AIBU- Dog vs neighbours allergic child !

[Henryhoover12]

Please can someone tell us if we’re being unreasonable or our neighbours are. We moved to a new house and really got on with our neighbours they are very lovely and we spend lots of time speaking to them. We mentioned that we were purchasing a dog In which they had mortified looks on their faces and explained their DC is extremely allergic to dogs (e.g can’t be in class with anyone who owns a dog etc has been in hospital) we kind of brushed it off and said we can speak about it closer to the time.

After that everytime we bumped into them they kept asking if we “changed our minds” which we found so awkward but in the end we told them not getting a dog wasn’t an option is we have always wanted one but are happy to work things out so it’s safe for their child. They took this badly and didn’t speak to us for a while. Closer to us picking up the dog we went around and asked what they would like us to do to ensure safety for their child.

One of the (long list of) rules was that we didn’t let the dog out while their child was in the garden. This seemed fine at the time until we realised their child is ALWAYS in the garden. And I mean always they have a little treehouse type thing that they play in so come rain and sunshine they are out there. At first we tried to play ball like if our dog wanted to wee we would walk him to the park 10 minutes but now it’s just getting ridiculous so we have started letting him go to wee when it’s raining outside because we really can’t be asked to walk 20 minutes just for that. The last time we did the mum came our and shouted at me saying I’m going to kill her child. AIBU to think that our dog has every much right to use our garden as the child? Our poor dog loves to be outside but is trapped inside because of this and I’m starting to think it’s really unfair

@GabriellaMontez

Poor op. You're being bullied.

It's going to be hard to turn the tables as they've backed you into a corner. My suggestion is letting the dog out and ignoring the door, phone screaming etc.

Alternatively text them. "We've been thinking about your rules. It's not working for us. We've decided to do our own thing from now on. All the best"

It certainly seems to be the case that the OP is being bullied and harassed.

I agree I would be disregarding all the rules and from now on being unwavering. You tried the Mrs nice girl approach and all it's gotten you grief, dirty looks and verbal rants. Maybe it's time for a non nonsense approach and just living your life.

If a family member says anything on Rover's walk on the cul-de-sac of doom, perhaps she could say how wonderful it is that the family are considering an informal house swap with another family member so the poor child doesn't share a border with Rover?

Hopefully she reacted due to stress and will be much more reasonable when you speak to her again.

@burritofan

But also why is our dog restricted to 5 minutes a day in the garden. When we have family bbqs and he’s trapped inside it’s not fair. Wah-wah it’s not fair. Because human beings are more important than animals? Because your dog not going to a barbecue isn’t the same as a child’s potentially fatal allergy?

Honestly, you chose to get the dog despite knowing the circumstances. It’s not like you had a dog already and moved in; you weighed up a kid’s allergy and thought “Meh, who cares! Me me me! It’s my right!”

Must be a cat person.

I don’t think you’ve said what age the child is, but school-aged children playing alone don’t generally scream for no reason, and certainly not at 5 am. Does she have other disabilities in addition to the allergies? This is all getting odder and odder.

[quote missingholland]@Bargebill19 My example was meant to indicate that in some instances we need to inconvenience ourselves for the benefit of others, even if we are not technically required to do so.

In OP's situation, I would not have thought twice. I would not have gotten the dog if there was even the teeny-tiniest likelihood it might affect an innocent child's wellbeing.[/quote]
Cool that’s nice. I wouldn’t. I wouldn’t be not allowing it in the garden either. My DS adores our dog and would be devastated to not have it and they have a great time playing together in the garden. I’ve had some randoms cat walk in my back door before now and I’m really allergic (puffy eyes and wheezing within minutes of ‘contact’, days to get back to normal) can I ask all of the village/town to get rid of their wandering cats?

I wonder if the parents have that fabricated illness disorder, this all just sounds so far fetched.

And I certainly wouldn’t be sticking to any of her other ‘rules’ not sure who she thinks she is. Tell her to fuck off.

[quote Henryhoover12]@missingholland you’ve moved rooms so that your crying baby doesn’t wake the neighbour. But what if your neighbour said to you your not allowed to have a baby? But you have a baby then she adds a whole list of rules:
-baby can’t be awake at this time
-baby can’t cry at this time
-baby cant go outside when she’s outside
-baby is not to be seen or heard
-baby must be taken out of a different door
-baby’s car and car seat must not be parked on the drive[/quote]
If you really have to do all this in relation to the dog, then honestly I would move.

I understand the thought appalls you. But this is no way to live.

Are you seriously saying that the dog cannot even be seen or heard??! Barking causes anaphylaxis now??!

@Henryhoover12, this analogy would work if the very presence of my baby could actually kill the neighbour, instead of merely severely inconvenience it.

My future baby doesn't have that ability. Your dog has. Your dog is an active threat to her child's well-being. You knew that, and moved ahead nonetheless. They compromised (against their better judgement), but now the list of rules no longer works for you, as it is inconvenient and restrictive. As I wrote above, you may be legally in the right, but morally I think it is wrong.

I am really sorry about the situation, Op. It just sounds bad for everyone involved. I understand why you are frustrated, too. But in this scenario, surely a vulnerable child's wellbeing should trump everything?

[quote missingholland]@Henryhoover12, this analogy would work if the very presence of my baby could actually kill the neighbour, instead of merely severely inconvenience it.

My future baby doesn't have that ability. Your dog has. Your dog is an active threat to her child's well-being. You knew that, and moved ahead nonetheless. They compromised (against their better judgement), but now the list of rules no longer works for you, as it is inconvenient and restrictive. As I wrote above, you may be legally in the right, but morally I think it is wrong.

I am really sorry about the situation, Op. It just sounds bad for everyone involved. I understand why you are frustrated, too. But in this scenario, surely a vulnerable child's wellbeing should trump everything?[/quote]
And yet such a vulnerable child goes to school? Hmmm.

[quote missingholland]@Bargebill19 My example was meant to indicate that in some instances we need to inconvenience ourselves for the benefit of others, even if we are not technically required to do so.

In OP's situation, I would not have thought twice. I would not have gotten the dog if there was even the teeny-tiniest likelihood it might affect an innocent child's wellbeing.[/quote]
I'd have got 2.

@SixesAndEights
Yes - it’s was a probate house sale. They died to escape. (Sorry, not sorry.).

@missingholland I am shocked and stunned that so many posters believe the crazy parents' story.

Now OP tells us she abides by a whole list of rules set by these parents. I honestly would tell them to fuck off and probably get a second dog.

Bugger missed off the smiley. Sorry!

@YellowBellyCat we had 5 at one point. They would have loved us on moving in day.

[quote missingholland]@Henryhoover12, this analogy would work if the very presence of my baby could actually kill the neighbour, instead of merely severely inconvenience it.

My future baby doesn't have that ability. Your dog has. Your dog is an active threat to her child's well-being. You knew that, and moved ahead nonetheless. They compromised (against their better judgement), but now the list of rules no longer works for you, as it is inconvenient and restrictive. As I wrote above, you may be legally in the right, but morally I think it is wrong.

I am really sorry about the situation, Op. It just sounds bad for everyone involved. I understand why you are frustrated, too. But in this scenario, surely a vulnerable child's wellbeing should trump everything?[/quote]
The child isn't in immediate danger from the dog.

The child goes to school. The school have no way of being able to know if a child has come into contact with a dog.

What if a child in the classroom, brushes by a dog on their way to school and doesn't even notice?

If the parents ever go out of the house for work, shopping etc they could be in contact with someone, who has a dog.

The allergy can not be a bad as the parents are making out, because the child is in school.

So they're dicating when your dog can make a noise? How is that relevant to their child's allergies?

@HeyDemonsItsYaGirl

Is the school also entirely populated by the allergic kid's family?

Has the village started erecting a wicker effigy, by any chance?

And yet such a vulnerable child goes to school? Hmmm.

Exactly. Any argument they may have falls completely flat at the fact they think the risk of their child going to school is less than the risk of a dog living next door.

There is no reason to think this dog is a risk to their child, they will never be near it, they won't be indoors with the people who have been in contact with it and yet somehow this risk is more life threatening than their child attending school.

It's just so illogical.

Well, at least you know they won’t be round ringing your doorbell or barging into your house to “discuss”. How do you communicate with them now? Presumably they won’t come within normal speaking voice distance of you in case they pick up dog from you. Is it all emails and texts?

[quote Bargebill19]@SixesAndEights
Yes - it’s was a probate house sale. They died to escape. (Sorry, not sorry.).[/quote]
Alas, that's quite believable the more OP tells us!!!

[quote missingholland]@Henryhoover12, this analogy would work if the very presence of my baby could actually kill the neighbour, instead of merely severely inconvenience it.

My future baby doesn't have that ability. Your dog has. Your dog is an active threat to her child's well-being. You knew that, and moved ahead nonetheless. They compromised (against their better judgement), but now the list of rules no longer works for you, as it is inconvenient and restrictive. As I wrote above, you may be legally in the right, but morally I think it is wrong.

I am really sorry about the situation, Op. It just sounds bad for everyone involved. I understand why you are frustrated, too. But in this scenario, surely a vulnerable child's wellbeing should trump everything?[/quote]
But OP's dog is not an active threat to the child. Even if the child is affected by dog hair there is a 6ft fence and a hedge between the gardens.

Posters have said that a dog allergy would usually be from saliva and/or dander so how exactly is that being passed over the fence and hedge?

I take you believe the bullshit about the school? No single person there has a dog or ever comes into contact with one?

I know it's been said, but the parents must be exaggerating the allergy. There is simply no way that a child can be in school with that level of airborne allergy to such a common allergen.

I've had the same thing happen to me - a parent screamed in my face in a sports club our children went to, because her child allegedly had a severe, airborne allergy to all nuts. My child was, perfectly acceptably, eating a snack with nuts in because the sports centre had no policy, and even sold nuts in the café/vending machines. The parent insisted that the entire site was nut-free, or the child wouldn't be in there without having a reaction. Accused me of breaking rules and endangering the child. And simply could not process that we were in a public space that sold nuts ...

Your neighborhood sounds toxic though. I'd move.

@missingholland Are you the neighbour?

How exactly would a dog, outside, in a separate garden cause such an extreme allergic reaction?

Only read to the end of page 9, so apologies if this has been suggested further on. As the cul-de-sac is comprised of family members except for you, why don't they swap houses with one of these so that the neighbours either side are dog-free family? An easy, no cost solution that would work for everybody.

Perhaps some need to remember that everything I have done for the neighbour has been from the goodness of our own heart. We have compromised they have not (not sure what you think the neighbour has done to compromise- granting us to get a dog is not a privelledged they had) we have followed their list despite not having to as legally we don’t and actually morally most people think it’s bonkers.