American XL Bully dog

[BettyALJF]

My ex and I have two sons (7&9) and share them 50/50. His girlfriend has an American XL bully dog that now lives with them. I’ve had reservations about the dog as it’s massive but I can’t stop them having it and know all dogs are different etc. I asked my ex to never leave them unsupervised with the dog, which the boys tell me they are on a morning when they go down for breakfast and their dad and gf stay upstairs and god knows when else. I pick my sons up on Saturday afternoon and the boys tell me that my youngest has been bitten on the ear by the dog on Thursday. My ex didn’t tell me this had happened. Once we are home I look at the bite and it’s pierced the skin. I asked them what happened and he said he got on the sofa and the dog barked at him and got his ear. He said it hurt and bled a lot. They tell me they didn’t go to the drs to get it looked at. Obviously when the skins been broken it can cause an infection, so I ring 111 to ask what to do and they send me to the hospital to get it checked out due to it being a Saturday. The doctor cleans the cut and says they have to report it to the police. I let my ex know all this and he has a go at me saying he didn’t know what I was trying to do and that I should have contacted him to find out what happened. I basically think they’ve not taken him as they are worried what will happen to the dog, therefore not putting our son’s safety first.
Regardless of what happened, it’s pierced the skin and as his father he has a duty of care and he should’ve taken him to the doctors for it to be checked, cleaned and given anti biotics. It may have been an accident, but I don’t want to risk ‘a second offence’ which may be a lot worse next time. I’ve told the police I don’t want the dog in the house when the boys are there, I don’t trust them to put the boys safety first anymore. Would you do the same thing in my situation?

The legislation established a scheme allowing individual dogs to be registered, neutered and exempted from the ban. So the dog (if it was registered in time) may not be illegally in the possession of the child's father and his girlfriend. I think it was a bad scheme, but it was thrown into the legislation to appease the dog lobby.

Social services can't stop the children going there. Only the mum can do that. They can't do anything about the dog. Only the police can do that. Literally all the social services would do is advise the mother not to send the children and record that the conversation happened. If it would make OP feel better to do that she's welcome to but they won't actually do anything.

I agree with this.

@jannier doesn’t make it right. The dog is a known dangerous breed and had pierced the skin, visit to the docs is the thing to do.

Why? Why should they know this? The mother is taking steps to protect her kids. Why do you think it's so important that social services record this somewhere?
if it comes to court the court will make their own enquiries. This is very unlikely to include asking social services about the incident. Really, it's pointless.

I agree the dog shouldn’t be there unsupervised with young kids. I wouldn’t have one personally. However, if the dog is legally registered, let’s assume it is, the police probably won’t seize it for a bite to an ear.

It just doesn't work like this. All social services would do would be to note down that mother reported a dog bite. They won't verify it. It's meaningless in terms of evidence. The mother has a police reference and medical evidence of the bite. That's evidence. If it goes to court the court may order cafcass to write a report - not social services.

I would absolutely report to police but I would also report to ss if a parent was putting a child in danger of death or life changing injuries. How is that not part of the child protection role they play?

I agree with you that the banning laws were kind of half baked.

However, even if the beast was registered and could be kept, surely if it has bitten a child it would be taken away and PTS? I don't know what authority would do this, but there must be some mechanism available, otherwise dangerous dogs would never be dealt with.

I never said it was right just why he wouldn't have taken his son....ie a useless prat endangering his child who should never have been unsupervised with any dog.....if a dog of mine bit once I'd put it down but it wouldn't ever have been unsupervised with a child either.

Because they are engaged only when nobody is acting protectively to safeguard the children. They are there to step in where there is no safe adult able to intervene. They don't get involved in every situation of children being at risk of harm! Why would they be? The OP is the mother of the children and seems more than capable of keeping her kids safe. Why would a government agency need to get involved too?

But there’s likely a court order so the mother cannot legally stop her dc going to their dad’s house.

There is such a mechanism. It is an offence to be the owner, or the person in charge, of a dog which is dangerously out of control and injures a person. The court can make an order for the dog to be destroyed. However, as with any criminal offence, the accused can plead not guilty and admissible evidence would be required. It is not clear from the OP who was present during this incident, but if the only witnesses are the children, would they want to give evidence in proceedings against their dad?

My concern would be that the girlfriend regards the dog as her child (even if this is mostly unconscious) and it will be a case of wanting to prioritize her dog over your two sons.
I can't help but question the sanity and/or judgment of anyone who keeps one of these creatures as a pet.

There isn't, OP said. But even if there was, social services can't tell someone to override a court order. All they would do would be to advise OP to go back to court urgently.

I just can’t understand why anyone would want to own one of these hideous killing machines.

When are the children due to go back to their dads and do they still want to go?

Q- why would anyone want to own one of these hideous killing machines?
This is the best answer I can come up with:
1- many humans are prone to falling in love with dogs.
2- love is blind.
There are still several of these creatures strutting around my local area 🤬🤬🤬

no dont send them bak if he wants to take it to court so be it -cant see any judge ordering access in te viccinity of this ddog

Is it an American xl bully or an American bulldog because they are 2 completely different breeds.

Report and don't let the children go until the dog is not in site. I can't believe a father actually didn't bring his son for medical treatment. Record and track everything because this needs logging and detailing.

Your Ex has a choice seeing your kids at his house or the dog. Frankly if it's bitten him I hope the police take the choice away by taking the dog away. You are not overreacting in anyway. Your children should not be with that dog, especially not alone, but I'd say not even in the house. They are a menace as are the people that chose to have them.

Yes it’s unlikely they’ll do anything but like I said it’s another building brick in the case against having them go to that house and be around the dog. If OPs ex was to take her to court, having it on record that social services were contacted because of a dog bite is nothing but a positive to her case.

I agree with you.
The father didn't bring his child for medical treatment because he knew that he would be in trouble and the dog could potentially be destroyed. His girlfriend would then go ballistic and the relationship would be over. The relationship is more important to him than the safety of his children.

It is different - he does not live with the dog at pets at home and is unlikely to see this dog ever again. I would not make him visit a house with a dog which has bitten him. I am suprised you think it is ok for our children to be around a very powerful dog with a bite history. I guess I now know where your loyalty lies and it isn't with your children

My children would not be going there while the dog lives there, or under any circumstances where they would be in contact with the dog.

The dog has shown itself to be not safe

Their father has shown he cannot and will not keep the children safe

And he has shown that he cannot be trusted to be honest with you about your children’s safety.