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?

I can prevent my son running up to dogs but I cannot be sure he would't grab at a passing dog. It would be sensible for owners to keep their dogs out of touching distance of children but some do not. My son looks like he is old enough to understand but he doesn't.

So math if my son runs up to the back of your car to watch you put the handbrake down as it moves away whose fault is it if he gets knocked over. The driver's according to you, even though I know he a) doesn't understand and being knocked over b) is magnetically attracted to handbrakes c) won't necessarily respond appropriately to a spoken suggestion

Ds3 has always been attracted to animals. So when he was too young to reliably respond to spoken instructions I supervised him very closely around them. Whether it was a horse (obviously not always closely enough around horse), a cat or a dog.

Lazy - now you know horses go swimming on family beaches will you be keeping your children away from them or is it okay for children to approach any horse they like?

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

If anything happens to the child it will Absolutely be the dog owners liability and fault. So it is very, very important that dog owners be taught to ensure their dogs do not hurt children.

Got to love the suggestions here - as parents cannot be expected to control their children, dog owners should move to the middle of Gobi desert, so they would never meet any humans when walking their dogs.

Does that apply to other dangers as well? As children cannot be expected to pay any attention to what their parents say and could, of course, run across the road unexpectedly, then all drivers should only drive where there are no people around?

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

Why is it reasonable? You are looking at the world from a dog centred view, and to you the world must bend to the needs of your dog.

Outside of the doggy reality distortion field on this thread the world has a child centred view, so it is unreasonable to expect them to have a dog centred view.

I don't understand why some parents here only seem to be concerned about whose fault it is. So your child ran up to some strange dog and kicked it, because you think it's not your responsibility to control your child and teach him not to do that. Dog bit the child. Yes, dog should not have and I'm sure it's very satisfying for you to see that the dog owner is punished and dog killed, but your child was still bitten.
As you state here that dogs are animals and therefore dangerous, then surely it would make sense to teach kids to behave around them, even if there is no law that says you should?

1. Parents should teach their children how to behave around potentially dangerous things- ponds, cars, ovens, dogs, matches,chain saws,glass coffee tables.....

2. People who own said potentially dangerous things should behave as if children haven't been taught or have forgotten.

Sorted.

"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 hmm 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."

It might be unlikely that a child kicks the dog BUT IT HAPPENED - I was right there. And my dog did not react beyond trying to run away (which she couldn't do because she was being controlled on a lead).
I am not going to assume that children will know how to behave but can you not see that if your child does know, then it massively lessens any risk, to any of the parties involved? That is what I am saying. I am not talking about criminal responsibility, or any of that.

I have said repeatedly I will take responsibility for my dog. I am STILL waiting for other people to say ok, and I will take responsibility for my child. Which in all the arguing still hasn't happened - I am still being held responsible for your child.
I'll say it again, I know children forget. But they also forget about busy roads - are you so complacent there that you don't then bother to teach them road safety, holding all drivers responsible for your child's safety even if the child does something to jeopardise their own safety, however unintentionally? Or do you say "Hmm, they may forget but if I teach them how to be safe on a road then there is a better chance they will remember and be safe."

Because for me, that is what this conversation is about. Teach your child to ask before approaching a dog, they may forget but equally they may remember (like my 4 year old does - it's not impossible) and everyone is happy. I am getting more extreme to try and make my point so that you will listen!

It's about numbers - if you don't teach your child the basics, then they are more likely to approach every dog they see and the possibility of a) harm to them and b) annoying dog owners is much higher. And if no children are ever taught the basics then every dog walk will become fraught for every dog owner. But if all children knew, then the majority of dog walks will be fine, the majority of children will be fine. And yes, you will still get the odd time when children forget but it's not going to ruin every walk. And I don't become less vigilant, but it still lessens any risk if kids ask first.

Why are you not acknowledging that, but still banging on about me being responsible? I will and do take responsibility for my side of things. DO YOU?????

Oh, and I can't walk after young children are in bed. Unless I plan on leaving my own young children alone in bed while I walk the dog.....

Yes curlew, I agree. Would just like to add a couple of points:
I don't own dogs. None of my friends or family own dogs. I know nothing about dog ownership or behaviour. So whilst I can teach my son to ask before touching a dog, and not to run up to them, pull their tails or poke them, i can't really teach him anything about doggy 'signals'. It's pretty unreasonable to expect people to just know this sort of stuff - dogs are popular but not ubiquitous.

Also, on every occasion when my son (23 months old) has been in contact with a dog I have held him back, asked the owner if the dog is friendly and can be petted, and really made an effort to ensure my son petted the dog very gently and carefully, and not for too long. Each time the owner has acted as if I was insulting them and the dog by being so careful. I've been told 'oh don't worry, this dog is bombproof', as if it's fine for my toddler to crawl all over the poor animal! As far as I'm concerned the dog might be gentle as anything, but my toddler isn't! I'm not only protecting my son from the dog, but also protecting the dog from my son. It seems .like you can't win. Be careful and teach your kids to be cautious and you're insulting someone's precious pet. Don't bother and you're an irresponsible parent.

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.

But that's the whole question! Is it unreasonable to ask people to teach their kids how to behave around dogs. You have just said it's unreasonable to assume they haven't been taught. Therefore, the OP is not unreasonable and despite pages of arguing about who is liable etc, you have said all we are asking - teach your kids what to do.

And I will fully expect that they may not remember, but it massively reduces the chances of anything happening (whether that's a bite to them, or an annoyance to me). As I have said repeatedly.

Well I agree with that curlew and it's how I approach the world with my kids and dog. (Although it would be nice if the general public recognised that some near-adults don't understand - even when the look 'normal' I digress).

But it seems bonkers to make dogs a special case. So dog owners are always responsible no matter what a child does to a dog. Yet, presumably car drivers aren't if my son runs up to the back of a car about to reverse to look at the handbrake. And what about these horses swimming on family beaches or wild ponies on the moor. Lots of children love horses - whose job is it to keep then away from them. The horse owner (who might be hundreds of miles away in the case of a moor pony) or the parents?

Yes children (and near-adults) don't always get it right. That's why I never take my eyes off my 14 year old son in a car park and an always close enough to grab him. Likewise I kept a close eye on ds3 around animals when he was 2 because I knew he would approach dogs, cats, horses, rabbits - anything.

Take police horses. Highly trained & highly trained in being absolutely bombproof. I still wouldn't let my children run up to a random police horse - because that would be idiotic- however bombproof the horse is.

"It's also quite judgey to assume the parents have not tried to teach their children."

And yes, it might be judgey. But the problem is that this is what I've been asking for all along, nothing more. And yet the response has been "If something happens to my child it is your fault". No mention of saying "Yes, I will teach my child to ask first." Simply a rush to apportion blame to me and my dog. I have said repeatedly that children will forget. I have one. I know. I'm not assuming all children are perfect. So I have control of my dog, just in case. But while I've been saying that, the people 'agin' me are still just saying "But you must control your dog" without adding on "while I control my child" which is getting annoying. I'm judging because I'm not reading anything that suggests you might bother to teach your child appropriate behaviour (other than from people who also have dogs!). Maybe it's not how you meant it but it's how it's coming across.

Incidentally my son has slipped out of my grasp & run up to the back of cars firing up ready to watch the handbrake go down. Correct response? Run over and retrieve him or leave him and say 'the car driver has to expect a (rather large) child to run up to the back of a car he's about to reverse it will be the driver's fault if he runs ds1 over so I'll just leave him there'

Because that's what a few seen to be saying about dogs.

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

Sigh.'

Lazey, can you expand on this comment so I can respond?

math, 'walk when young children are mostly in bed?' Why should people do this? Do others not have a right to choose to walk their dogs when they want to? Are you suggesting a type of curfew or restricted hours for dogs and their owners?

But it seems bonkers to make dogs a special case. So dog owners are always responsible no matter what a child does to a dog

It's the bloody law!! There is a Dangerous Dogs Act precisely because a lot of them have injured, maimed and killed children. When will you get that into your head?

That is why it is absolutely unreasonable for Dog owners to try and offload their responsibility onto the parents of other children.

The only bonkers people here are dog nuts who seem, 26 pages in, to be completely unable to grasp this exceedingly simple principle.

ok lazy so if my kid went and poked youin the eye it would be your fault.

good to know

There are also laws against dangerous driving but these do not negate the pedestrians responsibility to act safely and considerately around cars and roads.

I don't expect children to be experts in canine behavior, or even know anything at all at about canine behavior. Normally if a small child stops and asks if they can pet my dog I will come down their level and show them how to pet my dog and give an impromptu lesson on canine calming signals. Children are smarter than they are given credit for, a lot of the children I do this to will repeat to me what I've taught them the next time I meet them e.g "Is it okay to stroke Whippy today? But I won't wave my hand about over her head because I know doggies don't like that, I will stroke her on her front and sides where she can see me. Is it okay if I give her a cuddle? I know she likes cuddles but lots of dogs don't, so you shouldn't cuddle them unless you ask if they like it first" etc.

But nobody is offloading that responsibility Lazy.

I certainly have repeatedly said I am responsible for my dog.
I haven't yet seen you say that you take responsibility for your child though. Not once. I did see you say "Whatever my child does..." which is implying, whether you meant it or not, that your child can do whatever it likes and it's ok by you. It's how it came across.

Other people with children (and dogs) have said how they take measures to keep their own children safe, as well as keeping their dog under control. And you have ignored that and simply said "Dog owners are liable, dog owners are liable." There's no attempt to acknowledge that yes, while children can and do forget, as parents you can a) teach them in the first place and b) supervise them properly, and then in all likelihood, the situation where the dog bites the child will never arise. I manage that while simultaneously controlling my dog so it's not impossible. What is driving me mad is not a denial of my responsibility to control my dog, or some bubble where I see my dog as more important than anything else, but you completely ignoring the issue of parental responsibility. And let's face it, if your child, most times, does ask before approaching a strange dog, then the chance of them getting into a harmful situation is reduced massively, isn't it? And isn't that a good thing?

And I am interested in whether your attitude of "It is down to someone else to ensure my child's safety" extends to cars and their drivers, or whether you take a few basic precautions as well.

Um lazy - I suspect if you ran my son over because he ran up to your car because he saw the handbrake was about to go down and you reversed into him you could probably be prosecuted for driving without due care and attention or some sort of offence if it was decided to go down that route.

No matter, I still feel as a parent I have a duty not to put a driver in that position. I know he is attracted to handbrakes so I take steps to protect him (and drivers). Did the same with animal obsessed ds3 & animals before he was old enough to understand.

I don't think it's unreasonable for people to try and teach their children how to act around animals. You don't need to own a pet to know that running up to them, shouting screaming waving arms about and being rough is not any way to behave even approaching people or animals. No one should ever assume that the dog they meat or the child running up to a dog does know how to behave but it's common sense at least to try.

Parks are usually fenced off so dogs can't get in so yes kids can do what they like. BUT fields are commonly used as walking areas by dog owners and by children do everyone needs to act appropriately.

For what it's worth....IMO (as a dog owner and parent of a toddler) if a dog is on a lead it is up to parents to ensure the child either doesn't approach the dog or seeks permission to do so first - the child is the parents responsibility and the dog owner should not be liable for the dogs actions. If the dog is off the lead the responsibility is with the dog owner and should the dog harm a child even if through play its the dog owners responsibility.

"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."

My dog isn't nervous around young children, he like most dogs dislikes certain things being done to him, stroking is fine, tugging and prodding isn't. He won't react in a negative way towards the child when a child does that to him - but that doesn't make it ok. He is a living creature capable of feeling pain, so funnily enough I expect parents to take reasonable steps to prevent their children from causing pain to him. If there's a very young child poking him in the face as very young children seem to like to do to dogs, a parent telling them that's not a nice thing to do to a dog doesn't seem like it would be too much to ask, yet some parents don't.

Dogs need more than one walk a day - actually as it's been very hot, I have been walking him late, it makes not much difference as I explicitly said that it's not just very young children that are an issue.

Basically all dogs and children are not and never will be robots. So it is unfair and silly to expect them to behave 100% in all situations so a little give and take is needed

What I would like to know is if some parents make more of an effort to keep their child away from certain breeds (rotti, staffy any other 'dangerous child killing monster type breed') but are less cautious if it's say a lab, springer, dalmatian 'supposedly child friendly breeds'

If you can keep your child from one it is perfectly reasonable to expect you to have the same ability to keep them away from all.

Having accepted that my dogs are far too tempting to your child (thus highlighting the fact you should probably be using reins) I would kindly ask that:

• You give me time to put the dogs in a safer position and let you know which one you can stroke (this means NO patting as patting at that age is far more like hitting) and where you can stroke them (preferably their back as its further away from their head and is less threatening). Be aware that stroking the wrong one or not giving me prior warning that you would like to stroke them may result in you being peed on... So it really is in your best interest (and despite my embarrassment I won't be training boy dog out of it as it's a good deterrent).

• Yes I may have several spotty puppies with me this does not suddenly mean you no longer have to ask as puppies are more likely to jump up, scratch and nip. So if anything you should be far more gentle and ask politely. Again accepting that no means no. They are not public property and you have no automatic right to pet them

• My main concern is always for my dogs and my child so if I say no I mean NO. Not have a crafty stroke as a walk way ect

• If your child has sticky fingers they should not be touching my dogs unless you would like to bath them?

• If your child is eating/drinking they should not be allowed to come up to my dogs, nor should they be allowed to spill said food/drink on my dogs or shove it in their faces. Again would you like the hassle of washing my dogs (random blobs of melted chocolate etc on a white coat)? They are a breed known for their food obsession so training them not to eat (and potentially accidentally nip your child) the food shoved at them takes a lot of work

:)