To think parents should teach their children how to behave round dogs

[Xihha]

There have been a few posts lately about people needing to control their dogs more (and I agree, if you cant control our dog and clean up after it then you shouldn't have a dog imo), but is it unreasonable to expect parents to teach children to be a bit more careful round dogs?

Whilst walking my dog (on his lead) a child who looked about 10 ran up and stuck his head in my dogs face to make a fuss of him whilst i was picking up doggys poo, without checking if it was ok, there have been other times kids have just walked up and started pulling doggy around, this sort of thing happens a lot, especially in the summer when there are more kids out playing and the parents rarely say anything about it.

It's not really an issue with my great soppy lump of a dog because he loves kids and will put up with anything for a bit of fuss but shouldn't these kids know that you should check with the owners before approaching strange dogs and that even a nice dog can get pissed of if you start pulling it around?

er I think lazy has rather said that tbh!

Yes - lazet has basically said "Whatever my child does" without at any point saying "but I would stop them if...".

Yes - lazet has basically said "Whatever my child does" without at any point saying "but I would stop them if

That is a misrepresentation of the issue.

The issue is that the dog owner cannot assume that a child is trained, responsible, listening to their parents etc etc in a public place.

There is no legal obligation on the child or it's parent to ensure it's safety around the dog, the legal obligation is completely on the dog owner to ensure the Childs safety around the dog.

They will be liable if their dog bites a child in a public place, there is no "but the child misbehaved/didn't listen/tripped/wasnt nice to my doggy or whatever"

They must always assume the worst, therefore, irrespective of the Childs behaviour.

This is essentially because a dog is a potentially dangerous animal, so the owner is obliged to be fully responsible for it in public spaces. That is the quid pro quo of allowing the dog into public spaces. The law has increasingly shifted towards protecting the child (or human, really) from the dog, not vice versa.

I have said this over and over again in multiple ways over 26 pages, yet

there are a fairly dogmatic bunch of people on here who seem completely unable to grasp this. Their counter arguments are largely absurd (Believing their dogs are more Intelligent than toddlers is a new one, but unsurprising and typical of their skewed morality), as far as I can see they effectively value the rights of their dog above other peoples kids and seem to believe society, other parents and the law support this.

Personally I think these people are the biggest risk to other dog owners, as because they are unwilling to assume full responsibilty they are in effect irresponsible. Also their reaction, if this thread is anything to go by - oscillating between wilful denial and irrational, vituperative attacking of anyone who questions them, is not going to win any battles in a court of public opinion.

Set that against a background of increasing dog attacks on children, increasing health & safety insurance liability, and increasing public annoyance over dog nuisance in general, I think they will accelerate the rate of change towards dog free spaces, stricter anti dog legislation, licensing etc.

No they don't. Everyone (and their little dog too) has an equal right to be in a public space

Sigh.

Do I have the right to walk my tiger in the park?

You do.

And I will tell my child not to touch it.

LazyJaney, you have argued several times that is the dog owner's responsibility to ensure that your child stays away from their dog, does not hurt their dog etc. You have repeatedly fail to accept that you need to supervise your own child, especially if they are known to have a tendency to up to strangers (with or without dogs) and start making a nuisance of themselves.

Apparently if you fail to do this and your child injures my dog because of your lack of supervision, this is somehow my fault

You have repeatedly fail to accept that you need to supervise your own child, especially if they are known to have a tendency to up to strangers (with or without dogs) and start making a nuisance of themselves

You have repeatedly failed to understand that it doesn't matter whether I am the best pub helicopter mother on the planet, or the Worlds Worst Mother, or my child is left unsupervised, is irrelevant.

The liability for your dog biting my child starts and ends with you.

curlew is your tiger on a cereal cardboard saying grrreat?

then yes. although we might need to keep away from you!

look it's simple.

parents - control your kids
dogowners - control your dogs

job done

Do I have the right to walk my tiger in the park

Unfortunately not, even on a lead. Pity really, as youd have thecpark to yourself except those walking their Rhinos and Grizzlies.

I'm actually wondering when the Government will allow us to import leopards to counter the urban fox problem....

The only poster banging on about dog bites constantly is you. OP wanted to know whether she was being unreasonable to expect parents to teach their children not to pet her dog without asking.

This is not unreasonable.

You started bleating on about dog bites, just to cause a bun fight, which frankly says a lot more about you than any other poster on this thread.

You keep bringing the topic back to dog bites despite OP and other posters explaining again and again and again that they are not talking about risk to the child, but the child causing risk to the dog and generally making a nuisance of themselves.

99.99% of dogs no not and never will bite. I can clearly and concisely with reputable evidence sources, explain why dog bites are rising, but you will only stick your fingers in your ears and sing lalalalala because it is not what you want to hear, so I won't bother.

You believe what you want, love. It's not my issue if you make yourself look like a fool.

'You have repeatedly failed to understand that it doesn't matter whether I am the best pub helicopter mother on the planet, or the Worlds Worst Mother, or my child is left unsupervised, is irrelevant.

The liability for your dog biting my child starts and ends with you.'

The issue isn't about dogs biting, not to anyone but you.

The question being asked isn't, is my dog justified in biting children who annoy him, it isn't am I legally liable if my dog bites a child who is annoying him, the question is, is it reasonable to expect parents to teach their children how to behave so that they are not being a nuisance to me when I am walking my dog?

Tabularasa, where do you walk your dog?

If you take precautions to keep your dog out of the reach of people who might hurt it then they have been inadequate if you are still encountering people on your walks. If you continue to walk your dog where you keep on meeting other people then you can't be all that worried about them hurting your dog. I am pretty sure incidents where children run up to dogs and attack them are rare as hens' teeth.

Babybythesea, what you do it get yourself physically between your dog and the child, and you ask the child where mummy is. Then you ask the child to go and find mummy.

Nobody has a right to kick a dog and nobody has said this iirc, but if it did happen (unlikely) a child is considered to be outside the normal expectations of behaviour when it comes to animals or even other children. They are not held responsible in criminal cases until the teens for good reason -- they are not considered to have the ability to consider all aspects of any given situation including whether a kick would hurt someone or hurt a dog. So when you, the adult, are out with your dog, you as an adult have to look out for the welfare of your dog and take precautions if you think your dog is in danger of being hurt or (much more likely) hurting someone else. If you are really worried about your dog being hurt then you should walk where there are hardly ever any children or walk at times when children are in bed.

LadyClarice responding to 'Children as humans have greater rights to be in public spaces.'
No they don't.
Yes they do.
And under the law the dog owner has more responsibility than the person the dog attacks. Having a dog walking around with you in public where there are other people or other animals that could become prey to your dog (sheep and lambs for instance) is a privilege and not a right.

Curlew, you have the right (the privilege) to walk your tiger in the park as long as you scoop its poop.

HazelNutt:
So dog owners absolutely must have 100% impeccably behaving dogs or they should not be out in public, if they are not able to train their dogs. Lazy owners, tsk.
Yes.
This is because dogs are animals who hunt and kill if not trained to wait for kibble and respond to their owner's commands.
And also because your dog will be pts if you do not train it and it bites someone. So stupid owner too, if you do not train your dog to the point where it will not bite someone.

But you can't expect that children can always behave, they are children, after all, unpredictable? Just won't listen, those cute darlings?
Yes.
They are unpredictable. They can be trained pretty well. But you never really know for sure what they will do because sometimes they don't listen.
You were a child yourself once, no?
Do you have children?
Have you ever taught them in a school?
Bottom line is they are considered far more valuable than your dog no matter how brightly you think the sun shines out of your dog's arse and your dog will be pts if it bites one.

Dogs' intelligence is on par with a 2-year old child. So of you demand and expect that dogs are always perfectly behaved and if not, you consider it the fault of the owners, we can also expect the same from all children (older than 2). No?
Two child years is what in dog years?
Ridiculousness aside... No there is no getting past the ridiculousness of this.

It is not anyone here who thinks it is always the fault of the owner when a dog bites. This is the law.

The question being asked isn't, is my dog justified in biting children who annoy him, it isn't am I legally liable if my dog bites a child who is annoying him, the question is, is it reasonable to expect parents to teach their children how to behave so that they are not being a nuisance to me when I am walking my dog?

This is like groundhog day - back to page 2.

Although it would be a nice to have, it is unreasonable to expect it as children may not listen/remember/etc and you are always going to be liable for your dog in a public place, no matter what the child does to it

So you always need to assume the child is not taught, ie it is VU to expect it to be.

I already banged the gavel, but you guys just can't let it go.

like a dog with a bone

You keep bringing the topic back to dog bites despite OP and other posters explaining again and again and again that they are not talking about risk to the child, but the child causing risk to the dog and generally making a nuisance of themselves.

I keep bringing it back to risk to the child because what everyone else except you dog nuts is worried about is the risk to the child, not the bloody dog!!!

lazyj

you answered the wrong thing
the question was about if it's reasonable to expect a child blah blah blah. of course not!

it was whether it's reasonable to expect a parent to teach a child

the problem seems to be that parents don't even try to explain to their kids that a dog belongs to the owner therefore permission to touch or feed should be asked - because it doesn't occur to them as a problem or they don't care or it's not been brought to their attention or they just think it's ok or they can't except to be told no or whatever.

OPYANBU about wanting people to respect your dog and to learn about boundaries.
but I think it is unreasonable to expect people to think the way you do. especially "entitled" parents!

so until there is an awareness campaign or such, people won't know that they should ask for permission.

so just warn them. and explain. if all dogowners did just that parents and kids would get the message eventually. good luck.

'If you take precautions to keep your dog out of the reach of people who might hurt it then they have been inadequate if you are still encountering people on your walks. If you continue to walk your dog where you keep on meeting other people then you can't be all that worried about them hurting your dog. I am pretty sure incidents where children run up to dogs and attack them are rare as hens' teeth.'

I live near people, you know in a house, next to other houses, to walk my dog anywhere I have to go where people are...lol.

I'm not massively worried about people seriously hurting my dog though, I'm not at all worried that my dog will bite anybody (he does lick though) - I just think that if children aren't old/reliable enough to not be polite about approaching a dog then they should be supervised.

Most days when I'm walking my dog through the 3 streets I need to walk along to get into fields and woodland I'm approached by children wanting to stroke my dog, about half of them ask - that's not a problem. The ones with parents because they're young, well sometimes the parents ask - that's also not a problem. If they ask I can say yes, he especially likes being stroked just there > hang on, I'll make him sit down nice and still for you.

The ones that don't ask tend to behave in a way that either causes mild discomfort or upset to my dog, things like hugging which isn't something that comes naturally to dogs, pulling ears, ruffling up all the skin on the top of his head into wrinkles, I'd rather they didn't do things like that to him at all. So I'm now in a position of having to tell a child not to do something, while worrying that my large dog might accidentally stand on their foot or shove his huge hard head at them for a fuss while their parent completely ignores that I might have an opinion on whether I want to stop my walk and talk to a child or that their child is actually doing something that is unpleasant to a dog. I don't blame the child and I will tell them what they should do and if I'm in a bad mood I might even give them a little lecture about how my dog is ok with that even though he doesn't like it, but other dogs might not be in a loud pointed way that's actually aimed at the parent.

I don't think it actually should be me telling the child things like that though, I think their parents should be.

Older children also sometimes do things like run up to him and bark at him or taunt him with stick just out of reach, and they don't have a parent with them...again I'm not actually worried that my dog will bite them because he doesn't try to, I'm just annoyed. If your child isn't responsible enough to behave well, they shouldn't be out playing alone.

Teaching children how to behave around dogs is only in a tiny amount of cases about stopping them getting bitten, it's mostly about not causing a nuisance to other people.

You answered the wrong thing. the question was about if it's reasonable to expect a child blah blah blah. of course not! It was whether it's reasonable to expect a parent to teach a child

You can't expect anybody - parent, teacher, whatever - has taught that child anything. It would be nice but you cannot afford to act as if you expect it owing to the risks and liabilities.

In fact you have to act assuming the child has not been taught, so it is VU therefore to expect it has been.

'You can't expect anybody - parent, teacher, whatever - has taught that child anything. It would be nice but you cannot afford to act as if you expect it owing to the risks and liabilities.

In fact you have to act assuming the child has not been taught, so it is VU therefore to expect it has been.'

Not expect in the sense that assumptions are made that all children encountered will be experts in dog behaviour, expect as in - to consider reasonable.

I would consider it reasonable that parents teach their children.

It's very, very important that children should be taught not to approach strange dogs. It's not the dogs fault if it reacts to a strange child bounding up and leaping on it.

Ds is 5 and slightly wary, but will sometimes ask someone if he can stroke their dog. Dd is 3 and experiencing full tilt doggy terror due to our in laws dogs constantly barking at her. They wouldn't hurt her but the sheer noise of their barking has terrified her. So if a dog runs up to her she gets hysterical and runs away, which of course is a fun game for a dog. So I'm trying to teach her that they only want to sniff and just to stand still. Not working well at the moment!!

Tabularasa -- so walk when young children are mostly in bed? There are more ways of avoiding children than living miles out in the country.

There are probably lots of parents who don't know anything about dogs and assume they are all like Lassie or the Blue Peter dog or Snoopy.

Most parents assume if a dog is considered well trained enough to take out when there are children about then that training will include exposure to the ways of children. Most who have this assumption would be horrified to think the dog was nervous around children or likely to react negatively to a child's attention. Imo, parents who have this sort of assumption would be justified in having it, because if you are going to take a dog out among children and it isn't comfortable with children then you should rethink your walk route or your walk time due to the danger your nervous dog poses to the children. An owner who insists on taking a nervous dog out among children is being VU.

MummyPig, it sounds as if you encounter some really well behaved dogs when you are out and about . I wonder where the owners are when their dogs are cavorting around presumably off the leash.

I think it's unreasonable of dogowners to assume parents haven't taught their children not to touch dogs they meet. It's unreasonable to expect that the children would have paid attention. It's unreasonable of them to underestimate the attractiveness of their pet to children when they themselves love it. Dogs are nice animals. Children tend to love them -- it's unreasonable to expect to walk in places frequented by children when you have a nice pet with you and not take into account the nature of children or the attractiveness of dogs. It's also quite judgey to assume the parents have not tried to teach their children.