, no one declines. That seems to be a MN thing rather than a real life thing.

Doesn’t work like that I’m afraid. I can take a quadruple dose and still have an asthma attack and be quite unwell for several days afterwards. Dog people always refuse to accept it is not just hayfever

It doesn't have to be so dramatic as 'shutting them away' as if locking them in a cellar without food or water. Dogs like their beds, toys and chews. Once they've maybe said hello and had a pat it is perfectly kind to let them go to bed in another room particularly if guests aren't overly keen.

That's if you walk them and they're well exercised and stimulated so are tired? Some 'they're my babies' owners don't do theses basics so they think dogs running round jumping up at guests counts as exercise.