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

Haven't RTFT but if they are that concerned, why didn't one of their relatives (who live in the cul de sac) buy the house next to them, then put the vacant house up for sale instead?

@SionnachRua

Think it's far more likely that OP has a neighbour who wants to control and bully the new blood out of their family's road than they have a neighbour whose child has a highly improbable, rare level of allergy, tbh.

That has crossed my mind too.

I think it's time to push back a bit. Interesting the husband never said anything when Ops DH was moving the cars.

Something just isn't stacking up.

@steff13

Regardless of the severity of the allergy, a dog separated by a 6' tall fence and a row of hedges poses no risk to the child.

They are going to have a come up with a way for this child to navigate life in a world with dogs. They can only control her environment for so long. How is she going to go to college, get a job, etc.? There's no way to ensure that every person she comes in contact with in life hasn't had recent contact with a dog.

how even will this child ever be able to go anywhere as you can't know no dog hasn't been there recently because if the allergy is so severe it can be brought on by a dog next door.... is someone going to walk in front of the child at all times, decontaminating where she's going to walk?

[quote AudacityBaby]@Washyourtoes Bit different when it’s a question of legality though. If OP’s neighbour manages to get the law changed so that nobody next door to her can own a dog then that’s a whole other ball game.

I’m talking about a neighbour who thinks she can impose rules on another person, and posters here who think the neighbour is correct because of moral obligations. I don’t accept that at all.[/quote]
Yes, but that's what I was saying before. Being right is all well and good. I think anyone would be hard pushed to argue that OP was unreasonable. But I cannot imagine a scenario where my desire to have a pet (notably one I obtained AFTER knowing about the situation) outweighed the life of a child. Literally actually. I just can't quite get my head around the callous calls of well then the parents of this disabled child (who is unable to go to school, nearly died a few months ago and is already essentially unable to leave her home except to her family who thankfully live around her) should just move away and never see anyone ever again. So OP can have a pet in her garden.

Sometimes being right just isn't everything.

Yes, but that's what I was saying before. Being right is all well and good. I think anyone would be hard pushed to argue that OP was unreasonable. But I cannot imagine a scenario where my desire to have a pet (notably one I obtained AFTER knowing about the situation) outweighed the life of a child. Literally actually. I just can't quite get my head around the callous calls of well then the parents of this disabled child (who is unable to go to school, nearly died a few months ago and is already essentially unable to leave her home except to her family who thankfully live around her) should just move away and never see anyone ever again. So OP can have a pet in her garden.

That would be a good point, if the child's life were actually in danger. But you can't reasonably believe that it is. The only thing keeping the dog out of the yard is doing is assuaging the anxiety of the parents.

@Washyourtoes I think the calls for NDN to move are coming from the fact that the only way to maintain the desired life for the child is for everyone in her proximity to live their lives in a certain way, which isn’t realistic or sustainable. I can see why they come across as callous but the answer cannot be to force everyone else to design their own lives should it.

Cars would be a better example. Currently they take precedence over the lives and wellbeing of children. Are you in favour of banning them?

but surely if the allergy was so severe that it could affect her from next door, one of those relatives who already live on the cul-de sac (or even another one) could have bought that house to protect her? They can't rely on forcing everyone who ever lives next door to them

[quote AudacityBaby]@Washyourtoes I think the calls for NDN to move are coming from the fact that the only way to maintain the desired life for the child is for everyone in her proximity to live their lives in a certain way, which isn’t realistic or sustainable. I can see why they come across as callous but the answer cannot be to force everyone else to design their own lives should it.

Cars would be a better example. Currently they take precedence over the lives and wellbeing of children. Are you in favour of banning them?[/quote]
But it isn't controlling someone's life. It was them asking them to please not own one particular kind of pet.

And yes that is a huge deal. I get that. I have pets too and adore them. Just not as big of a deal as a small child's life.

Cars are a general issue on a population level. And yes since you asked I do what I can in voting for parties which seek to achieve a sustainable future for future generations. Not that that has much to do with the OPs dilemma. I guess not even a dilemma. Ultimately no one can force her to not live her life in undisturbed bliss with her dog.

Totally agree with what PPs have said about why didn’t the family club together and buy OPs house then rent it out to control who lives in there (without dogs!). Also if it really is life and death why don’t they do a house swap with other family in the road and be enclosed on both sides by non-dog owners who are family too?

Seems like they’re hell bent on getting their own way and give zero fucks about putting OP out so that they aren’t put out themselves.

OP, any chance you can locate and befriend a parent, teacher or employeeof the school & get the scuttlebutt on how precautions are handled there? Are all families the girl might encounter required to be dog-free?

This clan is trying to bully you out of your home, that's obvious. I'd be tempted to start fostering additional dogs.

And as a PP said, how do they even know what is happening in your private fenced garden??

@steff13

Yes, but that's what I was saying before. Being right is all well and good. I think anyone would be hard pushed to argue that OP was unreasonable. But I cannot imagine a scenario where my desire to have a pet (notably one I obtained AFTER knowing about the situation) outweighed the life of a child. Literally actually. I just can't quite get my head around the callous calls of well then the parents of this disabled child (who is unable to go to school, nearly died a few months ago and is already essentially unable to leave her home except to her family who thankfully live around her) should just move away and never see anyone ever again. So OP can have a pet in her garden.

That would be a good point, if the child's life were actually in danger. But you can't reasonably believe that it is. The only thing keeping the dog out of the yard is doing is assuaging the anxiety of the parents.

Based on what do I know it is not? It sounds like the parents took the risk of sending their child to school with as many adjustments in place as possible (which according to this thread were already completely unreasonable also). The child's teacher clearly also thought so and saw a dog at some point prior to coming into contact with the child. Landing her in hospital with anaphylaxis over Christmas. And subsequently withdrawn from school.

So yes I can't say I would view the parents anxiety as disproportionate.

Being told what kind of pet I can or can’t have is an element of control over my life. It may not be a great degree of control but it is control.

I guess the cars example is interesting for me because unlike the situation the OP is in, it is proven that they cause death to children (both from air pollution and accidents). Yet it’s accepted that they’re necessary and therefore the balance tips in their favour. I’d be surprised if those calling the OP selfish and saying they’d never own something that risked a child’s life didn’t have a car on their drive.

Anyway, I don’t think we’re going to convince each other so shall we agree to disagree?

@Washyourtoes

We don’t know for definite that the child has been pulled from school or even if they were, for what reason. That is pure speculation. The op has said she doesn’t t know for definite.
So until there are facts that the op can verify all we can do is speculate.
Based on what the op has said. It fair to view the parents as being disproportionate and unreasonable.

[quote Bargebill19]@Washyourtoes

We don’t know for definite that the child has been pulled from school or even if they were, for what reason. That is pure speculation. The op has said she doesn’t t know for definite.
So until there are facts that the op can verify all we can do is speculate.
Based on what the op has said. It fair to view the parents as being disproportionate and unreasonable.[/quote]
Guess that is just not a gamble I would be willing to take.

I apologise if I have portrayed the parents and the family who live in the cul de sac as vindictive horrible people. They are all lovely, who are dealing with a difficult situation. We all really got on. I think the issue is that the parents have sort of forgotten that the list we were following wasn’t “norm for us” it was a huge favour and when they started forgetting to be appreciative of that it’s kind of hurtful. For her to shout “your going to kill my child” rather then just “op don’t forget my child is out there let me just get her in if your going to take your dog out” and I will of apologised fully for not realising. She knows we bed backwards to ensure a safe environment for her child and so those words really hurt me

@AudacityBaby

Being told what kind of pet I can or can’t have is an element of control over my life. It may not be a great degree of control but it is control.

I guess the cars example is interesting for me because unlike the situation the OP is in, it is proven that they cause death to children (both from air pollution and accidents). Yet it’s accepted that they’re necessary and therefore the balance tips in their favour. I’d be surprised if those calling the OP selfish and saying they’d never own something that risked a child’s life didn’t have a car on their drive.

Anyway, I don’t think we’re going to convince each other so shall we agree to disagree?

But it isn't a fair comparison. Your driving is not directly potentially putting the life of a specific child at risk.

Ultimately like I said we don't even disagree overall. The OP has every right to have a dog. And to let it run around her property as she wishes. And to tell her neighbours that it's their problem to keep their child safe.

I am just saying that morally that is not the kind of 'right' I would want to be.

@Henryhoover12

I apologise if I have portrayed the parents and the family who live in the cul de sac as vindictive horrible people. They are all lovely, who are dealing with a difficult situation. We all really got on. I think the issue is that the parents have sort of forgotten that the list we were following wasn’t “norm for us” it was a huge favour and when they started forgetting to be appreciative of that it’s kind of hurtful. For her to shout “your going to kill my child” rather then just “op don’t forget my child is out there let me just get her in if your going to take your dog out” and I will of apologised fully for not realising. She knows we bed backwards to ensure a safe environment for her child and so those words really hurt me

Understandable. That would have upset me too. But do you think it may have been a moment of complete panic because she suddenly perceived her child to be in severe danger?

I definitely think they need to come and go a bit.

What would they do if it was a breeder or someone who'd bought the house? Many people do keep their dogs in kennels in the garden.

Just in the context of her child's teacher (according to what you wrote previously) also presumably agreeing to her 'rules', but then obviously deciding they were over the top and ultimately actually nearly killing her child.

@Washyourtoes it was teacher covering; but then again how they can keep nobody from having access to dogs is beyond. Statistically half of that school would have a dog at home

[quote Henryhoover12]@Washyourtoes it was teacher covering; but then again how they can keep nobody from having access to dogs is beyond. Statistically half of that school would have a dog at home[/quote]
Yes, it sounds like a very difficult to navigate life. Her allergy is clearly severely disabling. I can't imagine the worry her parents are living with.

Which is what swayed me to say that in your shoes I would either choose to take the precautions they suggested (even if they are inconvenient) or rehome my pet (probably the former as would struggle to give up a pet I have bonded with). Not because you are wrong. You are not. Just because it would feel like the right thing to do to me. Not a huge inconvenience in the grand scheme of things (i.e. when comparing it to alternatives of keeping child locked in the house all day, telling them to move away from the only support network they have, etc). You seem like a really compassionate lovely person who got to the end of her tether after going out of her way and then getting shouted at. Which makes complete sense. But ultimately I would continue doing what you had been doing. Maybe chat about a garden rota or something. A bit annoying for you, but if it meant making the life of this family a bit less scary and difficult I think that is something I would be very willing to do (and it sounds like you had been too). x

And get screamed at for her efforts?

No thanks.

I’m shocked that this thread has been allowed to run to over 870 posts.

And I’m even more shocked that this thread has run to over 870 posts without even one poster telling the OP she was BU for having bought rather than rescued the dog. Mumsnet has changed.

What I’m not at all shocked at OP is how many times you’ve mentioned The List. Nor that you mentioned you’re going to text the neighbour next week to tell her The List is being revised. (Well done on that, that’s your Thread 2 secured.)

This is not your problem, this is their problem.Their problem is they can not have their child around dogs. Enjoy your dog OP.

Hilarious is that of course we have all embraced doing just that for the past year have we not? I have had my life dictated with rules which I have followed (despite them infringing on my free will) to protect others who are vulnerable. I hated that too and it has affected my life a lot more than not having a pet.... But there we are.

What a ridiculous thing to say. I don’t think a global pandemic can be compared to one person’s, let’s be honest mostly likely made up allergy.