To not understand what this parent was thinking?

[Frequency]

While out with my rottweiler x this afternoon, I noticed he was panting more than I was comfortable with, so I abandoned our walk and took a detour to the nearest shop to buy him a bottle of water.

I crouched down at the edge of a very wide path to give him a drink. I wasn't paying attention to what was around me because I was watching the dog, and no one had any reason to be near us anyway. The pavement is about 8 feet wide on that street, if not wider. We were right at the edge, by the shop window.

The second I stood up, there was a toddler, eye-to-eye with my dog. He must have run up behind me while I was kneeling. He was literally nose to nose with the dog, reaching his hands out to grab/stroke the dog's face.

My dog is friendly but a little wary of small children, so I tend to keep him away from them.

Luckily, DD was with me and had spotted the kid and managed to hold his hands before he grabbed the dog's face and loudly told him, "Sorry, he's scared of kids, and he's just trying to have a drink, can you leave him alone, please?" She had to say it loudly because his mum and her friend had continued walking and were now a good 10 feet away from us. At this point, the mother then shouted at her other small child (around 7 or 8) to "get the baby," so the dog now had 2 kids to contend with while the mother kept walking away, ranting about how the young girl was supposed to be "watching the baby."

DD has anxiety and was really shaken by it, and can't stop thinking about how much worse it could have been if our dog were not friendly, or if the kid had managed to grab the dog's face and spooked/hurt him.

I still just cannot fathom what the mother was thinking, allowing her toddler to run up to a strange dog who was obviously eating/drinking, get nose to nose with him to try to grab him, and then send a second child over after she's made aware he is not a friendly dog?

Surely it is common sense to know that nose-to-nose with a strange, large breed dog, who is eating/drinking, is not a safe place to be, no matter how friendly the dog is?

This is one of only a handful of times a child has tried to interact with this dog. Usually, people cross the road to avoid getting close to him.

DD's fluffiest chihuahua is aggressive and does need space and has a lead and harness, advertising that he is aggressive and needs space, but we are constantly having to pick him up out of the way of approaching children, who then go to try and pet him while he's in our arms, snarling, or having to explain to parents that no, it is not OK, yes he will bite little Barry and no it doesn't matter that little Barry is good with dogs or that dogs usually like him.

PSA parents, small and fluffy does not always = cute and friendly. My rott x is by far the better choice if you want to use my pets to teach your children about dogs. Just ask first, approach him calmly (and not when he is eating or drinking), and supervise your own children. I'll mind my dog, you mind your kid, and that way everyone is happy.

Then the chihuahua needs muzzling too if he 'will bite'. More and more you sound like you are unfit to own a dog safely. You are putting everyone in harm's way.

You need to be responsible for your dog. If it could/may bite then it needs to be muzzled.

You have a dog that people cross the road to avoid

All dogs could/may bite if approached unexpectedly by an unknown small child, or in fact by anyone they don’t know and are startled by.

The parent was in the wrong here for not supervising their child.

Yes. OP was wrong too though.

Where have you made that up from?
Who is crossing the road to avoid this very average looking black and tan crossbreed dog?
OP does not even know if has Rottie in it, it is her vet that has decided this.

@Frequency next time you post about your dog, call it a Beagle X, the part you know about. It won't get rid of all the frothing anti dog venom, but it might restrict some of the knee jerk 'dangerous breed' posters.

OP, I do admire your perseverance in trying to engage those who are determinedly and perversely’misunderstanding’ your entirely clear posts. It must be a slow news day out there!

In her last post OP said:
“Usually, people cross the road to avoid getting close to him.”

If your dog cannot handle a toddler coming up to it in public, it should be muzzled. Sometimes things happen, sometimes children are runners, sometimes they have SEN. In the same way owners can’t have eyes in the back of their head, sometimes parents mess up too.

If you’re not sure or have any doubt of the dogs reaction, then muzzle. Then your DD would not need to worry about it biting someone.

The parent was lucky it only ran up to a dog, presumably it could just as easily have run into a road.

If you have a kid with you, you are responsible for keeping it safe. Which means keep it away from possible hazards.

To follow your logic:
Unsupervised child runs up to grab drinking dog, dog bites, it's the dog owners fault.
Unsupervised child runs out in front of moving car, car hits child, it's the car driver's fault.

Yes. OP can’t do anything about people’s parenting though. Not her responsibility. All she can do is ensure her animal’s safety by making sure he isn’t put in a position where he might bite someone. She can do this by muzzling, walking in a quiet kid-free zone or being constantly vigilant in case kids do approach etc.

The op was supervising her dog.

Whoever was looking after the toddler wasn’t supervising it.

Whilst the world is very child centric, it’s unreasonable to expect it to revolve completely around children. If you are a parent your job is to keep the child under control.

This passive parenting is getting ridiculous, it isn’t other people’s job to keep your child safe.

I'm starting to think Galtymore and friends might be the mum and her friends. FYI, your eight-year-old is not old enough to reliably supervise herself on a busy road, much less a toddler.

Do better.

The op was supervising her dog.

The toddler was ‘nose to nose’ with OP’s dog before she noticed. She said in her first post that she wasn’t watching the environment, just her dog. If you have a potentially reactive dog you need to be aware of what’s close by.

I agree the parent was at fault too.

😂😂😂
Talk about clutching at straws!

(If you’re paying that much attention to my posts you’ll notice I already said upthread that I’m not in the UK. It’s illegal to walk a Rottweiler cross without a muzzle where I am btw. I know that’s not relevant in the UK but these laws aren’t made elsewhere without reason.)

Yes, both could very well be culpable. I can't believe the number of people that don't know this.

I know you're gagging for the mother to be implicated as well, and that actually may be true to varying degrees but the primary responsibility for any action by the dog remains with the owner.

Fair enough. Thought I had read all her posts.

Fact remains, the dog does not look remotely Rottie other than coat colour, the head/snout/jaw are all completely the wrong shape. People here are reacting to Rottweiler, from a position of breed ignorance. I don't avoid Rotties, let alone a crossbreed dog that doesn't look remotely like one. If I still had small children, it would be my responsibility to keep them far enough away from an on leash dog for there not to be a risk.

I am old enough to remember when dogs were tied up outside shops. In those days, parents taught their children to stay away. And if the child was too young to understand, they held their hands and stopped them running off.

I'm terrified of rottweilers. When I was little my mother's best friend had three. We were constantly left alone with them and they were aggressive, pinned me against a wall once growling in my face.

I agree OP that mother was very lax, just like mine. Abhorrent behaviour.

I'm not in the UK and rottweilers are supposed to be muzzled here but they frequently are not. In my neighbourhood they are often off lead too. Ugh.

I’m not disagreeing that the parent should have been much more careful.
But ultimately it’s OP who bears responsibility for her dog’s actions. He’d have been PTS if he’d bitten that child. OP could have faced charges or been sued. She needs to be more careful and ensure that can’t happen.

The only way she can do this is by changing her own behaviour (eg by muzzling ). She can’t control others. It doesn’t matter how little she thinks of them really.

If you know who owns them you can report.

This is one of only a handful of times a child has tried to interact with this dog. Usually, people cross the road to avoid getting close to him.

wow. So you admit you have a dog that people are fearful of. You’re concerned how he may react to children. Just bloody muzzle him ffs. Why would you not?

I would say it is the dog that needs to be under control, not the child.