Dog

[UtterlyRainbowed]

Who is being unreasonable? Please decide:

Person A and Person B are in a relationship.

Person A has a dog.

Person B has two children - 11 months and 4.

Person strokes and plays with the dog, gives the dog food, has offered to take the dog on walks and agreed to go on a camping (compromised on a pod not a tent) holiday with A, the children and the dog.

Person A feels that while B likes the dog B isn't that bothered about it and is over protective of their children around the dog as B will often move the youngest away from the dog and tell the oldest to be careful. B says that's just parenting as the dog isn't a huge fan of A's nephew. A says the dog is completely safe and it is the nephew who doesn't like dogs.

Who is unreasonable? I will say who I am after a few responses. Thank you

A is being unreasonable . You should always be vigilant around children and dogs.

Person A.
Childrens safety trumps hurt feelings about the potential risk caused by the dog. And
Person B tolerates the dog, because that's what people do with other peoples dogs.

Why would anyone care which person you are?
Keep the children safe around the dog, teach them to behave around it as you are doing.

And you’re obviously ‘B’.

I think person A. Person B just sounds like they're being sensible with regards to their children and the dog. Dogs can be unpredictable and it would be shame to put them in a position where they nip a child because they've been accidently fallen on, petted too vigorously etc by said child. We have recently got a pup and I'm always teaching the children to be careful around him so they don't hurt him and I supervise them whilst they're playing with him.

Person a is being unreasonable.

A is being unreasonable but clearly you are B because it seems lie a very pro "B" version of events

All dogs need respect, particularly those not used to children and you say the dog isn't keen on another child? Therefore B is being a good parent in being cautious. The children also need to know how to treat dogs (my DS hugs our dog so have to drum it into him that not every dog would like it) so it's a happy balance of including the dog and person A in the family activities in a safe way.

Presuming you all at some point want a nice peaceful relaxed relationship between the children and the dog, person B is right... the dog needs to build a gradual relationship with the children where it’s happy to be around them and the children need to be taught how to behave around a dog respectfully.

I hate this A and B bollocks so YABU for not just saying who you are

B is right to be cautious of children and dog. Even the most placid dog can be provoked by a small child poking it.

The dog owner is BU.

I've been glamping - it was a garden shed really - with kids and dog, I wouldn't bother taking the dog again.

Person A is BU.

Reading it back it is clear I'm B.

I did try to be as balance as possible and A doesn't know I've posted this but I did use their actual complaints in the post.

Thank you. For clarifying that I'm not being unreasonable. Am I supposed to love the dog as much as they do? I don't expect them to love my kids like I do at all

Dog owner here! Person A is being completely irresponsible. However easy going, docile they may seem dogs can be unpredictable, especially if children make sudden moments etc.
Our previous dog was a particularly child friendly breed & very laid back but I was always very careful with him around children.
If something happens it is not going to end well for the child or the dog! Does A not understand that ?

Person A Is being unreasonable

I visited a friend who’s big lab wouldn’t leave my dd who’s petrified of dogs alone. My friend insisted it was a healing dog and was an angel.

It spoiled the visit tbh and I left early as she wouldn’t put him away. Some people are crazy when it comes to their dogs ..

You don't have to love someone else's fucking dog in order to treat it reasonably and kindly, which I'm sure you do. There is a big difference between being cruel to an animal and just not... slobbering over it and cuddling it constantly if you'd rather not. And there is nothing wrong with teaching children to be cautious around dogs. The nicest dog might nip or bite if it is unwell or the children handle it clumsily.

Also, presumably the nephew has known the dog all his life and still doesn't like it. I'd take that into account.

Person A is one of those idiots who treats a dog more indulgently than they would a child, and thinks anyone who doesn't love the dog in exactly the same way and to the same extent is failing. No matter what, the dog's imagined, anthropomorphic wishes (not it's real, dog needs and dog wants but the owner's projections) will trump the needs and wants of everyone except the owner themselves.

You can't win with people like that unless you are as daft as they are. It's not actually about the dog, but the dog is set up as a holy cow who's largely imaginary wish to be in your small children's space and not given boundaries must never be questioned for fear of implying you don't love the dog which is an unthinkable crime.

Sensible dog owners know dogs are dogs and treat them as such, which includes maintaining a healthy caution around children and firm boundaries. The dog owner you describe is the dangerous over indulgent anthropomorphizing type and tbh best kept at arms length.

I've got two dogs and one child.

Personally I wouldn't move an 11 month old away from a 'safe' dog unless they were being heavy handed (mine went through a 'Doggie Hug' stage) or the dog looked unhappy with their presence.

I would never leave small children and dogs alone, and I would always remind children to be gentle and careful around dogs. - so I'd say you both have a point.

I'd be really wary about the Nephew thing though, how exactly is the dog 'not his biggest fan?' What it does in his presence is important I think.

My in laws have two dogs and the older one is not great with kids. She isn't nasty and mostly just avoids them (though has been known to growl if cornered by a child trying to stoke her - not my child) but I'm extra vigilant with her because there's that extra level of unpredictably. I kept DC away from her in the unstable toddler phase because I wasn't sure what her reaction to random movement would be.

YOU’re clearly Being sensible keeping your DC and the dog safe. There’s a ‘useful resources’ thread in the doghouse if you advanced search which has some great links to dog-child safety and reading canine body language - perhaps show that to your DP.

You do sound a bit resentful overall though - not sure what going camping etc has to do with anything!

Also the 'you don't care enough about my dog' thing is weird.

Sounds like Person A has precious puppy syndrome (DH had a touch when we got our first dog before DC), no one else will ever love the dog that much, because it's ridiculous!

There's a line between making sure the dog is happy and healthy and planning your entire life around them.

Your children are obviously the priority in this situation - if A can't see that they're not worth your time.

Person A is being unreasonable. And B needs to be careful about what sounds like a relatively new partner accusing her of being 'over protective' of her very young children.

I've mentioned the camping thing because everything revolves around the dog. He won't leave the dog at home alone. I probably am sounding resentful at the moment I've been moaned at for not loving the dog enough again so I just got frustrated I guess.

Protecting children around a dog is reasonable. Some dogs can get annoyed by children. How long has the dog been around the children and are the children understanding of dogs and their personal space.

Stitchglitched I'm only over protective when it comes to the dog, apparently. I do take your point on board though - thank you :)