Another entitled dog owner.
The dog owner should not have had to make his visit to the householder difficult just because your DH took his child who doesn’t like dogs. Nor should the harmless dog have to be restrained when he was doing nothing wrong. Your child chose to stay near his parent. Your DH was very rude and entitled and was probably just irritated that he had to parent instead of letting his kid go off and be entertained.
Lets reverse this.
Imagine it was the child bothering the dog. Can you imagine the uproar! But because its a 'friendly' dog bothering the child, they should just get over it.
I bet you'd be screaming for a child to leave your precious dog alone.
The dog owner should not have had to make his visit to the householder difficult just because your DH took his child who doesn’t like dogs.
Imagine: The childs father should not have had to cut his visit short just because the dog owner took his dog, who doesn't like children.
Nor should the harmless dog have to be restrained when he was doing nothing wrong. (except jumping up a small child and licking them)
Nor should the harmless child have to be told to stay away from the dog, when he was doing nothing wrong. (just jumping on the dog and prodding it)
Your child chose to stay near his parent. - (yes, not asking for the dog to keep jumping on him)
Your dog chose to stay near its owner. (not asking for the child to keep jumping on it)
So yeah in that reverse situation, where the dog is staying away and not able to run around the room and being constantly jumped on and poked by a child. Would you, as a the dog owner say anything? I bet you'd be telling that parent to keep their child off your dog immediately.
So it works the other way around!
If your dog is being a pain towards a child who repeatedly shows they are scared and want nothing to do with them, you keep them away. Its really not that bloody hard to grasp is it?