to wonder why anyone with young children would have a dog as a pet or on their home?

[needtobediscreet]

In light of the many incidents of death and injury caused to young children by dogs, even those not previously considered a danger, I can't help but wonder WHY anyone would. The latest seems to involve a six day old baby in west Wales.

Don't get me wrong, I love animals. I grew up with cats and had a pet dog myself when I was in secondary school. But the nicest of dogs can 'turn' it seems and the results are a lot worse than when a cat gets a bit upset.

Clearly in the majority of cases the affected families weren't deliberately neglectful but why take the risk?

I'm prepared for lots of responses from dog owners....!!!

Are you sure a child hasn't been hurt in the presence of an adult??? Oh yes thats right a damn sight more often than a dog has hurt a child or attacked a child.

As in adults hurt children far more than dogs

I don't cosleep either...

I just looked up the temperament of a Malamute and whilst it seems loyal and affectionate, the website said:

"This breed should be supervised around unfamiliar small animals, as they have a strong prey instinct. "

I expect it didn't identify the 6 day old baby as human or one of its family

This has to be the responsibility of the parents.

soldatauction the difference is that a baby would not survive without a parent figure, but it would be perfectly alright without a dog in the house. So although both parents and dogs can both potentially harm a baby, the dog is not counterbalanced by the same upside.

Actually, co-sleeping means room sharing as well as bed sharing though. NHS advice doesn't recommend bed sharing though. Baby in their own bed in same room as mum and dad til 6 months minimum is the advice I believe?

needtobediscreet
Do you believe co-sleeping should banned? And anyone who does co-sleep should deemed as a neglectful parent?

There is - as usual with dog threads - a lot of hysteria, a lot of misinformation and a certain amount of ignorance (in the true sense, not the pejorative) being displayed on here.

Dogs do not need to be shown they are "bottom of the pack". That is outdated dominance theory bollocks and does a lot more harm than good. (If I could send Cesar Milan and his disciples on a long walk off a short pier I'd be happy.) Dogs are far less 'pack' animals than wolves. Dogs are not wolves. They need to be socialised, integrated and trained responsibly but NOT dominated or treated as a species which is not their own.

All dogs COULD 'turn'. Very few dogs WILL 'turn'. The idea of a dog as an unexploded bomb in which a switch could flick at any moment rather melodramatic and inaccurate. In the vast, vast majority of cases where a dog has bitten/attacked, there WILL have been a trigger and there WILL have been signs which could have been read before it reached bite stage. Unfortunately too many people do not know how to read canine body language and so the loss of control, when it does come, appears to be 'out of the blue'.

Dogs should never be left alone with small children, full stop. This is also important to prevent the child provoking the dog. Too many parents find it impossible to believe that their little cherub could have teased / hurt / irritated the dog and so the dog gets all the blame - and suffers the consequences - which leads to yet more mythology around dogs attacking 'unprovoked'.

It is simply not possible to generalise about rescue dogs v puppies regarding suitability for family life. Some puppies are inherently timid (just like some people are) and are less suited to the possible rough and tumble of life with children. Some breeders are irresponsible and couldn't care less about anything other than pound signs. Some rescue dogs have been surrendered due to a change in owner's circumstances and are calm, well-trained, well-socialised, have been much-loved and come with a full history known. It's common sense - if you have young children, don't get a dog where there are clear issues / gaps in the dog's history / a breed with a history of being used for fighting or guarding if you are a novice owner with limited experience / doubts about the breeder's motives. If choosing a puppy, pick a bold confident playful one not the one that hides at the back.

I did have my child in our room in a crib then a cot til 7 months though. Two adults and a tiny baby sharing a double bed never felt right to me though.

spare - I believe co-sleeping is risky, yes. How would you police such a ban?

Meant to add - there are things which can be done before bringing a baby home to acclimatise the dog to the change - playing tapes of babies crying, bringing home a blanket from hospital with baby's scent on it, taking the dog for walks with the pram etc. It gives a chance to assess how the dog might react to the change as well as preparing it for the new arrival.

I have a friend whose dog bit her badly. She needed placcy surgery. But apparently it was her fault, he was a lovely dog etc etc (he wasn't any of the dangerous breeds, he was a pretty small whippety cross/mongrel). Then he bit her toddler DD. Badly. Apparently it wasn't his fault that time either it was the toddler's fault. But that time sanity prevailed and the dog was put down. And then....she bought another one. UTTER madness.

Ilovexmastime , I don't need to defend my position against your strawman argument, but I will say this...did the baby make an informed decision to put themselves at risk?

Do babies make informed decisions to go for a car ride or bath?

LtEveDallas,

Whatever 'feelings' you get about me and any ad hominem attacks are irrelevant.

Truth is this: to leave a child in the presence of an animal that's jaws are bigger than it is just daft. I see toddlers running around with german shepherds and I think, 'wtf is the parent thinking?!'

For safety's sake, no matter how well-trained the dog is, it is daft to do it. So what if an adult is present? Would they be able to pull the dog away? Do they even know the signs of imminent dog attack?

You know I am not anti-dog at all; I like them, however, common sense must be applied: people shouldn't leave certain dogs around children-and NEVER around babies. If they are left alone together, it should be with a dog of a size and breed that will not likely do it much damage if it does 'lose it' i.e. a primary school child with a little small-jawed Yorkie seems about right.

Why on earth would any parent risk it? Oh yeah, I forgot; it's 'never bitten before', 'it's a gentle dog', the excuses go on and on...

..that's my point HazleNutt. I can make those decisions, but a small child cannot.

and bluedays has it right.

so what's your point, normalish? Yes, parents make a lot of decisions that could potentially pose a risk to their children. Why are dogs so different than anything else?

I looked at statistics and 17 people have been killed by dogs since 2005 and it is estimated that 200,000 are bitten by a dog in a year.
For the year ending June 2013- 1730 people were killed in car accidents and 23,000 were seriously injured.
Babies who co sleep with the parent are 5x more likely to risk SIDs than those who sleep separately in the same room.
Yet people still take children out in cars and co sleep.

5 people are killed by a lightning strike every year, that's more than killed by dogs. As with dogs, you can take some precautions and not, say, hug a big metal pole in the middle of a field during a thunderstorm. But saying that all parents who go outside with their children are irresponsible is going a bit far, no?

That's really sensible advice SelectAUserName. My sister got her dog 'ready' for my neice and they were inseperable pretty much from the start.

The dog was a rescue, had been used as an 'experiment' dog (one of the Whitminster Beagles) and had never been around children. She'd been my sisters 'baby' all the years she had thought she was infertile and they were terrified when my sister discovered she was miraculously pregnant. She was given that advice and went over and above it to make sure that she could have both dog and baby.

Sensible planning/training and supervision meant they were safe together and they had a wonderful relationship.

I was addressing a remark from someone else. Go back and take a look if you want to.

I have no strong feelings about dogs and young children but reading a few posts on here has concerned me
I would never ever trust any dog unsupervised with a child or have a dog I wasn't strong enough to restrain if necessary....
I know someone who has the loveliest, most obedient lab, about 10 yrs old, had from being a puppy. A family dog, been fantastic with the DCs, always been patient, didn't even need a lead. Came as soon as called. Perfectly happy with the smaller breed puppy the family got and great with other dogs. There couldn't be a better dog.
Out of the blue it took a chunk out of a puppy's face, so badly the puppy needed surgery. Out on a walk, no warning, the puppy wasn't bothering it, they had met plenty times before . It just attacked. I and anyone else who knew about it was (and honestly I still am) completely shocked ...
And I will never trust another dog again ...
And for all those saying how old is old enough to leave with a dog - what about the 14 year old who was killed by dogs in her friend's house? I would say not until the children are stronger than the dog -or all the dogs together if more than one.

Sorry NormalishDude, but I don't understand the strawman comment.

But no, the baby did not make the decision to live with a dog, just like, as HazleNutt says, the baby also does not make the decision to take a bath or a car ride. So, what is your point?

As far as I can see a parent constantly weighs up the pros and cons of situations. For example, it is perfectly possible to live without a car, but due to me thinking that driving a car brings many benefits, I choose to drive a car. It is also perfectly possible to live without a dog, but due to me thinking that living with a dog brings many benefits, I choose to live with a dog. In both cases, in my opinion, the benefits outweigh the risks.

The malamute in question has not been PTS, so far nothing has been put forward to indicate the dog did do this, otherwise the dog would not be here now, something doesn't add up tbh.....
I have an Alaskan Malamute, I have 3 children, the youngest is nearly 3 years old. My moot LOVES all children, he is loyal, kind, loving and above all my children's best friend.
Already the backlash has begun, Mals and Huskies are being put up for sale on places like FB/Gumtree stating reason for sale " due to recent events surrounding this breed ". I help with several Sled dog rescues, they are full to the brim with abused/abandoned Sled dogs due to idiots getting them and not understanding the work involved with them.

Statistically you're better off getting a dog & getting rid of the parents.

What a stupid, provocative post.