AIBU to keep my sister’s former dog after she moved back?

[WatchTheStormTouchDown]

I’ve name changed as this is a very outing situation. I wasn’t sure whether to post in the dog house but opted for here.

My sister moved abroad 7 months ago due to her husband’s work. They were originally moving for 3 years but my sister didn’t settle there so they’ve split up and my sister has come back with her children.

When they were planning to leave, they asked if we would look after their dog temporarily for the 3 years and they would have him back when they returned. We thought it over and said we would only take the dog if it was permanent. We knew our children would get attached to the dog and didn’t want them being upset when the dog had to be returned. They looked at other options but eventually agreed, reluctantly. Microchip/ownership was changed over to us and we pay all costs.

My sister is now back much sooner than planned with her kids and they’ve asked for the dog back. He is our dog now and completely settled in with us. We would all be heartbroken to not have him.

My whole family is piling on guilt and pressure for us to give the dog back. They’re using the kids to emotionally manipulate and saying my sister has enough on her plate with the split and having her dog back would help the children settle back home. They’re also saying that as the dog has only been with us for 7 months, we should give him back as it’s not long enough for him to have settled. My niece and nephew are upset but that isn’t surprising with moving countries, being without their dad and now moving back all within a few months.

We don’t intend to give him back. He isn’t a toy to be passed around when people change their minds and plans change and he has a great life with us. If we don’t give him back, I think it will cause a permanent rift in our family. Are we being unreasonable to keep the dog because we can’t give him up? I don’t believe it’s in his best interests anyway.

All we know is that she previously owned a dog. That's not evidence that she cared for it properly or knows what's involved in having a dog. OP says it had an eye problem that the sister didn't do anything about, that doesn't sound like an owner who puts the dog's best interests first or fully accepts the responsibilities of dog ownership.

I agree, I don’t think trying to move the dog with them would have been the best - especially given what’s happened. But neither do I think OP’s sister acted responsibly in the first instance in asking OP to essentially dog sit for the intended three years. That’s a long time in a four year old dog’s life and it would essentially have ‘belonged’ to OP and her family after that length of time. Not sure why OP has come in for such criticism for recognising that and insisting on taking it permanently. I think most responsible owners would have gone for permanent rehoming for the sake of the dog if they couldn’t take it with them, so I don’t really think that sister ever had it’s best interests in mind to be honest. Not then, and certainly not now.

Keep the dog OP.

My auntie died and none of my cousins wanted her dog - it came to us, was signed over at the time, just like yours. From that point the dog was ours. We were not a foster home, or a temporary stop over. She was our dog. No way would I have handed her back. Like your dog she quickly bonded with our existing DDog and they adored each other.

Taking on a dog as a foster, with the intent of it going back, is very different - you were absolutely clear that was not an option for you as a family. The dog is yours, legally and morally - your sister is grasping at straws trying to get a life back which is gone, I suspect the dog represents that to her - a time before everything went to shit - but the dog is clearly better off with you.

Your sister has lost her husband, her mother, and now her dog.

I understand your righteous indigation but at the same time, I'd be cutting her some slack.

I'm sure the dog would get used to being back in its original home. Its feelings are likely to be less complicated than your sister's, and I know which I'd be prioritising.

Edited to add: Sorry, read in a rush. Clearly hallucinated the mother bit!!

100% agree with @TheHungryHungryLandsharks

Give the dog back. You're being petty. You pressured her into making the arrangement permanent when she left, so she surrendered the dog to someone she trusted with it under time pressure etc, and you have been out of order from the start.

If you read the OP’s latest update the dog wouldn’t be back in its original home for long as Dsis will have to sell up and move. And she’s not coping after the split - that’s very clear. It would be very unfair to take an animal from a stable happy home and plunge it into a chaotic environment where it would be alone for a lot of the time.

My children don’t want just another dog. A dog isn’t something you just replace, like a lost toy. He is a member of our family who we love. I know you haven’t read the thread anyway as you would know my sister doesn’t live near us to walk dogs together, so 🤦‍♀️

Thank you for getting it.

And for me, their niece and nephew would be the priority. And I guess that’s how the decision will be made.

The dog was happy with the sister and can be happy once returned. The OP didn’t directly say she was superior but I wasn’t the only person who read some of her comments in that way. Hers might technically be the ‘better’ home but it’s not her dog morally and it’s morally wrong to keep it IMO, especially after so short a time.

Neither of us know the OP, but those who do agree she should return her sister’s dog, just as many people are saying here. This is what the OP said:

“My whole family is piling on guilt and pressure for us to give the dog back. They’re using the kids to emotionally manipulate and saying my sister has enough on her plate with the split and having her dog back would help the children settle back home. They’re also saying that as the dog has only been with us for 7 months, we should give him back as it’s not long enough for him to have settled. My niece and nephew are upset but that isn’t surprising with moving countries, being without their dad and now moving back all within a few months.“

I had the exact scenario with my sister. Obviously I gave her dog back because that's the right thing to do. However as it had been year long pet sitting now instead of change of ownership I went through and added up everything we had spent on trims, vets, food, toys etc and billed her for it. We had her dog 18months and think she owed us about £600. She paid as agreed it was fair. I then used the money to let my kids pick a puppy which literally solved it for them.

Quite. Would you consider shared care so she has h8m 50% of the time or would that be too unsettling for the dog?

YABVVVVVVVU

It's her dog. She may have agreed to it being yours permanently when she thought she would be away for 3 years, but things change. You have only had the dog since February.

Put it this way, if you let someone care for your dogs for 7 months, and went backpacking around the world, would you expect to get home and be told that you can't have them back?

And what's the magical cut off, time wise? What if you had had the dog for 6 months, or 4 or 2?

It's not your dog. Your sister really needs your understanding right now, but because you want to keep the dog, you will just keep repeating what you agreed when she thought she would be away for 3 years. This isn't a business contract, this is your sister! Her plans have changed, in such a horrible way. There's no way I could kick my sister when she's down. As a PP alluded, it all comes down to who you love the most - the dog or your sister. In 10 years time the dog will be dead, but you'll still have decades of your life with your sister.

I think it boils down to this : What do you value your most - the dog - or the relationship with your sister and her children?

PS. I work with dogs, and to say that your sister couldn't walk the dog because it wouldn't leave without your DH, is laughable. The humans are in charge, not the dogs.

My sister hasn’t lost her mother. She decided to give her dog to us and she has left her husband. We took on her dog at a time that wasn’t great for us but did it to help my sister and because the dog is family.

I’m cutting her a lot of slack. I can see she is in distress and needs help, not a dog. I am offering real help.

Our dog would be lonely and I’m not going to do that to him.

I think it’s Dsis who has been out of order from the start to be honest. Most responsible owners moving abroad for as long as three years would be permanently rehoming their dogs if they couldn’t take them. After that length of time the dog would be settled with OP and Dsis was intending to come back and just take him home again as though nothing had happened. OP recognised that as not being in the dogs’ best interests and acted accordingly. The fact that it was only seven months is neither here nor there. I don’t think Dsis acted in the dogs’ best interests then, and certainly isn’t now. It’s a sentient animal, not a comfort toy.

Put it this way, if you let someone care for your dogs for 7 months, and went backpacking around the world, would you expect to get home and be told that you can't have them back?

That's a completely made up scenario that has no bearing on what happened with OP and her sister.

I think you see living, breathing creatures as objects to be passed back and forth without any care and consideration for their feelings.

I haven't read every reply, but I've read all of your posts.

You don't want any advice that doesn't back up what you've already decided, so what's the point of posting? You've got your narrative all set and you're not interested in feedback that doesn't align with it.

For what it worth, I love dogs, but I'd be prioritising your sister's kids. Their father has prioritised staying abroad for a job over his wife's unhappiness and allowed his marriage to dissolve. Your sister seems to be being painted as quite the villain in this tale. It doesn't sound like you've ever tried to move a family to another country, but it's a hugely trying and destabilising experience. The kids will be having a hugely hard time, moving, the family splitting up, moving back. Where's the compassion for them?

Our dog would be lonely and I’m not going to do that to him

So, you are prioritising the emotional welfare of your other dog over your sister.

Wowzers.

The point of posting is to get a range of opinions, which includes people who agree with OP and actually care about a living, breathing creature, and not the sister who thinks the dog is a toy.

There was a Lassie film where they let the dog decide.
I think it was Lassie.

What has this got to do with Dsis children ? OP has offered to open up her home to them all for the foreseeable future because her Dsis isn’t coping. How on earth is giving the dog back going to help ?

Sounds like you traded a dog's wellbeing for a flashy new puppy.

No, she’s prioritising the emotional welfare of the dog - full stop. It’s not a comfort toy to be passed around on a whim.

If you read my posts you would see that giving the dog back wouldn’t be prioritising my sister or her children. It is the last thing she actually needs when in so much distress.

Yep. New for old.