Friend's dog bit a child, whose fault?

But the dog should have been on a short lead/to heel when passing the family, so could have easily been moved out of the way of the child. Plus ime children less likely to approach a dog under close control.

It’s your friends fault that the dog was on a longline and not under control in an area where there are unpredictable kids.

Its also the parents fault for not teaching the girl not to approach strange dogs and touch them without permission.

Lessons to be learned on both sides i think

Both. Dog should have been closer...thats a long lead ..and child or tbh parents who should have taught child to not touch a strange dog. As dog has now bitten (or nipped but it's still a bite) dog needs a muzzle if in public.

Not the dog’s fault and I wish to goodness parents would teach children not to approach strangers dogs. Madness.

This was my exact point, if your dog is under control next to you, YOU can control the interaction, which is what you should be doing as a responsible dog owner, letting it wander ahead 1.5 metres in front of you to pass a group of people, you have no control at all, you are putting your dog in a terrible position in case anything happens, it doesn't matter who's 'fault' it is, no dog should be biting anyone, which is what a nip is to be fair, it's a low level bite.

Both are at fault. The dog should have been on a short lead on the side away from the passers by. The child should not have approached the dog. Sounds like the parents have not taught that you never touch a strange dog ever without permission. Horrible situation for everyone involved, especially the poor dog and child.

Both at fault here. Small child should not have ran over and patted the dog, but small children are unpredictable. When I'm out with my dog and there are small children in close vicinity then I always put myself between the child and the dog. It's not fair on either of them to be in that position.

Well, yes?

But equally, if parents took as much responsibility for training their children as I do for training my dogs...then no one would ever need to worry.

My dogs have had children drag them from behind - literally wrap their arms around them, choking them for a 'cuddle.' My dogs didn't bite. But many dogs would in the circumstances my dogs have suffered through and it would be completely expected for them to do. And that's the point. Dogs are dogs. They are animals.

Don't rely on someone else's training of their dog to make up for your inadequacies as a parent. The answer is not muzzling, or demonising dogs, it's raising children properly - not letting them be feral and entitled.

I've managed to raise my children to be respectful of dogs, and train my dogs not to react to unpredictable children by biting. It's not hard. It's the bare minimum any loving and competent parent should do.

Dog should not be in a park 1.5m ahead where toddlers etc may be walking around. yes the young child shouldn't have touched but young children are unpredictable. I would walk my dog on the outside of me so the other side from anybody passing.

Ok then another 4 year old goes up and smacks them. I was making a point that our Blake the person who makes an unprovoked attack and not the one reacting to that out of fear or to protect themselves.

People always get every emotional and invested when it comes to dogs - I’ve never owned a dog so have no skin in this game - I was looking at this from a moral perspective and from someone who would usually assume the dog or owner is to blame.

I actually feel sorry the poor dog got put into this situation.

So you train your kids not to touch dogs then you should train your dogs not to bite kids

Both parties are at fault.

This.

I don't like dogs at all, and frequently have words with inattentive dog owners.

But even I'm on the dog/owner's side in this case. Dog was on lead, didn't instigate the situation, and parents had failed to instil the lesson of 'always ask the owner before approaching a dog' lesson in their child.

A nip is the easiest way to learn what the parents didn't yet teach.

it also doesn't matter whether is dog is startled or aggressive if the outcome is the same. A dog who nips when scared should be in a muzzle. End of
Well the law disagrees. If the dog nips and injure the child yes, otherwise no. For a child to have no injury or marks, it not even a nip, more like push. It's the unpredicted reaction and/or bark that would have scared them.

Also, it's your job to watch dogs when you walk them. If I'm in a park, having a conversation with a friend whilst my dog is peacefully sleeping next to me, then no, I don't expect to have a constant eye around my dog to make sure to jump in front of them quicker than the kid can touch it.

Parents do have to have control of their kids in public places too.

Ha, that's amazing. I have been known to put my hand out to keep a small child at bay before now but have never used the threat of lead yet 😂

If your dog "nips when startled" then it should be wearing a muzzle in public. The vast majority of dogs do not nip in that situation.

And obviously I meant I'd know the difference on turning around - because my instinct when I'm touched is not to immediately reach out and "smack" someone.

it also doesn't matter whether is dog is startled or aggressive if the outcome is the same. A dog who nips when scared should be in a muzzle. End of.

I agree that as a dog owner, it is your responsibility to police the public, including children. It shouldn't be, and it isn't fair, but it is the way it is. You cannot rely on strangers to be sensible, and your responsibility is to keep your dog safe and keep things that it is afraid of, or that could hurt or startle it, at a safe distance.

I understand it's not easy. One of DD's chihuahuas is gorgeous. He is, without bias, the cutest dog you will ever set eyes on. He is also the canine embodiment of pure evil. What started as fear aggression ended as attention-seeking behaviour; he knows if he growls, snarls, or snaps at strangers, someone is likely to pick him up and hug him to remove his ability to bite the object of his rage.

Walking him during the summer holidays is hell. He is a child magnet. He also loves nothing more than causing fear and misery, and children are his preferred targets, not because he's scared of them, but because he knows he is more likely to be picked up to keep the children safe from his wrath. Parents think his warnings (snarling and growling) are funny and cute. They don't often warn their kids to stay away, no matter how much we beg them to.

As much as I'm tempted to let him bite people who intrude on his space, I don't, because I am responsible for keeping him safe, and that means not allowing the targets of his hatred to get close enough to him to be bitten.

Was walking with my friend and her dog once, and a child (must have been about 6 or 7 ish?) made a bee line for her dog. My friend told the kid no and put her dog behind her, but the kid really really wanted to pet the cute white fluffy doggy.

My friend actually held the child off the dog! As in actually hands on kids shoulders holding her back.

The mum went mental "don't touch my kid etc"

To which my friend replied "You've got two seconds to come and get your kid before I use the spare lead in my pocket to walk it over to you"

Mum was hella pissed.

I just stood there open mouthed. 🤣

Masterclass in advocating for your dog 🤣🤣🤣

Your friend's dog was out of control - 1.5 metres is too long a lead when walking near others. One must always anticipate that small kids could do sudden, random things.

No, you've decided to link two totally different scenarios for some reason?

What I said was that the reason the police often "don't bother" with these things is that they have other things to be doing. That doesn't mean they never attend.

HTH.

The dog was fully under control, and my friend wasn't inattentive. The only uncontrolled element was the child who wasn't being supervised by the adults with them.

The dog should have been on a short lead in a narrow pathway with people coming in the other direction, then this might have been avoided. Your friend should have been more in control of the dog, I don't see how they could have been 1.5 metres in front.

Someone near us was tripped up by a dog recently BTW and the police were incredibly interested and paid a visit to the owner of the out of control dog.

Sure, that happened. In one breath you say the police are too busy, and in the next your claim the police are hunting down dogs who...trip people?

Did you know pigs fly and the sky is yellow?

I had the most placid, stoic, bomb proof Labrador on the planet, but I still would have pulled him in close if a child was approaching, both for his sake and the childs.

To me, both the dog owner and the childs parents are at fault here, but I’d put more responsibility on the dog owner.

There is a greater potential for a dog to seriously hurt a child than for a child to hurt a dog, so I think the onus is more heavily on the owner to make sure their dog is under control and able to cope safely with whatever situation it encounters.

Of course the parent should also have seen the dog ahead and brought their child closer, but as a dog owner I will ensure I am never in the situation where my dog is responsible for harming a child.