To think this dog isn't our/DHs responsibility?

[Dogg0]

DHs ex has a dog from when they were together. They purchased him as a puppy when they were together not long before they separated. He's about 8 now I think. Me and DH been together 6 years, married for two. We have a one year old baby together.

DH and his ex were never married but she wanted to keep the dog when they separated. DH was upset about it but agreed and she's had the dog since, he'd been with them around a year-ish before they separated. He's not really seen other than at the odd pick up for their DC, this dog since, never contributed toward it or anything like that.

Ex needs to get a new rental as her landlord is selling. She's struggling to find a rental that will take this dog and is insisting DH needs to take him as he's 'both their responsibility'.

We are not in the position for a dog. We own our house so not an issue with a landlord or anything but we have a baby, he works all day, I work part time (very part time, only 1 day a week) but I have no desire to be looking after a dog as well as a baby.

AIBU in thinking a dog is the responsibility of whoever kept it after the separation and you can't just demand it's your exes responsibility 8 years later when it doesn't work out for you? Or is this dog just always supposed to be DHs responsibility whenever she demands it despite not being able to see it really for the last 8 years.

Plenty of people successfully have pets and babies because they want to
op doesn’t want to. Which is fine and a perspective she’s absolutely entitled to.

again.
that’s how I would feel if it was my family pet being sent off to the rehoming centre / be put down.

People introduce their babies to dogs they already have and love and know the temperament of in houses already set up for dogs. I would think anyone suddenly bringing a dog they don't know well and have had nothing to do with for 8 years into a babies home was being incredibly irresponsible.

But the child would not be paying for and looking after the dog....

Again, if you as an adult were not prepared to take that dog in yourself then you'd be being pretty hypocritical.

So would I. Small children are mauled by dogs far too often. People get complacent and relax their vigilance because it's hard to be vigilant 100% of the time in a busy family house.

In the DH's position, I would rather explain to my older children why unfortunately it wasn't possible to take on the dog than risk having to explain to my youngest child why they suffered permanent scarring because I put them at risk by bringing an adult dog unused to small children into a household with a curious toddler.

No, the DSC/hypothetical you would be. The OP has told us she would end up being lumbered with much of the care, and it's clear that's correct from the information given. Her DH cannot force her to take it on and anyone who thinks he could or should is being unreasonable.

Nah, bollocks to that. @Dogg0 doesn't have any responsibility whatsoever to this dog, zilch, nada. She doesn't want a dog in her home, a dog which she knows she would predominantly be looking after. So that's really the end of the conversation.

Your DH is not in a position to take the dog because he is unable to give it the care it needs. If he’s so keen to keep it he gets a job that enables him to do it instead of trying to foist the dog onto you to look after. You don’t want it and for that reason alone you should not have to have it.

A lot of posters on this thread have mentioned how overloaded rescue centres are. Why do we think this is? My money would be on too many people taking on dogs without understanding just how much work, and money, goes into looking after them, and giving the dog away when they realise they’re not up to it.

Well, the OP HAS considered the practicalities, and the costs and responsibilities involved. She knows it’s not the right thing for her or her child. If more people were responsible enough to think things through properly, rescue centres wouldn’t be overloaded.

Having a dog doesn't prevent the EW from finding somewhere to live. It might mean that she has to pay a bigger deposit against any damage/ cleaning resulting from the dog's presence.

At last - amongst the banal ‘find a way to make it work’ posts (with zero hints on how to do so) and the mawkish ‘Awwh, but the poor doggy!’ emotional blackmail, someone actually makes a practical suggestion! Offering to pay a bigger deposit or a premium on the rent could help her secure a rental property. A lot of people have mentioned that landlords can’t refuse pets anymore, but all that means is you can’t say ‘No pets’ or refuse to rent on that basis. It doesn’t mean a landlord has to rent to you, any more than they have to rent to any other tenant who wants the property. There are way more prospective tenants out there than there are good rental properties. The ex-wife needs to make herself an attractive proposition.

This thread is incredible! We've even got posters adding an extra D to the word dog to indicate.....what exactly?! ddog indeed 🤣🤦‍♀️

Well, the OP HAS considered the practicalities, and the costs and responsibilities involved. She knows it’s not the right thing for her or her child. If more people were responsible enough to think things through properly, rescue centres wouldn’t be overloaded.

Indeed.

If OP had posted 'My DH wants to get a dog. We have a baby, DH works long hours and wouldn't be available to do much of the day to day care of the dog and we can't afford dog walkers or doggy day care. AIBU to say no? the replies would be very different.

@Zosime but in that scenario they’d be buying/ rescuing a new dog. This is the existing eight year old family dog of his children - he can’t turn back the clock and not buy the puppy in the first place.

I do agree that the OP shouldn’t be the one taking full responsibility for the dog but they as a family need to do what’s right by the animal (which could be taking it on themselves, finding a trusted foster, going to a breed specific rescue - there are options) and someone needs to model responsible dog ownership for the DC. I don’t think it’s as simple as the OP simply saying the dog can never cross the threshold - there has to be a solution to this which doesn’t involve the dog being PTS and that might involve a small amount of temporary effort from the OP.

It's this 'temporary' again. People are being very naive thinking OP could specify and enforce the dog only being there for a set period, even if it weren't a dodgy idea in itself to bring a strange and elderly dog into a home with a mobile baby it isn't used to. There's a clear risk here of any allegedly stopgap arrangement becoming permanent.

he can’t turn back the clock and not buy the puppy in the first place.

His ex-wife wants to turn the clock back though. She wanted the dog to be 100% hers. Now she has a housing issue, it’s suddenly 50% his again.

I don’t think it’s as simple as the OP simply saying the dog can never cross the threshold - there has to be a solution to this

But it is that simple
It isn't DH nor OPs dog
It never was for last 7 years and no they don't need to listen to any silliness from MNers nor an exDP who refused to share DDog before doe SEVEN years - that now it becomes "shared" or "their" dog. It simply isn't

There is no solution to find. It's not their dog, DH works away and OP has a young toddler and she doesn't want a dog. End of conversation,

Anyone else suggesting otherwise is as much a CF as the ex is ,

It’s a sad situation because you don’t want the dog, so a dog shouldn’t be with someone that doesn’t want him or her, but she can’t have the dog because of housing. Poor dog.

I wholeheartedly agree with @Tiani4 . The situation is unfortunate but the exP cannot foist her responsibilities onto the OP.r

Exactly @Tiani4. OP doesn't want a dog, so that's the end of the discussion. DH doesn't get a say because he's not in a position to take care of said dog.

This is entirely a problem for the ex to resolve.