Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

AIBU to be upset after a dog jumped at our baby?

945 replies

KellyK2026 · 15/09/2026 12:14

Okay, so myself, DH and baby were at a country park the other week. Baby was getting hungry so we sat ourselves down on a park bench and got some food out. A woman was walking with her family and dog and the dog must’ve smelt the food as it suddenly
comes bounding over and is jumping at baby (who is on DH knee) to get the food. We don’t know this dog and don’t know what it's capable of. I scream at the owner that we have a baby and to get her dog under control. At this point, she’s pretty far away and is taking her time to come over. My DH then kicks the dog to get it off them as it just will not stop. The woman wasn’t particularly apologetic and seemed shocked. Did we overreact?

OP posts:
Lacksie · 16/09/2026 13:17

Couldyoustfu · 16/09/2026 13:11

Not everything, you’ve misunderstood - possibly wilfully. The law can be very open to interpretation but this area particularly is very clear and there is very little nuance, including whether there was food around, they were provoked, they were ‘friendly’, they’ve never done this before and nobody was hurt. Owners and dog lovers’ opinions - and yours - are completely irrelevant.

Show quote history

We'll have to agree to disagree.

I can only continue to suggest you put your theories to the test.

Original poster
KellyK2026 · 16/09/2026 13:17

Lacksie · 16/09/2026 13:06

You can continue insisting that everything is black and white if you want, but the real world—and the application of the law—is obviously more nuanced than that.

The next time a dog jumps up at you in a park, do report it under the Dangerous Dogs Act and see what actually happens. It may provide some useful insight into how this law is interpreted and applied in practice.

Show quote history

‘If a dog is jumping up at a baby in someone's arms, the law views this with extreme seriousness.
In the UK, the threshold for self-defense is met immediately when a vulnerable person—especially an infant—is placed in danger.’

This is extremely black and white. And you should really take note of it. The law takes the protection of babies extremely seriously.

OP posts:
Couldyoustfu · 16/09/2026 13:11

Lacksie · 16/09/2026 13:06

You can continue insisting that everything is black and white if you want, but the real world—and the application of the law—is obviously more nuanced than that.

The next time a dog jumps up at you in a park, do report it under the Dangerous Dogs Act and see what actually happens. It may provide some useful insight into how this law is interpreted and applied in practice.

Show quote history

Not everything, you’ve misunderstood - possibly wilfully. The law can be very open to interpretation but this area particularly is very clear and there is very little nuance, including whether there was food around, they were provoked, they were ‘friendly’, they’ve never done this before and nobody was hurt. Owners and dog lovers’ opinions - and yours - are completely irrelevant.

Original poster
KellyK2026 · 16/09/2026 13:09

Banannanana · 16/09/2026 13:08

Again, unless the dog was hurting your baby, you shouldn’t have hurt it. If the dog didn’t make contact with your baby, you shouldn’t have kicked it.

Dont ask a question on here if you don’t want an answer.

Show quote history

I just said that that dog made contact with my baby.

OP posts:
Banannanana · 16/09/2026 13:08

KellyK2026 · 16/09/2026 13:07

We didn’t have sandwiches. The dog leaped at my baby a number of times making contact with it. Please don’t rewrite the narrative to suit yourself.

Show quote history

Again, unless the dog was hurting your baby, you shouldn’t have hurt it. If the dog didn’t make contact with your baby, you shouldn’t have kicked it.

Dont ask a question on here if you don’t want an answer.

Original poster
KellyK2026 · 16/09/2026 13:07

Banannanana · 16/09/2026 13:06

The owner absolutely should have been in control of the dog and should have been very apologetic when he did come over. I’d be annoyed too.

However, unless the dog was hurting your baby, you shouldn’t have kicked it just for having a sniff around your sandwiches.

Move on from this now, no one was hurt.

We didn’t have sandwiches. The dog leaped at my baby a number of times making contact with it. Please don’t rewrite the narrative to suit yourself.

OP posts:
Banannanana · 16/09/2026 13:06

The owner absolutely should have been in control of the dog and should have been very apologetic when he did come over. I’d be annoyed too.

However, unless the dog was hurting your baby, you shouldn’t have kicked it just for having a sniff around your sandwiches.

Move on from this now, no one was hurt.

Lacksie · 16/09/2026 13:06

Couldyoustfu · 16/09/2026 12:46

The information is out there - no need to see what happens. The laws in this area are very clear and there is very little nuance - responsibility lies with the owner, always. You can read them if you want, the DDA is only a part of it so plenty for you to look at.

Show quote history

You can continue insisting that everything is black and white if you want, but the real world—and the application of the law—is obviously more nuanced than that.

The next time a dog jumps up at you in a park, do report it under the Dangerous Dogs Act and see what actually happens. It may provide some useful insight into how this law is interpreted and applied in practice.

Original poster
KellyK2026 · 16/09/2026 13:05

Lacksie · 16/09/2026 13:02

Not where people have addressed comments to me, where I think there are important clarifications to be made.

How the law is interpreted and applied certainly is not black and white, it involves all kinds of judgement and nuance. That's why law is such a lucrative profession :).

Show quote history

But not when a dog is involved. A human’s safety will always trump that of a dog’s. If a person feels under threat they can legally use force against a dog. That’s not up for debate.

OP posts:
Rpop · 16/09/2026 13:05

Anon501178 · 15/09/2026 12:42

Would be interested to know what breed it was?

I am not really a dog fan, am very vigilant and cautious with dogs around my children, and will refuse to take them to friends or relatives homes where certain types of dog are present or allow them near certain breeds in general.
However i think kicking the dog (except as a last resort if it was showing signs of agression or you were unable to get it away from baby any other way) seems quite unkind to the dog (although better to overreact than underreact in a situation like that to be fair)

Could your DH not have restrained it by holding it's collar or you stood up with baby so it couldn't reach them?

If it was a dangerous or agressive sort of breed though such as an XL Bully I get why you might panic and kick it automatically.

Ditto all of this.

except I wouldn’t know how to hold a dog collar as I’m so uncomfortable (and scared) around dogs.

I loathe it when we eat foot outside (picnic / pub lunch at picnic tables) and dogs run over and are seemingly allowed to lick our food.

some dog owners just get so desensitised that they don’t seem to notice it isn’t ok to run up to babies……

Lacksie · 16/09/2026 13:02

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Not where people have addressed comments to me, where I think there are important clarifications to be made.

How the law is interpreted and applied certainly is not black and white, it involves all kinds of judgement and nuance. That's why law is such a lucrative profession :).

Original poster
KellyK2026 · 16/09/2026 12:56

Ohdfod · 16/09/2026 12:52

I agree that dog licences should be compulsory. But I also think parenting classes should be too.

Well I agree with that too. However, a baby isn’t a threat to others. A baby doesn’t have huge canines and claws and can weigh 80+ pounds. And I’ve never heard of a baby mauling someone to death.

OP posts:
Livpool · 16/09/2026 12:52

runnerducky · 15/09/2026 13:40

I routinely do. Dog body language is quite easy to read if you know a bit about dogs! Whenever we have a picnic we have dogs coming over, it’s food outside so we expect it. The dogs are invariably friendly, and clearly so, so I will hold onto them or crouch down to block them and make a fuss of them to distract them till owners come. No screaming or kicking has ever been required.

Edited
Show quote history

But people who aren’t interested or own dogs shouldn’t have to learn how to interpret dog body language. The owner sucked here.

i feel sorry for the dog being kicked but it is entirely the fault of the owner. I would have reacted the same when DS was a baby.

Ohdfod · 16/09/2026 12:52

I agree that dog licences should be compulsory. But I also think parenting classes should be too.

KellyK2026 · 16/09/2026 12:47

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Couldyoustfu · 16/09/2026 12:46

Lacksie · 16/09/2026 12:12

Laws aren't black and white at all - how they are interpreted and applied in practice involves all kinds of nuance.

As I've said several times, if this happens again, OP should report the incident under the Dangerous Dog Act. What happens next may provide clarity on how the law is applied and interpreted practically and that might be helpful information to have moving forward.

Show quote history

The information is out there - no need to see what happens. The laws in this area are very clear and there is very little nuance - responsibility lies with the owner, always. You can read them if you want, the DDA is only a part of it so plenty for you to look at.

Itsbeenalongtimeincoming · 16/09/2026 12:46

CornerShoes · 16/09/2026 08:04

*Dogs are not humans and always come second. Always.
I have dogs and would have used my foot to push away the dog in that circumstance too. The safety of my child always comes before a dog. *

Thank goodness for owners like you.

Show quote history

Exactly. Thank goodness there are owners like me who recognise that dogs are animals and babies are not. .

OpenGoose · 16/09/2026 12:21

Ignore these crazies OP, I doubt your husband muay thai kicked the spaniel mix. And ignore people calling your husband dangerous/aggressive for kicking it. If he got it on the ground and started stomping it after I would say they have a point but he got it away from you and your baby which is what matters. You were also right for not grabbing it's collar, even friendly but exuberant dogs that are grabbed near the neck might panic and nip over it. I would kick out at any dog that ignored firm shouting to get away, I would never put my hands on a dog that ignored obvious signs I didn't want it around as that's how you lose some fingers.

FWIW another dog that wasn't neutered into oblivion would give a dog a very nasty telling off if it was jumping up at them and ignoring very clear go away messages. Let alone if that dog had puppies it was jumping and bounding all over.

Lacksie · 16/09/2026 12:12

Couldyoustfu · 16/09/2026 12:06

Well, that’s why we have laws. They are very blank and white and they don’t care what you think.

Show quote history

Laws aren't black and white at all - how they are interpreted and applied in practice involves all kinds of nuance.

As I've said several times, if this happens again, OP should report the incident under the Dangerous Dog Act. What happens next may provide clarity on how the law is applied and interpreted practically and that might be helpful information to have moving forward.

Couldyoustfu · 16/09/2026 12:06

Lacksie · 16/09/2026 11:18

yeh - as covered extensively - I just think that's way too black and white/ unrealistic. It's not a reasonable/ meaningful approach to life imv for reasons discussed.

Edited
Show quote history

Well, that’s why we have laws. They are very blank and white and they don’t care what you think.

Lacksie · 16/09/2026 12:05

KellyK2026 · 16/09/2026 12:02

Then don’t.

Show quote history

ok :)

Original poster
KellyK2026 · 16/09/2026 12:02

Lacksie · 16/09/2026 11:58

OK. You’re clearly determined to interpret anything short of complete agreement with you as “clutching at straws”, evidence of bad character and further proof you are correct (!), so there’s no point in continuing.

Edited
Show quote history

Then don’t.

OP posts:
Lacksie · 16/09/2026 11:58

KellyK2026 · 16/09/2026 11:54

No, it’s you defending the owner saying that my shouting to alert them to the incident may have made them hesitant to react. You’re just clutching at straws.

Show quote history

OK. You’re clearly determined to interpret anything short of complete agreement with you as “clutching at straws”, evidence of bad character and further proof you are correct (!), so there’s no point in continuing.

Original poster
KellyK2026 · 16/09/2026 11:54

Lacksie · 16/09/2026 11:49

Yeh I disagree with almost all of that (except the pack animals bit ofc) and think the sweeping conclusions you’ve drawn from one incident are frankly wild. But you’re clearly committed to them, so you do you :)

Edited
Show quote history

No, it’s you defending the owner saying that my shouting to alert them to the incident may have made them hesitant to react. You’re just clutching at straws.

OP posts:
Minasama · 16/09/2026 11:52

You have a baby, of course you protect it from the dog. Hopefully the owner will be more vigilant in future.