“Happily Ever After, Together” did not happen for Great Danes Lily and Maddison after the blind Lily turned on Maddison and attacked her.
You’ll remember the touching story of blind Great Dane Lily and her companion Madison; the news reports were dripping with saccharine anthropomorphisms of how Madison is Lily’s “seeing eye dog” and how they were “inseparable for the past five years” and destined to be “friends forever.” The story goes on to document how Maddison “took the sightless [Lily] under her wing” and how “devoted” and “close” Maddison is to her, “touching her to let the blind pooch know where to go.” We were told of how they “cuddle at night” an “curl up together.”
Most other dog blogs and media outlets focused on the hopeful prospect that such a love story could continue and that the perfect new home would be found for these two dogs. No such nonsense here at BorderWars:
There are very few homes equipped to adopt one Great Dane, let alone two. Add in advanced age and congenital blindness, and it’s not surprising that the former owners just couldn’t handle the onus any more and ditched blind Lily and her seeing-eye-dog Maddison at the shelter.
…
This is the burden created by breeders who mate merle to merle, merle to harlequin, and harlequin to harlequin. They afflict their puppies and the big hearted owners who adopt them with a lifetime concern. Dealing with a blind puppy might pull at the heart strings enough, but compassion fatigue and mounting veterinary bills can quickly make the prospect of caring for two middle aged or geriatric dogs more burden than bliss.
After spending 4 months “looking for a new home” (how a blind dog looks for anything is beyond me) the pair made international headlines when their story went viral on the internet last October and within days they had a new home.
A new home at last for the blind Great Dane and her devoted guide dog
- Couple decided to take in Lily and Maddison after reading about them in the Daily Mail
- Dogs can now look forward to holidays in France and the Lake District
It’s the happy ending that Lily the blind great dane and her trusty friend turned guide dog Maddison deserve.
When the Daily Mail featured the heart-warming tale of the two great danes, who were looking for a new home, more than 2,000 dog lovers responded by offering to take them.
Now Lily and Maddison are moving from the Dogs Trust centre in Shrewsbury to live with the Williams family 35 miles away in Crewe, Cheshire.
It seemed the couple had good intentions and had at least thought about the pitfalls I had highlighted:
Anne Williams, 52, and her husband Len, 53, a retired fireman, fell in love with the dogs when they read about them in the Mail and their offer was accepted by the trust.
Mrs Williams, a business manager for an insurance company, said: ‘We’ve always had two dogs together, I like them to have company and so taking on two of them wasn’t a daunting prospect.
‘My daughter moved out five months ago, taking her two English setters with her, so the house has felt a little quiet without them.
‘We live in the countryside and I miss having a reason to go for a walk – I can’t wait to take the dogs out with us. We’ve also got a lovely big garden so it’s the perfect setting for two huge dogs.’
The couple plan to take the great danes on holidays to France and the Lake District and ensure they both enjoy life with their new family.
Louise Campbell, manager of the Dogs Trust in Shrewsbury, said: ‘This is the happy ending we were all hoping for and everyone is delighted for Lily and Maddison.
‘The Williams family were the perfect match and we know they’ll give the dogs all the love and fuss they so deserve.’
After only one month in their new home, Lily turned on Maddison and the couple who adopted them returned her to the shelter.
Do you want to know how long those feelings of good will and togetherness lasted once the two dogs were placed in their new home? All of three weeks.
Blind Great Dane turns on her guide dog companion
Blind Great Dane Lily is looking for a new home after attacking her guide dog.
The six-year-old and her companion, another Great Dane called Maddison, had been rehomed together after an appeal by the Dogs Trust.
They were adopted by Anne and Len Williams from Nantwich, Cheshire, but were returned to the charity’s home at Roden near Shrewsbury.
Mr and Mrs Williams will now keep Maddison, but Lily is at the dogs’ home because the two cannot be reconciled.
It’s worth noting here that the dog the couple returned is Lily, the blind Great Dane, and not the comparatively easier to re-home Maddison. It’s no secret that disabilities are causal factors in behavioral disturbances in humans and animals, and best intentions coupled with a desire to not stigmatize disabled animals unfairly might appeal to egalitarian leanings, but they can’t trump reality. It’s worth noting that many pigment disorders have been associated with neurological problems and behavioral issues irrespective of their effects on sight, so not only could Lily be reacting to being blind, she could also have concomitant neurological disorders associated with being double merle.
“Despite the best efforts of staff and the very committed new owners, it became evident that Lily and Maddison were no longer happy to live together.
“The nature of their relationship changed in their new home environment and after careful consideration, and many attempts at re-introduction in different surroundings which continued until very recently, the decision was made that they would need to be rehomed separately,” she said.
‘Stress and uncertainty’
Lynn Barber, the head of canine behaviour at the Dogs Trust, said initially the dogs had been happy together but moving to a new home had proved stressful for Lily and she struggled to adjust to the new environment.
“The stress and uncertainty Lily felt during the move resulted in her attacking Maddison.
“Unfortunately some fights in the dog world are so distressing that it becomes too difficult to forgive each other.
“For the safety and well being of the dogs, Lily and Maddison will be rehomed separately.
“Human company and affection in their new homes will help take the place of dog companionship and ensure their happiness,” she said.
The Dogs Trust is now looking for a new home for Lily where she would be the only pet.
This should give pause to those who advocate for finding homes for all disabled puppies versus putting them down. As much as the knee-jerk bleeding hearts think that all life is so precious and that once the crime of breeding dogs like this is committed that we can’t then “punish” the defective offspring by killing them, such decisions have consequences that have to be weighed against the humane concerns of other dogs, owners, and trainers who are all impacted by raising and keeping a dog like Lily. Even the question of humane treatment of Lily does not fall all on one side of the balance.
It’s all roses and light when you can spin the story as a caring companion dog and a no-frills adoption where a blind dog won’t be inordinately burdensome on a prospective family. But that’s not what happened here. Lily was obviously so tormented that she lashed out irreconcilably with her new home and her old friend. Maddison was also terrorized by Lily and the new owners clearly sided against the much more sympathetic Lily in their decision to keep Maddison.
Why should Lily be kept alive? She’s already worn out her welcome with two families who thought they cared enough and were equipped with the skills necessary to keep her and she’s already benefited from the efforts of the Dogs Trust and an immense media campaign to find her a new home. Ten tons of sympathy doesn’t weigh very much against the practical concerns of this dog who has proven to be too much of a burden again and again.
This isn’t a call to kill every dog that might be a burden, rather it’s a call to be objective in our assessments of just how difficult such a task really is and just how rare the right home for a dog like Lily will be to find. There is no rational place here for absolutes, every dog need not be “saved” at all costs any more than every dog need be put down.
The original Daily Mail story was shared over 100,000 times of Facebook. The news of the pair’s adoption a week later was shared 35,000 times. The BBC story which documented Lily’s failure in her new home was shared less than one thousand times.
So remember that stories of feel good empathy and hope and sympathetic helpless animals are about 3 times more interesting than their happy endings, and 100 times more likely to gain traction than the brutal, unhappy, but entirely real and forseeable outcomes of unethical breeding and unreasoned “life at all costs” attitudes. While it’s politically incorrect to discuss the very real burden of disability in humans, we can’t let etiquette trump ethics. There needs to be two sides to this debate and that means being honest about the costs and yes BURDEN that comes with coping with dogs like Lily. If we never acknowledge the burden, how can we hope to appreciate and aid those who choose to carry it and how can we forgive and not stigmatize those who choose not to?
* * *
Comments and disagreements are welcome, but be sure to read the Comment Policy. If this post made you think and you'd like to read more like it, consider a donation to my 4 Border Collies' Treat and Toy Fund. They'll be glad you did. You can subscribe to the feed or enter your e-mail in the field on the left to receive notice of new content. You can also like BorderWars on Facebook for more frequent musings and curiosities.
* * *
Was there word on exactly how this was determined to be an “attack?” I’ve heard that word used for a number of actions by dogs on other dogs, or even people, and sometimes it is accurate but other times it is a gross overreaction. I knew someone who said she was “attacked” by a very excited, teenage labrador mix who ran to her too fast and jumped on her. He had somehow broken loose from his harness, the owner said. The dog was desperate to play and sorely under-stimulated. I can completely understand how this could terrify someone walking down the street, not expecting this, but she kept saying she was attacked when there was no intent of aggression, no attempt to injure and no resulting accidental injuries. It was clearly a misuse of language and/or a misunderstanding.
Having said that, I wouldn’t be surprised if there WAS a lashing out by the blind dane. A lot of people truly underestimate how the changing of environments can affect behavior, or bring out new ones, relax former ones, and so on. THe former owner of my kelpie swore up and down that he LOOOOVES children of all ages. Well he sure as heck shows fear in my neighborhood when little kids bounce and scream in their normal play and I will never allow them to bum, rush my dog as is their wont to do oftentimes. Tucker just can’t take it. When I asked the old owner EXACTLY what the circumstances were in the past with kids, she said he always sought out the neighbor kids to play. I said “Oh, so are these the only kids he’s ever known, on your quiet country property?” I received no response.
Even two sighted Danes might, for whatever reasons, have a lashout under enough stress and being dumped in a shelter and then a new home, are all major stressors. But blindness and potiential neurological issues are, sure, ADDED stressors that are completely unnecessary. There would have been no shame in putting Lily down at birth. She would have never known what she missed, because when you’re gone, you’re gone. You could put her down NOW and she wouldn’t know what was coming, only the people do, and that’s just it. People make it about their OWN guilty feelings on the subject, and not about what is really best for the animal.
I’m not sure we’re going to get a detailed account of what exactly happened. But let’s look at the facts: the people got rid of the dog after only 3 weeks and even with the help of the shelter they all agreed that the two dogs were now unable to live together. That really says it all.
It could have been worse, obviously, this dog could have been deemed unable to be homed with anyone and put down for the aggression on the spot.
where is lily now? can you give me the info on where she is i know of someone who is looking to adopt her right now
After the rehoming fiasco, the rescue stopped releasing updates. I believe at last update both dogs had homes.
Tell your friend to Google Dane rescues in their area because blind and deaf Great Danes are sadly common due to Harlequin color breeding. There are also a number of Aussies and Dachshunds on the rescue market with the same condition.
There is also many, MANY double merle Border Collies out there that people refuse to acknowledge.
You won’t find lack of acknowledgment here. This is, after all a Border Collie blog, and why I bother to write about Merle to Merle ethics.
One key difference, however, is that Dane breeding culture encourages and basically demands that you breed Merle to Merle by their establishment of color family breeding schemes.
Refer to my Something Rotten in Harlequin Danes post.
what a bunch of crapayolia!!!…these 2 dogs had a sudden change in environment, of course there will be tension, heated up things, turf wars, fights….i had that going on even between my 2 GSD(bro and sis) mixes after our golden died, the one who was separated in another room because she attacked our other dogs….so after Olivia passed away i had some few little “i rule, you rule’ incidents but they are fine now since i corrected them and told them……no need to completely separate them, there is always a workaround!!! unless you are a friggin negative outlet like this website seems to me, giving wrong advice…. 🙁
Frank recently posted..You will be missed 🙁
The only bad advice is to pretend that an unaware, untrained dog can magically be an assistance animal for another dog, just because that horrible anthropomorphism gives you warm fuzzies.
History proved me right, too.
Chris ,even i see your point …they where together all along but then ended up in a different env. /but you keep advocating your narrow minded negativity and this is just wrong…keep it real and one day you will understand…?
cheers
Frank recently posted..You will be missed 🙁
It’s not narrow minded negativity, it’s a much needed dose of reality. THIS is what happens when you dump a defective dog on the market and expect other people to clean up your mess. THIS is what happens when you are too callous in your breeding decisions but have no spine to put these dogs down instead of pawning then off on rescue bleeding hearts hoping that someone else will sort if kind of make it all better.
The message here is to look on this situation for what it is, an abundance of human arrogance and failure and the dogs keep paying the price.
You’re entirely right about people making it about their OWN GUILTY FEELINGS… so true. This actually fits in with some other posts I’m writing. It’s like a munchausen by proxy thing, or even when the parents of a sick child (that they did not make sick) still form a narrative around their own suffering.
I’ve ran into too many parents who chose to reproduce, even when they knew full well that in their particular case, there was a risk of deformities, but they went forward, had the kid, and the kid DID in fact have said issues; congenital heart defects, trisomy 21, etc.
They cried beforehand if a doctor advised them against reproducing or enhanced warnings. One even said to me “Can you BELIEVE that doctor told me not to have children?” and was shocked and angered when I said “Actually I do. The doctor is there to give honest medical advice.”
These folks then cried when they took the risk and lost, whining “Oh, I think about my poor child every day.”
Oh REALLY?
I wonder if Sarah Palin bothered with amniocentesis before having her last kid and ignored the results, or skipped it because it was “in god’s hands?”
Funny you bring up Sarah Palin. I evoked her as an example on Facebook where Gina Spadafori posted a link to this post. For some reason people like Heather Houlahan never want to engage in debate on my posts despite having well formed arguments. I’ve never censored anyone (can’t say they do the same), and am always up for a debate. Anyway, here’s my Down syndrome observation:
Of course from the perspective of the individual animals they are sympathetic. If we watch a movie about a seal family and then a polar bear eats the baby seal, the bear is EEEEVIL. If instead we watch the same situation first from the perspective of the Polar Bear family and we see how the cubs are starving and mom needs a kill and she finally gets the seal, well then the bear is no longer EEEEEVIL, we’re rather pleased with the seal being killed.
Well, there’s more than one perspective here. I see the knee-jerk life at all costs attitude as very destructive. Just look at the human cost of this one dog. Breeder couldn’t deal with it, the first home couldn’t deal, the second home couldn’t deal. The dog is obviously not dealing well with it all. And this dog is a one in a million who happened to get a viral campaign to save it.
I don’t color breed but if I was staring down at a fresh litter and there were double merle puppies, I’d look at all the rescue pages full of Danes and Aussies that are defective and I’d say, “I’m not going to add to this problem, I’m not going to make my mistake someone else’s problem. It sucks the dog has to pay the price, but that crime was committed when I allowed the breeding to happen.”
Parents of ADHD and Autism Sectrum Disorder children are ~twice as likely to get divorced than the average parent. Parents of Downs syndrome children are not. Ponder why and I’ll bet you will come to the same theory I have. I suggest this is because there are no prenatal tests for the first set of disorders and parents get caught unaware.
Only 10-15% of informed parents decide they are prepared to raise a Down syndrome child.
So, I’d ask someone like Heather, who comes from a political sect that is perfectly willing to criticize someone like Sarah Palin’s life-at-all-cost attitude, somehow find the same issue with her rescue dogs so above reproach.
I definitely do NOT believe in life-at-all-costs. I’m more a quality-of-life girl. Of those informed parents who chose their down’s syndrome child, how many thoroughly thought out who would care for that grown child after they die? Does it make them feel okay knowing they may end up in state care? Would that be part of god’s plan?
A lot of parents suck, but when someone is lucky enough to have truly loving, devoted parents, we know there is no replacement for that. Even siblings don’t see it the same way. They have their own lives to live. Most caring parents don’t want to see their healthy children burdened with care of a disabled adult either. They certainly don’t HOPE for it.
And true, you don’t censor. Not that I’ve seen so far anyway. You welcome folks and if they seriously disagree, you let them know where you are coming from and what the blog is about. That IS more than I can say for most.
maybe the BREEDERS are the problem. I believe in breeding enough to keep the breeds distinct and to keep them from becoming extinct, but why breeders breed their dogs 4, 5 times (and MORE) producing dozens of puppies (some with the best and some with the worst traits), when there are millions of loving adoptable dogs in the shelters, and why people feel they must have a certain type of dog (like it’s a status symbol in the same way they must have a mercedes when we know its no better of a car than one 30k cheaper), is the question we should be asking. shameful.
This IS a problem about breeders. But not in general, in specific. The breeders of Great Danes who follow the breeding guidelines allowed by their registry and encouraged by their culture and enshrinement of color families which makes Harlequin x Harlequin which IS Merle x Merle, allowable. This leads directly to crippled animals.
Otherwise this is not an issue about how many shelter dogs there are, breeding dogs in general, the concept of purebreds, etc. Off topic and bordering on obnoxious.
I hate this debate and Chris is right, it is off topic. However I have a problem not responding, sorry Chris.
Many people need a dog with predictable body type, coat type and BEHAVIORS. Choosing a dog of a particular breed oes not mean that you choose it as a status symbol in most cases, It often means that you choose the dog breed because you thought it would fit in with your life style, housing family structure, etc.
I do not know how much actual experience you have with the ” millions of loving adoptable dogs in the shelters” but in my local shelter, when I was last there 3 months ago helping to rehome some setter crosses there were some 25 dogs there and (counting the 3 setter crosses) only 5 of them were not “pit bulls”, or pit bull crosses.
Owning a pit type dog in our area is, among some people “a status symbol” so why do we have so many in need of rehoming? One reason is a ruling in our state court system that these dogs are “inherently dangerous” and that liability for attacks can be passed on to the landlord. In addition if you are a home owner and not a renter you may find that your home owner’s insurance is canceled if you have certain types of dogs. No home owner’s insurance, no mortgage.
So you want to get a dog of a certain size and predictable personality, you do not want some one’s 11 year old pet that became available because the person died (as in the case of the above mentioned setter crosses), you want a dog that you can use for duck hunting, etc. A lot of the predictablity of a dog is due to its parents being selected for certain desireable traits – not its sire being the toughest and most aggressive intact stray male dog in the neighborhood.
If some one is looking for a family pet and they have children, in general they want to either get a young dog they can train and socialize to be reliable with the children or if they adopt an older dog they want to get it from a situation where the dog has a known history in relation to children.
This is really important. Our state legislature was working on a bill to overturn the breed specific aspect of our court ruling and the day before the state senate was to vote on it March 10, 2013), someone with a 20 month old child is visiting a friend who owns a pit bull cross and the dog ends up severely biting the baby in the face.
Guess what this did to the anti-BSL dog bill…?
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2013-03-10/news/bs-md-co-pitbull-bites-child-20130310_1_pit-bull-baltimore-county-animal-control-dog-bit
The purpose of Chris’s blog is to discuss the need for education in sound practices of animal breeding among dog breeders and the need for empathy for the quality of life that dogs produced by controlled breeding practices will enjoy.
This means that a lot of dog breeders need to learn more basic genetics in my opinion and that they should be looking at the whole dog, not just a specific subset of cosmetic traits.
New rule: If you send my dogs food and toys you can be as off-topic as you want. Thanks again, pictures soon.
And I split my DogTime post into two, the second and upcoming part deals with this very issue, smearing breeders.
It is a popular thing to do from pit bull people now. Their hearts bleed for pit bulls and they choose to blame all dog breeders in the most righteous and vile manner.
Dana’s position is very typical of people who do not understand dogs and who do not see dogs as animals with personalities, do no understand genetics, do not understand breeding, and do not understand the dogs long history as an adjunct or a tool to humans. To Dana and her ilk, all dogs are the same; ergo, any dog will do for someone seeking a puppy, and therefore anyone wanting a dog should be perfectly to pop down to the shelter and take whatever happens to be on offer.
Dana even tries (lamely) to pay lip service to ‘breed preservation,’ even though her references to ‘status symbols’ etc make her position a big, fat, hypocritical LIE.
Either all dogs are interchangeable and we should all be perfectly happy with any generic dog from an unknown background, or NOT. Pick a position, because insisting that ‘any dog will do’ puts the lie to having, developing, or maintain breeds or types at all.
IOW, ask for a hammer and Dana and her little feewing fwends would likely offer you a screwdriver.
Jess recently posted..Guest Post: Suzanne Phillips: Why dogs develop food allergies
Jess mentions:
However the shelters I am familiar with mostly do NOT have PUPPIES. What they have are adult dogs that are strays or were given up by their owners. So popping down to the shelter to obtain a dog is much less likely in our state to yield a puppy that the owner can raise and train to their needs.
The BEST consumer is an EDUCATED consumer. Dana and her little soft-hearted and soft-headed buddies do not care about making a match that lasts, through education and research, through consideration before the sale, all they care about is how they feeeeeeel about ‘things.’ All those poor homeless doggies make them feel bad. Denigrating someone who wants a certain kind of dog or wants to raise the dog themselves makes them feel good.
Dana sez: “why people feel they must have a certain type of dog (like it’s a status symbol in the same way they must have a mercedes when we know its no better of a car than one 30k cheaper), is the question we should be asking.”
Yes, this is an excellent question ANY dog buyer should be asking! Why do you want that breed? Why that particular puppy? Why do you want that rescue dog? But Dana willingly falls into the trap of believing that all dogs are the same, one dog is ‘no better’ than another, and such a trap will not allow the asking of those questions.
One dog is not better than another? Better for whom? And why?
Dana lives in a very black and white little world. God forbid she should be confronted with anything murky and grey that compels her to stretch her brain cells a bit. God forbid she should consider another view other than her own. God forbid that she should shove her feelings down where they belong and consider things with her intellect to guide her instead of her bleeding heart.
Jess recently posted..Guest Post: Suzanne Phillips: Why dogs develop food allergies
I give up on America. Everything published has to be black and white.
Dave recently posted..For One Allele
ok i beg to differ here. shelters and rescues do so indeed have puppies. ignorant people not fixing their dogs and dumping them at shelters pregnant. as for over breeding…dana is correct. take a look at any city shelter and look at their kill rate. NYC posts a list every night of dogs to be killed the next day. AND they are killed. research this before making a comment i am a bleeding heart. no need for breeding dogs except for your money hungry back yard breeders and puppy mills. and as you went off topic. unless you are in the situation it is very easy to say to terminate a pregnancy when a test shows an abnormality. this i know about.
Downs kids are much less stressful to deal with than autistic children. I think that is a more important factor than the predictability of a deficit.
Depends on the level of autism; it’s a spectrum.
Look up the definition of Munchausen by Proxy. Parents of MBP kids do make the kid sick!
I’m aware of Münchausen by Proxy.
http://www.border-wars.com/2012/06/munchausen-by-harley.html
Everything in your post indicates that you are only concerned about what’s best for YOU, not the animals, despite your belief to the contrary. Dogs at shelters most certainly do know what’s coming, as they can smell the death and fear all around them. Thus your argument that a dog doesn’t know what’s coming would only apply those dogs who are privately euthanized. Regardless, by your logic, there would be no shame in killing a human infant, as they “wouldn’t know what was coming.” Likewise, we could shoot adults as well, perhaps with a bullet to the back of the head when they’re not looking. Your reasoning is completely ludicrous. Also, a dog’s desire to live far exceeds that of a human’s and we know because decades of animal research have proven it to be true. Thus, we know what Lily wants; she wants to live. If an animal is suffering and the suffering cannot be alleviated, then by all means the ethical and humane thing to do is to euthanize them. Euthanizing a dog simply because YOU don’t want to be inconvenienced or because you believe the dog’s life is insignificant is unethical, immoral, and incredibly selfish.
Erik recently posted..Hello world!
“Also, a dog’s desire to live far exceeds that of a human’s and we know because decades of animal research have proven it to be true.”
Citation, please.
Jess recently posted..2012 in Review
I’d also like to see these multiple studies measuring ‘How strongly dogs desire to live compared to humans’. Fascinating science, I’m sure. =P
Such studies would be enormously useful for owners dealing with chronically ill (not going to get better) dogs. I can do an assessment according to a pain scale, but ‘desire to live’ is something I cannot assess. I’d like a handy chart, please.
Jess recently posted..2012 in Review
I hear that the Soybean plant has a particularly marked desire to live. The wholesale slaughter of Soy to create ToFu constitutes mass genocide by the Vegans. How long will YOU stand silent?
Plants actually have some fascinating defense mechanisms. Plus they communicate!
Jess recently posted..2012 in Review
It was in the animal’s best interest to never have been bred from two Harlequin parents. Don’t shift the blame here.
Gosh, you stumbled upon my weltanschauung! I am absolutely, as a rational and moral agent, concerned for what is best for me. Duh.
I do not believe it is moral to endlessly sacrifice time, money, and resources to the maintenance of this dog’s life for the sole benefit of self righteous back patting of do-goodery. Get real, this dog was not bred for its own benefit and it’s not being “saved” or “rescued” for its own benefit either. It’s simply a toy in other people’s messiah fantasies.
All that I wrote… and all you get out of it is that I kill for convenience? Wow. Talk about twisting things.
If I found animals inconvenient, wouldn’t it be easier for me not to bother owning any in the first place? I don’t need them for any practical purpose. They are my companions. I’ve fed all my cats premium cat food, I paid numerous vet bills for them when they had treatable illnesses that with surgery, would add QUALITY years to their lives, such as fibrosarcomas and Sub-Q fluids given at home.
I now have a kelpie that I pay hundreds per month for on real, whole raw foods, dogwalkers, I paid for lessons, vet care ( I drive over an hour out of my way on a non-traffic day for one particular vet clinic, just because of their gleaming repuation), ah yes, I truly do put convenience first.
Animals and babies/children both are at the mercy of their caregivers. The hands they land in are a roll of the dice. The best one can hope for is that they land in the hands of people with a good balance of love and sense. That balance is working towards a long and healthy life w/o suffering.
I’d be quite happy with a bullet to the back of the head if my suffering were unlivalbe, incurable, someday. I’m sure there are terminal infants out there somewhere, sadly, that would be better served if they were taken off of life support. And yes, that they don’t even know what is coming would only be a good thing.
Jess, Pai and Chris have the right added comments.
Hey, im sorry but i dont sleap anglish very vel , can you help me , becase i wanna now wher is Lily now . She have new home ? How ist posible to help she ?
Thank you wery much
Lily has a new home. The shelter is no longer providing new information.
Lilly má domov, ale ostatní psi potřebují pomoc (V České republice):
http://dog.rescueme.org/cz
Pokud chcete přijmout slepého psa, zkuste zde (V Británii)
http://blinddogrescueuk.webs.com/
Erik! Exactly!
you sir make me sick…..end of story!!!!!!!!
I don’t think it’s surprising or particularly newsworthy that the dynamic of the relationship between these two dogs changes when their home environment changed. This happens with cats and dogs. It’s unfortunate that the issue was irreconcilable, but these things DO happen. I can absolutely agree with the comments related to irresponsible breeding. But I have a real issue with the idea (and “idea” is probably not an apt descriptor, as the article itself was somewhat oblique) that somehow a special needs animal doesn’t deserve or qualify for a second chance at life. It it didn’t work for Lily with Maddison, that doesn’t mean it won’t work for Lily with another family with experience and without another dog in the picture. I read in the article the suggestion that special needs animals should be considered more appropriate to be euthanized than others that (seemingly) have no special needs. On that, I violently disagree.
So the deal should have been no separation at all. If one had trouble adjusting, they should have been returned together. How cruel!!!! Heart breaking story.
That is such a cute puppy but its a sad story of what happened to him.
Perhaps, whatever the presumed facts to be as reported, that these folks were not the ideal candidates, Despite their great compassion, there comfortable environment and all the financial capabilities to meet the commitment of such adoption, were they capable of managing the potential behaviorism dependencies that come with such a pairing and the transition et al?
As contrast to this situation, an astute dog person living in a hovel could perhaps been a better turn for such a dog..ok, I am being extreme and certainly don’t imply any disrespect toward the folks that stepped up in good faith..valiant as it is.
But where the tire hits the road, in the end, they were, perhaps, not fully capable..as harsh as that statement may be.
It appeared to me that the canine pair had a proven relationship of trust and accommodation and only after three weeks in an alternative environment under new guidance that altercations resulted. More often than not we fail to appreciate the human factor and relative cause to behavior detriment. Just saying.
That’s a very good point. There ARE only so many homes that are able to fully take care of a such a dog and despite the huge public response an a supposedly well trained shelter staff, they didn’t find the right home among all those candidates on the first try.
Very true. If you haven’t lived with blind/deaf dogs before, or two adult rescues before, it takes some getting used to.
Decide in haste, repent at leisure – the people “fell in love” after seeing all the cute pictures and news reports. Which happens to a lot of people, and is why Petfinder is such a success, with its easily searchable database of sad-eyed doggies (and is how I got my cat, for the record!).
IME, it takes at least three weeks for a new adult dog to settle into a home. I foster, and always warn the adoptive families that the first month is the most difficult – for dogs and people. Each side is testing the other out, deciding on boundries, setting a routine. With two dogs, you have twice the potential issues.
one of the things that isn’t discussed is that if these dogs were neutered after surrender, the hormone changes might have altered the “pecking order” of the two dogs. a change in environment or change in physical status can often initiate a shift in pack order. Lily wasn’t born blind and one does have to question the decision to operate on her eyes rather than to put her down at the time. I was recently asked to help find a home for a Queensland x who is deaf, barrier aggressive and aparently can fight with other dogs and is food aggressive. It’s possible this dog will find a home, but it is clear that it won’t be with an “average” owner. I don’t know that “Lily” was tortured, but she clearly should never have been bred and having been bred and kept alive, has negatively impacted the life of Madison.
My dog’s former person once told me she thought she had as high a rank in the pecking order as her husband, until he went away for a bit and then suddenly she found her home of dogs ( a BC, couple of kelpies and an LGD of some sort), getting sort of chaotic. The dogs were having some conflicts.
She felt the fact that the peace was disturbed said something about how the animals perceived her in the home; lack of peace in her presence meaning she was not respected after all.
I don’t know how true that really is. We can guess things but it’s always going to be hard to know EXACTLY what is going on in a dog’s mind. But they were all in the same living environment when this happened, and these were all healthy animals with intact senses.
A LOT of folks are not prepared to deal with these issues because the theoretical just cannot compare with the real, in-your-face dynamic.
“…the theoretical just cannot compare with the real, in-your-face dynamic.”
That’s an interesting statement to make, UrbanCollieChick! – especially in light of your previous comment:
“I’d be quite happy with a bullet to the back of the head if my suffering were [unlivable], incurable, someday.”
I wonder…
I have owned many Borzois for a long time (since 1967) and I have also helped train handicapped dogs (blind). Currently I have an elderly Borzoi who has become blind with age. He and the other old (over 10 years) Borzois are house dogs at night. The blind dog has been attacked a number of times because he sometimes steps on the other old dogs. This was a real attack involving subsequent visits to the vet for stitching up – not just growls and snarks. Mostly we have the blind dog go to his own area at night so that he is not stepping on the other dogs.
It is important to realize that when dogs as large as Danes and Borzois get in a real fight, that a lot of damage can be done to the dogs, to people trying to cope with the fight and to the household. Reading the account of the two Danses and subsiquent conclusions by the shelter, I suspect it was a real fight and dangerous to the humans present, not just nosie and snarking.
Back to my blind Borzoi. Watching him, I think he may do a bit of echo locating and also uses scent to locate the other dogs. One of the old Borzoi is especially reactive to his presence and he is hesitant to try and pass her. She of course has the habit of lying in the middle of doorways and then coming up off the floor suddenly to snap at him when he approaches.
I can aid him in navigation in the house by (1) not moving the furniture. (2) using a leash at times (3) clapping my hands to get him to home in on me. The hand clapping is very effective. We also que him in by saying right and left as needed when he is walking.
A very interesting thing about him is that he is very very fond of his plush toys and he will explore to find them before going into his exercise pen “bed room” at night. They must have a scent as he will immediately pick one up if it is at his feet.
I have helped to train some blind dogs – we do things like have the owner put a bell on the handle of the leash and also teach the dog to track the owner’s scent and to walk just behind the owner rather than to one side. If they walk behind the owner then the dog does not walk into things. Personally I think the human companion of the dog is a better “seeing eye guide” than another dog. The pecking order is better understood and the human is (hopefully) smart enough to watch out for problems the dog might encounter.
I think the blind Dane should do fine as a single dog if the proper human companion can be found.
An important part of the decision as to wether to keep a blind dog alive really is the question of the quality of life of the dog. Does it still enjoy things. Does it enjoy walks, its toys, its interactions with people. These are much more important than some imaginary human idea of devotion between the handicapped dog and another dog.
We also know some deaf dogs – one set is a pair (not a breeding pair!) of white dalmations that belong to a deaf couple. One of these does understand sign language.
I think that a useful tool for a deaf dog would be a non-shock vibrating collar. One could teach the dog to look around for the owner when the collar vibrated and then the owner could sign commands to the dog.
After owning big dogs for many years the main factor that I find comes into play on deciding if the dog should be euthanized because of a disability is the “quality of life” factor. This is also influenced by the dog’s environment. One does not want to see an elderly owner damage their back trying to move a large heavy crippled dog up and down stairs for example. It is not fair to either of them.
Aww, your comment’s truly sweet! It’s always nice to hear about real happy endings for dogs, even those with disabilities.
One small point: I don’t think the devotion between Lily and Maddison was “imaginary” (dogs are social animals after all), just so romanticised that the reality of the situation was lost.
I agree that well-informed or experienced humans probably do make better companions for disabled dogs in most situations because we can understand their needs better than they do.
I think Lily was adopted out a few weeks later to another family, and from what I’ve read, she seems to be doing fairly well with her new family.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/heavenlycreatures/2012/02/update-on-lily-and-maddison-the-blind-dog-and-her-doggie-guide-pal/
Thanks for the link. Here’s the quote from Dogs Trust:
I’m not sure how “extensive” their attempts could have been if the dog was dumped back at the shelter a mere three weeks after going home.
Sad story, no matter how you cut it.
Katie recently posted..Hawk Mountain hike
Three weeks is usually when trouble starts to appear with rescue dogs in new homes. My experience is if the trouble involves real fights and damage to dogs or people that one needs to separate the dogs. Big dogs like Danes can inflict real and permanent damage on another mammal and the potential for this should not be treated lightly.
One of my friends who became involved in rescuing Malamutes ended up with 5 dogs. They formed two mutually incompatible packs despite her experience and efforts over several years managing them. One day an error in letting dogs get together resulted in a fight which ended up with one dog with a bitten nose (not really a serious injury) but with her having permanent damage to her right hand.
This also illustrates why I believe it’s a fallacy when rescues to claim 2 dogs are ‘life bonded’ and will only adopt them out as a pair.
I’ve seen shelters do similar after dumping a kitten in with an adult cat overnight due to overcrowding.
It’s also worth bearing in mind that it’s notoriously difficult to ‘sort’ two bitches that start fighting each other within the household, even if they were friends for years.
I guess I just don’t understand why in this case (re: this article), there is euthanasia being discussed. Dogs are returned all the time and go on to find great homes. Without a full veterinary and behavioral work up I feel it’s pretty irresponsible and a tad heartless to suggest it as an option to be honest. She didn’t do well in the home for whatever reason. Ok? I’m sure being in a brand new environment was quite unsettling for her along with bounced around. There is a process for adding an adult dog to a new home that MOST people don’t follow.
It appears she found just the family for her in the end. I wish her the best.
I think that falls under the “quality of life” issue. The vet and behavioral assessments you suggest are reasonable. But I think this situation was meant to exemplify the additional burden to everyone that intentionally breeding dogs that a breeder knows can result in blindness or deafness, incurs. And that burden includes the burden to the blind/deaf animal itself; especially so.
Peggy said this dog was not born blind and the piece said it was congenital. The dog was also said to be in advanced age. Does anyone know exactly how old this Dane is and when she became blind? What was the operation on her eyes and what was the point of it if she still, it appears, had sight issues?
Euthanasia is the quickest, cheapest, easiest solution to an unwanted animal. It’s also humane. Why should it NOT be included in the discussion?
There are arguments to be made for quality of life, and of course those are weighed with the dog at the center. Is it better for the dog to be alive or dead? This of course depends on the severity of the defect, pain, and possible neurological involvement. It also includes the possibility of this dog not finding a home or bouncing from home to home or languishing in the shelter.
But this isn’t the only lens we can view this situation through. These dogs are produced by human decisions, they are not wild animals under antonymous destiny. Someone bred this dog on purpose. I’ve written extensively here why such breeding plans are unethical and a mistake. I’d prefer we avoid decisions like this by not creating these situations to start with, especially when disabilities like this are easily avoidable. This was NOT some freak accident that could happen to anyone.
Should we double down on that mistake by insisting that these animals, once born, get a chance at a life? Are we to elevate life beyond valuable, through precious, to sacred? Is there some timeline on that decision such that if an animal grows to a certain age that it’s no longer ethical to kill it? Should not animals be subject to the whims and desires of man? If not, do you then believe that animals must be given rights and assigned advocates independent of their owners? Should you have to go to court and win a judgement to desex your animal? How about to get their teeth cleaned or their nails clipped? What if you want them off your bed, would you need a restraining order?
Do you think that breeders should be prevented from killing these animals (and I use that word only because “PTS” is a little too romantic, I do mean humane euthanasia)?
Do you think that it’s better for the shelter and rescue community to be beholden to people who continue to produce these animals in large numbers and charged with finding homes for all of them?
For that matter, do you think it’s inhumane to kill a dog that is healthy but no longer wanted? Is this dog fundamentally different than the millions of dogs that are killed for just that reason each year save for the daw factor for being disabled and that someone wrote a story about it? Is that our standard now, selective outrage for the causes someone puts in your face but apathy to the ones that aren’t popular or publicized?
I think it’s a little quick to jump to include that in my opinion. Talk about it all you want, this is just my own opinion. Look, I run a rescue and am no stranger to making the hard decision. I am also well familiar with the outrage for special causes and the silence for the ones not publicized. We deal with those dogs every day, they aren’t highlighted by anyone or anything.
As for your entire 4th paragraph, don’t be ridiculous.
This conversation is not so much a call to find this one publicized dog and kill it. It’s more to highlight that the typical reaction of “well, what’s the harm in letting it live?” … starting when it’s born… is usually not informed about just how hard it is to reach a satisfactory outcome for a disabled dog. I think it’s easier to say “let’s just try.” But just because it’s easy doesn’t mean it’s best.
I’m not even advocating that all these dogs should just be put down so they don’t bother anyone. It’s about making people realize that there are burdens and negatives that need to be weighed against one’s desire to do something noble for a disabled animal. In light of these negatives, the kicking the ball down the field attitude can lead to a rather grotesque melodrama where these disabled animals are go from bad to worse and ultimately are confused and adrift all because people want to indulge their own feel-good desires.
Again, people can do what they want with the dogs they own, they can spend their money or even waste it on a lost cause or long odds. The thing I see lacking is honesty about the balance here. Too many people who just assume that there is only one way and that of course we’re going to save every last animal we can and we never have to deal with budgets or limitations or the thought that we could be spending our time and effort into rewarding those who breed right versus making up for those who breed poorly.
Chris is not the real issue you attempt to bring into this discussion: The conditions here were preventable? I believe we all understand the work of Rescue Volunteer Workers. However, will these breeding practices ever stop as long as we continue to help those that produce them?
The 4th paragraph was obviously written by a psychotic.
I know taking this one line out of your post is taking it out-of-context Chris, but it’s an important line. The very Danes you don’t purposely bred because of the risks of deformities those breedings pose, are done all because OF “the whims and desires of man.”
There are times when an animal can be saved and times when it makes more sense for the animals sake to put the down. It shouldn’t matter what the age, what the breed or who is to blame for the animal being born in the first place. Sometime it is just plain and simple that it is more compassionate for the animal.
This is not something people don’t know and this is not RARE. This is a simple case of if you breed Merle to Merle 25% of the puppies will be deformed. You will have half the Merle color and the other 25% will be not Merle.
You will get the SAME number of Merle by breeding a Merle to a non Merle — 50% but you will NOT have a quarter of the puppies deformed.
People who breed Merle to Merle should have their ability to register dogs PULLED.
?Yeahbut, actually–you will also get some dogs that are not merles. Merle is a modifier and an “add on”–I have seen genuinely accidental merle-merle litters that produced plain tricolors or bi-blacks (or whatever) along with a double-merle puppy. Not defending, just saying.
I mean, I do not want to see merle-merle EVER, but if you look at the calculator–25% double merle, which means in theory that 75% will be heterozygous merles or not merle at all.
http://www.athro.com/evo/gen/sheltiecalc.html
Nora, I certainly understand with the numbers what a complex mind twisting rationale it creates. It would seem if we are truly to understand the dangers to offspring one must consider the other avenue of double piebald and irish spotting being present. Likewise, now must watch out for the harlequin gene. The complex of color patterning and the desire for the white eye candy makes this far more complex than just a 25% margin of defectives from merle to merle breedings.
What really is frustrating if you have been observing the decades of this breeding program in varies pastoral breeds there is alot more horrors especiallly when you see or hear about entire litters are born with no eyes. We have the breeding tools today and some just refuse to back up their theories with proof. Such as the link that appeared on German Coolie breeder in 2007. Time for these breeders to back up thier claims with DNA and a Baer Test in my opinion.
Countrymae, when you say the German Coolie breeder link in 2007 do you refer to this page? http://www.coolieregistry.com/History.html
Sorry to have to check my own link that i provided but I missed the year 2007. Maybe it’s on another portion. Just checking.
http://www.coolieregistry.com/Health.html
What you want to know may be in this page.
Right. That’s another page of the same website I originally started posting here. Nothing regarding color-related issues on that particular page. The site was created by the same person, who speaks of coloration and Coolies with a dog named Oscar on another post in Chris’ blog; and she posted words that Chris refuted in some places.
I’m currently speaking with a lot of Aussies regarding Coolie origins. There is already a lot of hot divisions between folks, so much so that this German Coolie person is in fact a Texan, who decided that only she knows where the “pure” dogs are and decided to run off and make her own group, saying she has “German Coolies” and anything with “Australian Koolie” is another dog heavily crossbred with BCs or kelpies.
Meanwhile no one has given me any convincing evidence that these dogs are a breed in the sense people think of it today. It may in fact, be their version of a landrace, whether the Aussies want to admit it or not.
Oh, and still not seeing a reference to the year 2007. I’m sure I’ll find it eventually. 🙂
As some one who has fostered dogs for many years in my own multi-dog household, the issue of 2 dogs not adjusting has nothing to do with the physical limitations of the dog. Perfectly healthy dogs also don’t workout in foster/adoptive homes due to personality conflicts. I have great Danes and volunteer with great Dane rescues and to assume that this issue is a physical handicap issue is ridiculous.
Nothing? Ridiculous!
Being blind and/or deaf is not a neutral state. It’s a clear negative and it is without question that humans and animals with disabilities almost always face greater burdens beyond their specific handicap. You won’t find a single credible source anywhere that says “disabled kids have no unique issues in socializing with other children.” To say so, even though I’m sure your political correctness urges you to do so, denies not only reality, but creates an undo expectation that those with severe deficits should behave like everyone else, face no special burdens, their hills are the same height as everyone else and that they are in no way predisposed by their disability toward social problems.
They are. It’s a simple reality. Don’t victimize the disabled twice just because you want to pretend that the ability to mitigate disadvantages means that they are automatically done away with. By your insanely stupid logic any average owner is equally capable of raising a blind and deaf and neurologically impaired dog as they are one without those impairments. Great way to doom these dogs to bouncing in and out of homes.
Get real. Be honest.
I could not agree more be it human or dog do not burden or victimize the disabled with logic that is not reality. We know those special humans who can cope with these disabilities are not the vast population of human or dog. Get real
I have two blind dogs, due to age related cataracts and lens luxation. The fifteen year old is completely blind, the fourteen year is mostly blind.
All I can say is that there are most definitely management and behavior issues related to the blindness that a sighted dog would not have. To deny that their lives and interactions with the physical world and other dogs are affected by blindness is just naive.
I’ve own my blind dogs all their lives, and I’ve watched their behavior and demeanor change over the last year and a half or so as their blindness became worse. These are dogs that haven’t been rehomed, haven’t been placed into new surroundings with new people and unknown dogs, and their behavior has definitely been affected by their lack of sight.
Would you deny that the a dog with some kind of physical pain or mental trauma would experience behavioral changes and problems? Then why would you deny that lack of vision would affect behavior?
Jess recently posted..Afghan hounds, 1957
The dutch society for the protection of animals states that euthanasia is neutral in regards of wellbeing, whereas living isn’t.
Christopher…..all I can say is you are an idiot and hate for any dog of yours that isn’t perfect. You obviously have no idea what you are talking about….sad for the animals. There are so few people out there really for them that take the time to try to understand them. Obviously you are not one of them.
It’s not about the dog not being perfect, it’s about weak people putting their own insecurity above the welfare of that dog. I hope you never breed dogs because it’s clear from your comment that you don’t have the balls to do the humane thing.
If you get a puppy born with its intestines on the outside or with a cleft palate that will prevent it from nursing, will you allow them to linger until they die or will you put them down on the spot because you’re strong enough to know that it’s more humane than indulging your own sympathies which say that death can’t be better than such a compromised life?
So here, we get a dog who gets tossed from home to home, never given the extra care it would need as a blind, deaf, and possibly neurologically compromised dog, plus the other poor dog who gets ditched and then attacked right along with it. That’s not humane. This dog IS better off dead than to be paraded around as a fund raiser and DAWWWW story for slactivist jerks like you who can sit on the internet and pretend you really CARE enough but just like the people who stepped up for this dog, one week of REALITY was too much and they actually didn’t care enough to do what was right for this dog in any manner. They didn’t choose to keep her and rehab her and mitigate her deficiencies and they didn’t chose to put her down, no they just passed the buck.
Your comment just proves my point, there are SO FEW people out there and in this case it’s obvious that the dog is just continuing to suffer because of it. Shall we keep bouncing her around endlessly until we maybe find one? I say no. You’re welcome to disagree.
But I’m no idiot and I don’t hate imperfect dogs, so go suck a lemon.
Reading comprehension FAIL.
Jess recently posted..Are Mixed Breed Dogs Healthier Than Purebreds?
If lilly is still up for adoption, please let me know. I am a ample dog lover and have two dachsunds already, grew up with bassetts and boxers, would love to give this dog a home. I had a dog who grew up mentally disable and was aggressive and had seizures, but he lived to 14 and was a very loving and affectionate dog.
The shelter never responded to my initial inquiries and I’m not sure if they’ve advertised what has happened since.
Ok… Here is something to think about. There are soapy elderly people who are blind and incredibly combative . The families r unable to tend to their needs so they send them to a home. Where these people to are unable to take care of this person and their combativeness. This person is the. Transferred to another home, maybe a lockdown facility . But even there the workers are having difficulties tending to this elderly person due to blindness, combativeness, and more than likely some form of dimentia. Now, would u (put this person down) ( kill them)? This is not a different situation animals have souls too. They deserve a life as much as any human. Ur welcome!!!
The legal system and religious zealots in this country prohibit human euthanasia when quality of life is at a horrendously low state; be it having to do with mental instability or physical or emotional pain or stress of intolerable levels that can not be managed, controlled, etc. Even if management of suffering is temporary and there is no hope for improved quality of life, we rarely are given the luxury of control over our own bodies. A human in the full state you suggest of blindness, combativeness and dementia would result in someone deemed of unsound mind, and their requests for death would not be considered UNLESS, while in a stable sound mind, such a person had written legal documents such as a living will, DNR, or something along those lines at the very LEAST. At that point, it would likely simply be a matter of making no heroic efforts to keep the person alive; not a way of granting permission to perform a mercy killing, as the old term goes.
So would I kill that person? No, but that wouldn’t be my moral judgment necessarily. It would be a matter of my wanting to avoid a prison sentence. If someone could tell me my fate was blindness, combativeness and dementia and lockdown in a facility, you BET I’d want someone to kill me before the full onset came!!!
I don’t know how you define a “soul” but life for life’s sake, regardless of quality of life and the realities behind horrid medical suffering, I’m betting your idea of it is straightforwardly based on a religious viewpoint. Is it?
You are entitled to your feelings in a free country of course, but for myself, I find it to be hogwash! And there are plenty of other humans who feel just the same.
Bottom line you produce it, you take care of it. Breeder responsibility simple. You think it is o.k. to produce them …take care of them your choice first time and last your choice. You want to make excuses or state this is the Creator’s actions get real.
what happened to lily?
Christopher: Your knowledge of breeding Great Danes, as well as its aftermath, appears to be quite extensive. However, this pales in comparison to your assessment of humans with disabilities (emotional disturbances, social ineptitude, and even percentages regarding divorce rates in parents raising children who have particular disabilities, not to mention that of couples who choose to proceed with a pregnancy once Down syndrome has been identified via amniocentesis). What qualifications do you possess which warrant you to make such claims?
I can use The Google.
You mean you do ~research~ on these subjects?! I thought blogs were just supposed to be people’s uninformed rants and opinions about stuff! =P
Chris, I realize this is a blog, but if you want to add credence to your claims in reference to individuals with disabilities: (1) Properly cite your sources when including statistics and (2) Do “The Google” on “person-first language.” Why? I’m a Special Education teacher who researches emotional-behavioral disorders and intellectual disabilities in middle- and high-schoolers, as well as their families. Also, I’m not sure if this extends to dogs, but most individuals who receive services in conjunction with a “visual impairment” (in other words, what most of society would call “blind”) can often, in actuality, distinguish between different shapes in the visual field, as well as subtle variations in the intensity of saturation between one object to the next. So, as individuals who have this condition rely on these indicators to succesfully navigate their environments, perhaps dogs who are considered “blind” really do have something to look for! 😉
I hear: “You didn’t document a comment on a blog like a thesis and I’m too lazy to use google to look up the statistics you cite myself so I’m going to complain and demand you do the work for me.”
Do your own work. Apparently you get paid to know these sorts of things. No one pays me, so unless you’re keen on putting money in my donation jar, I don’t feel like doing your clerical work for free.
But, of course, since you’re entirely unlikely to put your money where your mouth is and pay me for my time (should I be wrong about this, there’s a donation link right up there on the right), and for the benefit of my other readers, my comment is based in facts and studies.
For everyone else, here’s what my comment said:
Here are the studies which confirm all my numbers, compiled by another blogger:
As for aborting Down syndome fetuses, wikipedia provides the following cited statement:
Children and dogs that are handicapped is like comparing apples and oranges. This dog blog from my experiences, observations, and reviewing all references has nothing to do with these conditions in educating human beings..Sorry
Indeed some dogs adjust to being blind, but more frequently than not other serious organ disease. Examples in conjunction such as heart problems, kidney and liver disorder not excluding serious skin,muscle and bone abnormalies.
They are like apples and oranges which are both fruit which are commonly found in many households and which people make decisions on their acquisition and disposition. Dogs and children share many similarities, especially in terms of culture and ethics and parenting/ownership.
I agree on this platform that apples and oranges are both fruit. Likeewise, the high numbers of abortions when down snydrome is predicted has more parallels to breeding dogs, and decision to have an affected child or affected litter of blind and deaf dogs.
It is an interesting parallel you draw here. Comparing the choice to breed affected puppies with rescue situations placements with divorce rates in human couples of children with handicaps. It does relate with this parallel of thinking.
I am appalled at the callous tone of your article. You do not appear to know if Lilly is ill, or has another reason for being irritable. You also do not appear to know what level of skill the adoptive parents had, nor what behavioral interventions and/or assessments were undertaken. You seem more interested in seeing Lilly killed. You are very definite about that, despite having few details about the situation. It certainly does not make me want to donate money to “read more like this.”
If you read the article, you’ll see Chris did state that pigment disorders have been associated neurological problems.
Let’s look at the facts, the adoptive family sent back the blind dog, not the normal more easily adopted dog. Why is that?
You also seem to lack the understanding that the callousness you accuse Chris of is pragmatics and directed more towards the people that breed these dogs.
Let’s be real, if these dane breeders are going to be heartless enough breed together Harle and Harle knowing what the chances are of producing these defective blind and deaf dogs, they should at least have the heart to euth them at birth. That is the only kindness in torture breeding.
If he sounds callous, it’s because Lily should have never been born in the first place. And somewhere Lily has white blind and deaf nieces and nephews from her breeder who pats themselves on the back saying, well, I find homes for MY defective dogs, not even considering that they should be trying to AVOID producing defective dogs in the first place.
And when people take in these defective dogs, they give these torture breeders an out. They take the responsibility away from these breeders. Because surely, if breeders had to put their pups dog because of these defects, they would be less likely to produce more of them… Or at least one would hope.
It taken me some consideration of this complaint as being a callous tone. It seems in my opinion the only issue is the callous nature of breedings such as this without a life long commitment to the care. Dumping blind/deaf dogs on the public is more than callous. Expecting others to clean up a choice someone else made.
Let’s face it folks, some people are more stupid than others. That’s life.
Thanks for writing such an objective and HONEST piece. I have a pug with a leg that doesn’t work well and they really do require more of a commitment than our other pets. I love her like crazy and am so happy to have her in my life, but we have to be much more careful with her and she can’t do everything that the other pugs can do. People really need to think long and hard before rescue an animal with special needs, and sometimes living is more torturous than peacefully letting them go.
Here’s my littlest one 🙂 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_abRyWE_GII
I love Great Danes and have had them most of my adult life. Life expectancy for a Great Dane is only 8 years, most of my Danes lived a few years longer and I considered every day after 8 years as wonderful. Great Danes are smart and loving dogs and should not be bred for peoples’ “entertainment”. People who don’t know about breeding should leave it to people who know what they are doing and quit creating problems with the breed. It makes me so angry to see this happen.
Joy, the problem is that these people DO KNOW what they are doing. It’s not just the ignorant and suspect breeders, it’s the cream of the crop. Please read my “Something Rotten in Harlequin Danes” post. The Dane breed club encourages this sort of breeding by their demands for breeding within the color families.
Is Lilly still available to adopt
I don’t believe so, the shelter stopped providing public updates. Given how wide this story was carried, I would think they found her a home.
Would you put down your child if they acted out? How about if you had adopted a child and that child acted out? Would you? NO! Thats all I have to say on that part! I had a dog that was dying and I couldnt afford to take care of him as to the surgerys were so expensive. I found a couple that took him in, even knowing he may die anyway, and had the surgerys done and he is alive now. Because there are people out there that can and want to take care of these animals, why kill them? Its not their fault their owners suck! Just like a child didnt choose its crack head parents!
It’s a blessing that dogs are not children, but your point fails even on its face. You elected to use the word child, I assume, because it has a certain ring of innocence and harmlessness. But dogs are not incapable of inflicting harm.
I don’t think very many people would have objected if the most recent mass shooter’s mother put him down before he killed her and all those other people.
I also know well of an adopted child, now adult, who likely has fetal alcohol syndrome or other drug use related inborn neurological disorder. They have been a miserable human from birth and have left a wake of tragedy, harming themselves and others, poisoning all things they touch, and leading to the dissolution of families and perhaps even murder.
Life is not so precious that we must sacrifice so many of the good, the innocent, the productive to preserve the evil and the broken.
A dog is not a child. It’s ludicrous to demand people treat their pets as if they were human infants and as if they were expected to sacrifice just as much to maintain their lives, no matter how defective and impoverished in quality. That’s not love, that’s selfishness.
It is really unwise to pose an ethical question by comparing canines to humans.
Is it really ethical to bring a child into a world of depleting resources? Is it really ethical to place a child in an orphanage which resonates of “The Dying Rooms” and “Bulgaria’s Abandoned Children”? We can go on forever with these questions.
Choose your straws carefully.
Dave recently posted..The Christmas Ham
I may one day be in a horrible situation health-wise where I would welcome the chance to end my life, rather than stretch it out with the stress, expense, and added pain of surgeries. I won’t know until I get there. It will depend on the individual situation and how I feel about it. It will be a hard decision either way because I have the burden of understanding what it really means to die. Dogs have no such burden, so why impose it upon them?
As someone who has been active in rescue for 15 years, I do believe there are fates worse than death. Spending years locked in a kennel is a far worse fate than death, for example, in my opinion. However, you can’t logically apply that same type of thinking to blindness. Dogs, unlike humans, don’t engage in self-pity due to their infirmities. A dog doesn’t care if he’s missing a leg or even blind. Nonetheless, the world can be a little scary for a blind dog and thus, such dogs do best with experienced handlers. The dog didn’t lash out because she was “tormented”; she lashed out because something frightened her. With so few details, we don’t even know if she actually “attacked” or if she was merely warning Maddison off. Obviously the owners didn’t possess enough experience that we can rely on their interpretation of the events. In any case, it would be senseless to euthanize the dog because she didn’t do well in ONE home. The previous owners dumped BOTH of their dogs at the shelter, so that has nothing to do with Lily’s adoptability. There is nothing to suggest that Lily wouldn’t do well in a home with owners who have experience with blind dogs. Furthermore, there are entire organizations dedicated to placing blind dogs with experienced owners. A dear friend of mine ONLY takes in blind dogs and they do just fine with her, her husband, and their 2 small children. Anyway, you’re certainly entitled to your opinion, but in this case, it really shows your ignorance on the subject.
Erik recently posted..Hello world!
If dogs don’t engage in self-pity, why are we to believe that they engage in other complex self aware emotions like the fear of non-existence? If they don’t care about being lame or blind, do they care about being dead?
She failed two homes. How many go-arounds should this dog get when other dogs are put down on first admittance to a shelter for conditions as simple as Ringworm? A fungal infection is certainly easier to treat and CURE than the incurable blindness and the obvious lack of socialization and therapy necessary to integrate this dog into a third home.
Sure, she COULD have been adopted by some amazing family who has an entire resume filled with dealing with old blind dogs. But she wasn’t, even after hundreds of thousands of people read her story. If there was a dog who had an amazing chance at the perfect home, it wasn’t found in this case despite a rather unprecedented and epic volume of publicity.
It’s not ignorance, it’s a different world view. Your points don’t change my argument and my argument doesn’t change due to what you perceive as ignorance, I know what you’re claiming I don’t. I _know_ there are entire rescues out there for dogs like this, I’ve profiled them before. There are multiple readers of this blog, friends on Facebook, who are raising double merle blind dogs RIGHT NOW, I wish them well, but that doesn’t change anything. The crime was breeding this dog, it is not a crime to put it down. I don’t think it’s unethical, immoral, or even a poor option to kill this dog humanely.
Should we move mountains just because of an outpouring of sympathy? Let’s spend a few million on this dog and we’ll make a Disney movie about it in a few years just so we can pat ourselves on the back.
We can go into what system of morals you or I would use to justify our positions, but I’m not unaware of the belief systems which drive positions similar to yours (mainly influenced by the writings of Peter Singer and Tom Regan). I don’t find them convincing.
To my mind, this discussion is not about euathanasia – the heart of the matter is about the carelessness of breeders and the need for tighter laws controlling the activites and also about the ability of rescue homes to find the right owner. I totally agree with what has been said in that if an animal has no quality of life, euthanasia is the kindest option. However, many animals with disabilities CAN live fulfilled lives thanks to modern knowledge etc and thus, in this case, it is clear that the failure was on the part of the rescue home – 3 weeks does not give an animal a fighting chance to settle in and these people were clearly not prepared for what they had taken on. It was irresponsible of the rescue home to let them take the pair because they had “fallen in love”. That is not adequate motivation or knowledge to take on this kind of challenge. But there ARE people out there who have the ability to take on this kind of animal successfully; I have seen it. The point is, nobody should HAVE to take them on, because they shouldn’t have been bred to this point. As a final point, please, please, stop bringing children into this debate. My family fosters a little girl with global disabilities and she is happy and healthy, and I find it offensive that this discussion seems to be going towards the “let’s kill anything disabled” slant. I am NOT against allowing people to end their own lives if their condition makes it unbearable, but that is a personal decision, not for someone on the outside who doesnt know anything about them and their life to decide if their life is “worthy”.
You people are fucked. It’s not her fault she was blind. She didn’t “fail” 2 homes. The first home she was in fucking ditched her at a shelter because she was a “burden”. If you have a special needs child do you ditch them at an orphanage!? She didn’t fail at anything. Humans failed her. All she wanted just like any dog was to be loved and fed. As far as her attacking her best friend is crap. My dogs have little squabbles all the time over bones and shit. THey would never really hurt each other. And one time? Come the frick on. Poor baby. I would have loved her no matter what. Soulless jerk offs. Some people do not deserve to have pets. It’s not about the money. It’s about the compassion and bond.
What fairy-tale land do you live in? Dogs aren’t mere objects, they are part of a relationship and that has two directions. Dogs have to hold up their end. Your point about special-needs children? Yeah, in the real world people choose to abort special needs children and those that are born increase the odds that one or both parents will abandon them. Is it fair? No. Is it the dog or child’s fault? No. But it’s a reality.
Of course humans failed this dog, you must have missed the part where this entire post is about not producing these dogs intentionally in the first place. This is what happens when breeders are too callous to (1) Not produce these dogs and (2) Not put them down at birth when their disabilities are clear. You might scoff at this, but they also clearly failed the alternative (3) Find a home that has the experience and ability to give the dog a good life, if that’s even possible.
Blind, deaf, and neurological issues don’t make that likely. Bouncing this dog around is not fair to the dog, the people whose hearts are obviously bigger than their brains, and the other dog that was victimized.
Keeping this dog alive is actually the EASY choice. It’s much more difficult to find it a situation that will allow it to thrive, again, if the impairments even allow that to happen. If you can’t appreciate that, back to the kiddie table with you.
“What fairy-tale land do you live in?”
Silly Christopher! Obviously L lives in “I am better, more tolerant, more noble, and more self-sacrificing” fairy land. See?
“Come the frick on. Poor baby. I would have loved her no matter what. Soulless jerk offs. Some people do not deserve to have pets. It’s not about the money. It’s about the compassion and bond.”
L doesn’t have to go through the pain of recognizing their own limitations in regards to dealing with animals, because they are perfect.
Jess recently posted..Guest Post: Suzanne Phillips: Why dogs develop food allergies
It’s so easy to play a God Amongst Mere Mortals on the internet. 😉
I can’t say as I understand what you’re getting on about not being able to find a suitable environment. Last I heard she’d been adopted on her own and is doing fine. I suppose I’m one of those “bleeding hearts” that doesn’t like to kill animals because they don’t function like the other animals, just seems kind of lazy to me. I work at a no-kill animal shelter, we don’t euthanize animals for any reason except for except for extremely low quality of life (simply having a disability doesn’t come even close to qualifying) or if they have an extreme and persistent aggression problem. Let me tell you, it’s not uncommon AT ALL for dogs to have to try 2 or 3 different homes before they find the right fit, you never really know how a dog is going to react to a new environment until you put them in it for a little while so they can get their barrings, this is especially true of the dog has special needs of some kind, But in my experience we’ve been able to find people who can take care of a dog/cat with special needs pretty regularly, it does take time and effort granted but it’s pretty worth it, in kill shelters animals aren’t really given the time required to find an suitable home, and instead are just put down after either they’ve been there for a certain period of time or they got sent back after a home didn’t work. It’s a very lazy yet rushed way to go about things, and I’m glad I don’t work at a place like that.
My point is: I’m not exactly sure how much you actually understand the issues at hand when it comes to finding dogs homes and such, I dunno maybe you do, but the way you talk about it sure doesn’t seem like it. One thing I do agree with you on though, irresponsible breeding needs to be stopped, it’s a very real problem that’s causing catastrophic damage to different breeds of dogs.
You have a screw loose.and these people did not take the time and care to make the readjustment easier. What skin is it off your back if ppl want to care for a disabled puppy or dog. You are some piece of work, a shitty piece of work. And BOOOO to these people. The agreement should have been together or not at all and if returned returned together. Some dogs who have been abandoned or are grieving loss, require more than 3 weeks to become adjusted to a new home, probably less constant attention and a different way of doing things. That trust also sucks ass.
Pleas help me somebody i dont speak very well . how ist posibl to help Lily ? my mail ist barbora.3108@email.cz i dont speak very well but i cant understant. Ist posible to adoptit her ?
As I looks at the posted picture of these two people I notice that the seeing dog does not hold his buddy by the leash any more – like separation of them- The lady hold the blind one & the man the other. They separate long time friend & make them enemies, these 2 do not understand animal behavior at my point of view. If they were getting along before the two dogs after so many years–what change for them did occur….That told the blind dog that his faith in his long time buddy does not work ANYMORE and he retaliated–probably on jalousy—He wanted his pal not human for quidance.
It needed humans in the picture to ruin this I guess.
Besides, “attack” – define attack, is the other dog visibly harmed by dog bites or what?
And now, since we humans are so unable, is death her only reward for our own unfortunate shortcomings?
Well there are no Wild Great Danes of the Serengeti, so yes, pretty much everything about this dog is due to humans making it so. This is the case with the vast majority of dogs on the planet as well, they are of, by, and for humans.
As for the attack, who knows. It’s not as if we have a police report and secret filmed footage. All that matters really is that it was serious enough for these high profile people who got so much world praise for adopting these two dogs to decide, “SCREW THIS, not one day more.”
I’m not sure death is a reward, but I don’t think it’s in any way a cruel or inhumane choice of action here. It’s not as if dogs contemplate their mortality and wish for a rocking chair and the sound of little grand puppy feet for their old age. The dog exists, then it ceases to exist. I think the sanctity of death is superior to extending this dog’s torture. We can blame the humans all we want but the fact stands that many humans have already failed this dog already, from breeding to now and no amount of bleeding heart desire for a “happy ending” on our parts is going to change that fact. There is no cosmic justice and even if we could wave a wand and grant this dog bliss, it wouldn’t be for the dog’s benefit that any of you care, you want it all to be roses because you want to feel better yourself. This dog’s suffering is a proxy for your own insecurity and emotions, and that’s actually a rather sorry state of objectification.
What I think is ridiculous here is the comparison of Autism to a Blind Dog who has possible mental disorders and then equate it to whether or not the dog or child should live if you knew the probability of that the disorder. What a completely irrational argument.
Neither the blind dog nor the child with Autism deserve to be terminated. While it is sometimes hard to find homes for dogs with disabilities; by the same token, there are lots of families who own animals with these same issues. Likewise; even if you could test for Autism before birth, a child with Autism is no different than any other child. The only change is how you teach them and any parent worth a grain of salt will work hard to learn how to do that.
My own child is Autistic and to say that I should have either had an abortion or have “terminated” him after birth… whatever that is supposed to mean, is completely stupid. You clearly don’t know what Autism is by saying that. Autism is a SOCIAL DISORDER. It is not a mental disorder. In a person who has Autism they fail at recognizing social cues because they often do not look at a persons’ facial or body language to which 80% of our language and social development stem from. This is why they need to be diagnosed early and can be hard to teach, it is not because they are stupid… because they aren’t. Albert Einstein was Autistic. He was a genius but couldn’t put on his own pair of pants. The man who did all of Kiss’ light up electric guitars had Aspergers, he is electronic wizard. So… do you think they should have been terminated? Should they have died because someone else didn’t understand them? Should they have died because according to some people they would have /possibly/ had a horrible life? No. They shouldn’t have. And that goes for all people; or dogs, with disabilities. Is it harder to live with them when comparing a “normal” child/dog to one who is blind or has Autism? Yes, I’d say it is. As a single parent of of a child with Autism, do I cry about it? No. I deal with it. I adapt to it. That is being human, and this is how life continues. By adapting to stressful situations we learn.
What instead should happen is be more careful to teach the public about proper breeding of dogs. The sad reality is that anyone who wanted to make an invested interest in breeding dogs should have known this beforehand… thus it is the humans fault for likely forcing the animals to breed (whether actual force using illegal breeding equipment or by purposefully selecting two animals and keeping them together like most breeders do). And because it is the humans fault it is also the humans’ responsibility to learn just how to handle an animal that may have issues through educating themselves on efficient behavioral techniques. The adoption agency that had these two dogs should have made 100% sure that the family that adopted Lily and Madison have a background as an animal behaviorist or require them to talk to a vet about how to handle a new dog with blindness and possible disorders. Clearly, the agency was overwhelmed by all of the applications and likely only went through a few of them and picked what they thought was the best one… they obviously didn’t do enough research about the family. That is their fault. It is not the dogs.
Likewise, I would wager that is YOU who wouldn’t want to handle a dog or child with disabilities. THAT IS YOU! Not everyone is like you. Not everyone is going to cower in fear of having a harder life then others because some sort of stigmatized disability comes into their life. There are some people who are glad to wake up to a challenge every day. To fight every day. To go to bed at night and say “I made it another night, and I will make it another day, and when the week is over I will have shown progress.” There are people who choose not to fail no matter how difficult the road. It is stupid to think that no one is capable of handling these dogs or people, or rather, that people SHOULDN’T handle them… that instead it is easier to ignore the problem and throw away the life that has been given. The world doesn’t progress that way, it doesn’t change that way, and it certainly doesn’t actually get better that way. What an irrational, illogical, and completely foolish way of thinking. By not dealing with the issue you effectively let it continue; and that is stupid… because no matter how much you ignore it life around you and the problem itself will still continue to exist. Believing that it will end when the dog/child/whatever dies is utterly naïve. That is no better than running away from the problem which is cowardly. And last time I checked, cowardice solved nothing.
There’s noting irrational about the argument at all. Dogs are not children but they share enough similarities to make informative comparisons. Many people invest a great deal of thought and choice into having children and owning dogs, their genetics and behavior are important, considerations of the burden of their care is important, they are both charges and unable to live on their own so they must be cared for. They are both living beings and yet the law and our current morality allows us to acquire and dispose of them in certain circumstances.
This is where many people get all huffy and uncomfortable but this does not change human nature writ large. I’m not evil for pointing it out either. Nine in Ten people say “Nope, don’t want to do that” when faced with a Downs fetus. And after that self-selection the extra burden (and this a reality) of raising a Downs child doesn’t particularly doom the marriages of parents who knew what was coming and chose to proceed. Autism, on the other hand, is not ever diagnosed during a stage where it is moral or practical to dispose of the child should the parents not want to raise an Autistic child. The result is that marriages fail at twice the rate. This is people saying “Nope, don’t want to do this any more,” same as before except now it’s a point where one parent is actually abandoning the child when the child is a sustained entity. Not a great outcome.
And the question is not about who “deserves” anything. There’s no cosmic justice. There’s only the ability of actors to use what choice and power they have to change their circumstances and the resulting effects on others. The dogs and the children and the fetuses are at the whims of the parents and the breeders and the owners.
There are big moral questions here that you seem to think have only one answer. Are we morally obliged to let all fetuses be born? Are we morally obliged to let all born creatures live? Are we obliged to care for them all? Are we any less obliged to care for the child of another person than a child of our own producing? Is there a moral difference? Should we place the morality of that situation dependent on the needs of those lifes? If it’s more natural or moral to have an obligation to meet the needs of a life we created, why are so many people blaming of breeders to be obliged to subjugate their wants to create life of their choice when others created life and then abandoned it. Is that not placing the obligation to care for another’s life above the life one creates themselves? Does that fit with our earlier position?
Is it moral to abort a fetus with some condition? What if the condition is a major disease? What if it’s not… what if it’s superficial like hair color. What about something more substantial but not deleterious per se like gender? Why are some of these moral but others are not?
Why does this morality change at “birth” … and are we not making distinctions via definitions to just AVOID making a moral choice, i.e. we say it’s perfectly moral to abort a fetus we don’t want but morally reprehensible to commit infanticide on an already “born” child?
What societal structures should we create that facilitate people abandoning other lives that they own? Should we make it just as easy to dispose of a child as an unwanted dog, i.e. leave an infant at a fire house? What about a 2 year old or a 9 year old? Can we allow those children to be left to someone else’s care at a whim? Like we can with a dog at a shelter?
Can we put down unwanted children like we put down unwanted dogs? Why do we as a society do this en masse with fetuses and 1.5 year old dogs? Is there not a lot of similarity between the two? After we behave in a manner that brings another life under our ownership, and after finding that we don’t want that responsibility any more, we create escape valves that either push that burden on to other people or remove the burden by removing the life.
You seem to think that I have some extermination fantasy. No, I’m pointing out such behavior that already exists at huge levels in both children and dogs.
Your kid might be autistic but I fear you’re the one with the mental disorder. Where the hell do you see anyone calling for you to “terminate” your child after birth? The only use of that word on this entire page is in the comments where I quoted Wikipedia statistics about what people CHOOSE to do on their own, with free will, when they are pregnant and get a Down Syndrome diagnosis. Nine out of ten of these people are NOT FORCED to abort/terminate their fetus/unborn-children. They CHOOSE TO. They DECIDE TO.
I’ll leave it up to you to guess what percent of parents would make the same choice if there was a fetal Autism test. Or a fetal ____ test for any other number of issues parents might not WANT to be burdened with in their idea of child raising. The ethics and morality of these decisions are not settled in our culture, for sure, but talking about these issues should not be disallowed.
So fuck you very much for distorting what I’ve presented here to be some call for killing your child. Fuck you. This is my blog and I write in clear and detailed sentences. So you’re either incredibly stupid or intentionally distorting what I have said into something else entirely because you either can not or choose not to confront what I said and would rather pretend that my position is monstrous and not even worth thinking about. We’re not going to play that game. You address what I actually argue or get lost.
Should their parents, or their mothers if you only think that it’s the mother’s prerogative over this issue, had the right to terminate their pregnancies for reason of a diagnosis of Autism? What about Down Syndrome? What about some other quality? What is moral justification for termination of a pregnancy, the killing of an unborn child? Should mothers be compelled to birth those children? Should they be compelled to raise them? If those mothers are compelled to birth those children but refuse to care for them should we as a society be required to care for them?
Bringing these questions to dogs. Should society be compelled to find homes for every dog until it dies of natural causes? What circumstances is it moral to kill a dog? Should we be allowed to kill unborn dogs? Should we be allowed to kill birthed dogs? What reasons are sufficient to allow this to be legal?
So, if we have one group in society that is flooding the system with unwanted but otherwise healthy dogs, should we be compelled to find homes for every single one of them or is killing them an allowable solution? How does your answer fit within the current paradigm where we do kill animals for the convenience and the sole reason is that it is a solution to the problem of unwanted stock.
If we kill perfectly healthy unwanted animals, why is it worse or different to kill disabled unwanted animals?
How many resources do we need to spend to find homes for these animals, disabled or not. Is it fair or moral if 5 healthy dogs are killed because the resources spent to find them homes was instead spent on a deaf and blind dog that already failed out of at least 2 homes? There are not infinite resources and infinite homes. Decisions have to be made and it’s not cowardice to do so. It’s cowardice to NOT do so and just think it’ll all work out.
As a single parent, why are you single? Did your husband leave after the diagnosis? If so why do you think your personal story is counter evidence to what I’ve presented? Do you have other children? Do they suffer because of your autistic child? Did you alter the number of children you wanted to have because of having an autistic child?
You point out “that is how life continues” but don’t you agree that both of these dogs are actually genetic dead ends. They are not being bred. They don’t have the chance to become parents. They are not a continuation of life, they are a terminus. By saving Lily we are not saving countless future generations of Great Danes. Rather we are actually taking away resources from dogs that could be used to breed and continue life. In fact the bleeding heart rescue community considers breeders to be the enemy. They are staunchly anti-breeder and thus are entirely devoted to taking resources away from the actual avenues of life in dogs and spending them on terminal dogs because they find them compelling and they feel good about “rescuing” dogs.
I feel you are becoming a little confrontational here – you have every right to your opinion, and I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you, but there is no need to become personal. I don’t feel that anyone is equipped to pass comment on such emotional situations until they have some personal experience of it. That’s not to say you can’t have an opinion – certainly, you are entitled to one! But perhaps those opinions are better kept between yourself and those who know you. Otherwise, they simply become hurtful and can come across as very judgmental towards those less fortunate than yourself. Please, can we stick to the topic at hand – dogs, poor breeding and re-homing for dogs with disabilities.
You don’t have to lecture ME on this issue. You won’t find a single person who has written more on this issue, brought this issue to light, more than me. Not one in the entire world. I’ve written dozens of articles, explained the genetics, clarified research, and even done investigative journalism to expose the breeders of all status levels who did this and continue to do it.
http://www.border-wars.com/category/health-genetics/lethal-semi-dominant
So you don’t get to play moral high ground with me. Try again.
This is ridiculous, you can’t condemn a dog to death from the information gained in a news report, particularly from the daily mail. Many many dogs are sadly returned to dog homes for similar problems to these, and often all they need is a more understanding owner with more experience and time to train and be with them. You do not know the circumstances of the fights they were having. Many dogs can only be rehomed as only pets, doesnt mean they don’t deserve a little more perseverance. Pessimist.
Poor English! You’re confusing CAN with SHOULD. We CAN condemn a dog to death because it’s Tuesday or because we don’t like how they smell or because we just want to. The ability to kill a dog is entirely independent of their merits or even their disabilities that give us warm fuzzies. It should not be news to you that hundreds of thousands, at some points millions of dogs are killed each year in the USA alone based upon CAN and having little to nothing to do with SHOULD. Because you CAN take a dog to the shelter if you simply don’t like it any more. You CAN kill it because you are moving and don’t want to pay the pet deposit or find pet friendly housing. Or because you failed the dog a dozen times with no training, setting it up to fail, putting it in a bad circumstance and it bit someone. You CAN kill a dog because you bought a shitty breed and it didn’t match your lifestyle or wants, it didn’t live up to its image.
Now SHOULD is an entirely different question. If you think we SHOULD save all of these dogs, then tell me how you’re going to do so with limited resources. You can’t have it all. There’s no happy ending for every abandoned dog. It’s an unequivocal fact that more dogs are abandoned than people who want used dogs. If that were not the case all the shelters would be empty. The problem is getting better but it’s not solved yet and never will be as idiots will always be there to get a dog and then abandon it. Should we warehouse abandoned dogs on “sanctuaries” or in shelters and rescues? How long? How humane is it to keep an animal in an institutional setting? Why is a shitty shelter superior to a good death? Why should we have life at all costs for every dog no matter how many are produced?
oh FFS it is time the rescuers got a brain not all should be saved, why should 5 healthy dogs die because so much recourses where put into saving 1 sick dog.
I am autistic but extremely high functioning so autism a bit of a grey area as you can go from me a little annoying, always thirsting for information & not so great with people to someone who can not talk or make any face never mind eye contact at all.
I am nether for or against abortion you just do what you got to do.
But I am all for pts a higher % of unhealthy rehomes.
I currently own 3 Danes, 1 is a rescue from a puppy farm and 1 is deaf and has sight issues. We heard about our deaf girl almost as soon as she was born and started discussing if we would take her if she was deaf from then. As I had never had a deaf dog before, I started researching and speaking to other owners of deaf dogs, specifically deaf Danes. By the time she was 4 weeks old and her deafness was confirmed, my family felt confident that we could handle her special needs. Her breeder did not just dump her onto the first home, we were recommended to her by other people and I have signed an agreement saying I will have Isis put to sleep if we are unable to keep her. The day Isis came home at 8 weeks her training started and she learnt sit, she learnt drop a day later, she now knows 15 signs. Isis is a very happy, confident girl that has fitted into our pack very easily. To have a blanket rule that these dogs should be PTS, is ridiculous. My boy that was a puppy farm rescue, is more difficult to deal with than our deaf girl. Danes don’t deal well with change at all and it wouldn’t surprise me if that played a huge part in the issues seen between these two dogs.
Where in hell do you see me calling for a “blanket rule” that all similar dogs should be PTS? Where is that? Why do you bleeding heart types insist on putting words in my mouth? Does all that blood loss make you poor readers?
I can not hear anyone calling for a blanket rule at all…. Most agree resources could be better spent than they are now in many rescue groups but no one is saying all should be pts.
Most of us are calling for them not to be breed anymore through poor breeding choices is all.
How can these breeders still do that if they /we all want good , healthy dogs with some standings/pedigree? I agree but it won’t stop the greedy ones, all in for money not the dogs, they are no dog’s lovers, just market purvayors.
luv
I don’t think it’s just the money, or money at all in certain instances. I think it’s more about the culture of pedigree dog breeding where TRADITION has not adapted to new information and trumps health. I see more people doing this because “that’s how we’ve always done it!” or “this is how my breed mentor did it and they were very successful.”
Breeding blind and deaf and nutzy dogs is not cost effective and you don’t actually get any MORE puppies that are “desirable” colors from this breeding method. It really isn’t a good idea even if you have no soul, no morals, and just want to make the most money.
Easy stop breeding merle to merle full stop. I am all for opening the gene pools I think the Dalmatian has proved it is a good idea, I would far prefer a 6/8 heavy Dalmatian than a sick pure breed personally.
This whole mentality of only breeding show dogs & only doing what some mentor tells you has created many of these issues so maybe it is time to start looking outside the box hay.
Is there any update on Great Dane lily after fighting w her companion Maddison? Appreciate it if you could provide me the updates on her. Thanks.
According to this press release you should contact their Press Office for updates. I did so over a year ago and have gotten no response.
http://www.dogstrust.org.uk/mediacentre/newsreleases/pr11lilyandmaddisonblindgreatdaneguidedog.aspx#.UgCVyZK1GiM
I read in a release that I can no longer find on their site that they are not going to provide updates. If you hear back from them, do comment.
I’ve got a litter of Borders in my kitchen right now that will hopefully soon be going to new homes — I’d love any advice on merling/extreme white that I could pass on (both of my dogs are black/white but there is merling/piebald in both of their lines; I’ve got one pup with a white face and one blue eye, and we did have blue eyes and white face in the last litter). I’ve recommended to the new owners to 1) be really for certain you want to breed and your dog turns out to be really worth breeding (it can’t be haphazard, and puppies are a lot of work and can be a source of heartache as well as pride); 2) if you do, pick a dog that is not only physically and mentally suitable, but complements your dog (also, don’t get caught up in looks or drive so much as well balanced bodies and personalities — most dogs don’t go to strictly show/trialing or even working homes, BCs need to be versatile and family friendly in this day and age, breed for it); 3) try to stay away from inbreeding/heavy linebreeding as much as you possibly can (it isn’t easy, but at least in the first 4 generations); 4) watch out for extreme white/merling.
If I need to be telling the buyers of the blue eyed/white face dogs something more, I’d really like to know. What somebody does with a pup after it leaves my house is their business, but my business is to try and make sure my pups go to good homes that have been imparted with good advice. I don’t want to see blind/deaf dogs getting produced from something that came from me if I can help it.
Merle is a dominant gene so if the parents are not merles then none of the pups are merles. If one of the parents has the merle gene but with very minimal expression then of course 1/2 the pups could be merles. The degree of expresison is not strongly inherited so some could be full blown, very obvious merles.
There is the unlikley possibility of a spontaneous mutation to merle in a non-merle dog but this would have a low probability – in the order of one chance in 1000 to 10,000.
It the merle in the pedigree is in the great grandparent generation or further back with no identifiable merles in the parent or grandparent generation it is very unlikley that any of your puppies are merle.
Dogs with a lot of white on the head, especially when an ear is white or the blaze is so wide that it partially covers an eye can have a blue eye also. This blue eye is independent of the merle gene and in my experience with Borzois has little effect on quality of life. Also there is a gene for blue eyes most commonly seen in Siberian Huskies which has nothing to do with merle and does not seem to be related to any problems of quality of life.
Dogs with all white heads can however be deaf or parially deaf because the lack of pigment cells may also occur in the inner ear where the sound receptive hair cells need to be stiffened with melanine (black pigment) or they are too limp to sense sound waves.
For this reason it is a good idea to avoid breeding spotted or collie marked dogs with a complete absence of color on the head to each other.
There is some randomness in the distribution of spots on a spotted dog but consistant selection for certain patterns seems to increase the incidence of certain patterns of distribution.
If you are a bit unsure on inheritance topics such as domiant and recessive genes, etc, I suggest reading over some thing like this basic dog genetics primer by John Armstrong. This version is hosted on a lhasa-apso site. I am not sure if the original is still available on line.
http://www.lhasa-apso.org/genetics/primer.html
Thanks, what you stated is basically what I’ve heard and have passed on — and yeah, with the high white pups we’ve had I have cautioned their new owners about steering clear of breeding them to high white dogs if they choose to breed, just to be safe (along with taking care to check out merle breeders long and hard before commiting to a breeding — I’ve seen what the color craze can do, and there are those that are starting to get into that within Border Collies; I really don’t want to contribute to that, so if they’ve come up with any new theories on this stuff, I like to know).
Besides, I like the black and white, easy on the white, myself.
As for the blind Dane in parallel to kids: dogs are not children, animals are not humans — we breed animals, always have, sometimes we’re pretty blasted stupid about how we go about it (like being so color mad that we produce blind/deaf dogs, or inbreeding to the point that infertility, predisposition to sickness, or anomalies become the rule of the day)….breeding people has been attempted in the past, o has the notion of “taking care” of those considered not fully functional, life unworthy of life. It didn’t turn out to well thanks to the folks in charge and their assumptions of what the parameters were. No thanks.
There is a balance, and we would be wise not to upset it in regards to this sort of thing — with animals though, we have a bit more leniency…because at the end of the day, they are not humans.
A large collection of canine genetics and canine diversity articles are being hosted at doggenes.com. This includes a memorial publishing of Dr John Armstrong’s articles.
Looks like a good collection of material:
http://www.dogenes.com/diverse.html
Also I have a set Essays on Dog Genetic Diversity and dog health at:
http://www.dogdimension.org/DiversitySite/index.shtml
Followers of BorderWars may also find much to be interested in at Jemima Harrson’s Pure Bred Dogs Exposed blog.
http://pedigreedogsexposed.blogspot.com/
What makes a coloring more desirable? Is it what’s marked in breed standards? Is it what people say is the cutest?
How does a breeder decide how often to breed/how many pups they want to sell from a dog in her lifetime? Is this a supply and demand deal? They didn’t get them all sold last time, so they’ll wait a little longer to breed again?
I understand that not everyone can walk into a shelter and get a dog that fits them. I’m not convinced that not everyone SHOULD do this. In general, I believe that not everyone needs to own a dog; I’d bet a stack of perfectly formed pb&j sandwiches that most of these people already own one, if not three (similarly for those who are parents of human children, but that’s another, often sadder issue). Anyway, I guess I’m stuck on the Goodwill mentality – why shovel out for something brand new, when I can get a shelter dog and avoid increasing demand on breeders. I’m not a fan of creating new life only to leave the dejected and depressed already in existence to lie (again, feeling similarly about humans). Hence, my questions on quantity and desirability.
At the end of the day, I’m left to ponder whether Fern had it all right. Save the pig, I will care for him. With the right care, he will turn out to be “T-double E-double R-double I-double F-double I- double C-C-C-C-C.” Or do we hope she stayed in bed that morning, because there aren’t enough Ferns in the world to care for all the runts? When do we have to account for pet owners’ good intentions and poor commitments to the animal kingdom?
I used to work for a shelter — the color thing is a fad; usually it starts as something unique and everyone wants it for that reason. It then progresses into a fad — some breeders will breed for that color, due to its marketability, and that alone, and the problems start to come after that.
This can happen with more things than just color — but there are (as stated in this blog) genetic issues attached to some color patterns (which was probably the original reason why they were unique, aka. rare)
We got a lot of deaf but pretty to look at Dalmatians (with horrid temperments) in that shelter; we also got more than our fair share of bad hipped Akita types and teacup Poodles/Beagles/Chis/Yorki-poos etc. For a while Bichons went through a popularity boom in our area, so we were overrun with those and they had all manner of skin related issues…oh, and Shar-peis and Chows, sometimes Shar-Chows. I don’t ever want to see another Shar-pei or Chow dog as long as I live.
The sad fact of the matter is: quite a of the dogs in the shelter are there for health and temperment reasons (which goes back to improper breeding — and most of these dogs were bred with the intent of selling them, not oops pups — it doesn’t happen that often anymore, at least not in this area; the dogs are coming in from homes that bought from irresponsible breeders/puppy mills; they were not “oops” pups; their owners could not cope with their myriad health and temperment issues). Every once in a while you can find that diamond in the rough (and even then he/she will have some behavioral issues just from being in the shelter or from getting there in the first place, like lack of socialization and proper manners — I had a really nice Dobe/GSD that I rescued, on his final day no less, but I had to deal with a year of him getting over huge separation anxiety issues caused by his previous owners), but a lot of the dogs there have problems beyond just that (which to be honest, beginning dog owners are least equipped to deal with).
With that in mind, I’m not going to hold a thing against good breeders (which aren’t necessarily big show breeders by the way) who want to produce good pups. Somebody has to do it, and honestly, if somebody comes to me wanting to know where they can get a nice dog, that’s who I try to send them to because that’s somebody who is caring to produce a quality pup (if they want to go to the shelter, fine, but I do warn them up front about what’s going to be found there most likely). Because they’ve put their trust in me to help them, and it would be wrong to send them someplace, unforewarned, where they could just as easily wind up with heartache than joy.
And I have to add this: one of the biggest problems I saw with the shelter was that they would highly publicize a big “charity” case (the deaf Dal, the puppy mill Shar-Chows and Bichopoos who skin conditions out the wahzoo) while at the same time far more run of the mill, much more adoptable dogs languished in their kennels (until it was their time to go take the walk). The dogs that got promoted for adoption were often the least adoptable of the lot!
But they made the news; they got the donations, and people (and rescues) lined up in droves to adopt them.
I have some choice words for this situation, and none of them are printable.
It’s been a while back, I hope things have gotten better, but I’m not going to hold my breathe.
I am a breeder. I breed when I want a puppy in order to carry my program forward. I generally each bitch only once, and I usually have a waiting list for my puppies. In any case, I will keep pups here until they find new owners. They have a home here with me until then.
As for colors, for a show breeder you generally see people breeding what wins. Show Whippets are dominated by fawn particolors, with or without brindle. Racing Whippets come in much more diverse colors. Some colors are difficult to win with and are typically not popular. Some breeds have ‘undesirable’ colors; these are colors that aren’t a disqualification but are not ‘desired.’ White markings are not desirable in Afghans in the US and Canada.
DesertWindHounds recently posted..Sirdar of Ghazni, 1930
I breed when I feel the need for new blood & I always take back any dog I breed no matter what.
Colour is stupid I breed work ability above all else.
Life begins at conception. God is the author of ALL life. God also gave man dominion over the animals. We don’t “put people down” like animals. *sheesh* Some of you people need to GET a life…..and try to recapture your souls from satan. Dear heavens, no wonder our country has no respect for life whatsoever. When you’re standing at your particular judgment (and you will whether you believe it or not) it will be interesting to hear what you say to God about how YOU decided whether babies could live or die.
truetolife recently posted..AKC: Big Fat Hippocrites
Life doesn’t begin at conception. The egg and sperm are alive before conception, so there is actually an unbroken line of life from the very first life on this planet until every living thing. So the only life that began did so perhaps 3+ billion years ago. Everything since has been a continuation of life from that life.
With the sperm and the egg there is never a point in which we would call them dead and they become not-dead. Always life, never not-life.
And the rest of what we do as beings is end that unbroken chain of life. We take life and make it not life, so we can consume it in some fashion. Fairy-tales about Heavens and Hells don’t really add anything to the conversation. There will be no final judgment, sorry. That’s a fantasy created by powerful people to control other people and to fulfill the unpleasant idea that there’s actually no justice in life except what we make of it while we are alive, so plenty of beings get no happy ending, no nice little moral to a story that makes everyone happy with the status quo and able to sleep at night.
I like your wording of the unbroken chain of life.
I may have to quote it in future 🙂
On the posted issue:
Its disgusting that breeders are still breeding harlequins / merles knowing that they risk severe deformities. Those dogs should not be bred from at all (along with the majority of all pedigreed dogs in my opinion).
What they decide to do with the deformed pups afterwards is beside the point, they never should have bred them in the first place.
Why are we still breeding for looks alone? Why are people so superficial and shallow?
Then again, we place such emphasis on superficial looks even within the human population, it should probably be no surprise that we do it to “man’s best friend” too…
Good article, but boy did these comments get aggressive later on! It’s a shame that the dogs couldn’t stay together but at least they did find homes (assuming Lilly is still fine at the one you mentioned in August).
I volunteered at an “animal sanctuary” once and it was horrible. I don’t think it should have had any animals at all, let alone the blind/deaf/scentless cat who they’d dumped in a faeces-smeared room with other “feral” (not happy about being picked up) cats, none of whom would ever be up for adoption. Sadly the RSPCA said that and other things I’d seen must have been a “one-off” (which doesn’t even make sense). The experience massively changed my views on euthanasia, because those animals were living in a Hell where the end would only come slowly.
What’s particularly tragic is that people who home disabled animals and can’t cope might be put off from taking in one of the many able-bodied animals who would make perfect pets. It would be lovely if all animals could have the homes that they, as domesticated creatures, generally need, but back in reality we should probably prioritise those with the best chance of happiness rather than those with the best sob stories.
…What a gloomy post! Mood lifter: One of my old cats (who passed away last year, he had kidney problems) went deaf in his old age and he coped wonderfully with it. Suddenly the scary sounds in his life (e.g. rustling of plastic bags, sound of the vacuum cleaner, fireworks) were gone, so he was generally much more relaxed. I set up a treat routine to go with his meds (for his arthritis and brain tumour) so he’d pester me if I was running late, and all in all I think he had a good life.
I agree, but much of the behavior in “rescue” is actually fueled by the best sob story and not an evaluation of the animals’ or the people’s merits. It’s branding, just like a $500 purse doesn’t operate any better than a $20, save what it SAYS about who owns it. It’s a status symbol and rescue animals are a status symbol.
I couldn’t agree with you more. While in my heart, it hurts me that any dog has to be put down because it doesn’t have a loving home, it sure is a heckuva lot more humane than keeping them alive in less than loving conditions. A friend once described to me a visit to a “no kill” shelter in Palm Springs. I was horrified. Putting these animals down is the humane thing to do. Not torturing them by keeping them alive in a cage for months with no one to love them! Think about it, people!
Someone should put you down Christopher, you repulsive creep.
Did I burst your juvenile bubble with a dose of reality? Boo hoo.
This is an incredibly insensitive article. You’re advocating for the dog to be destroyed because she’s a “burden”? Some people ARE equipped to deal with giant breed dogs with disabilities. This isn’t uncommon. It’s also not uncommon for 2 dogs adopted together that are bonded to show aggressive behavior in a new home, where it is a stressful environment. Could certainly do without the snide comments that are snuck in this article as well such as “how a blind dog is looking for a home is beyond me.” She’s blind. We get it. Get over your “I told you so” point you’re attempting to make. The situation is just sad and this is just a poorly written article.
Insensitive? Go suck a lemon!
I’m one of the few sane people advocating that dogs like this never need be born. And they don’t. This blind, deaf, and temperamentally unstable vicious dog is the fault of a breeder and breeding culture that promotes horrible breeding schemes to create Harlequin Danes. Doing so is breeding two semi lethal genes together and it results in monstrosities like this dog.
So not only should this dog never have been bred, it should have been put down at birth. And that is the most humane thing you’ll read about this dog.
wow!!!….this is the most hateful comment i have read since Adolf Hitler declared the war on Jews…so, imagine your wife(if you have one which i doubt) is getting pregnant and she receives your child…and all of the sudden you realize it is not perfect, it has a problem, maybe down syndrome…you go to kill it(according to your previous statement, you would without hesitation!) …sicko!
Frank recently posted..You will be missed 🙁
Your Down Syndrome analogy fails. DS is caused by a random error of cell splitting in the egg, it is not a gene that is carried by the mother or father. You can not predict DS occurring by testing the parents before conception. This dog is blind, deaf, and mentally tortured by the combination of being a double Merle and Harlequin. This is entirely predictable by any person with eyes who looks and sees that each parent is a Harlequin Great Dane. This can be entirely avoided before any mating ever happens. No DNA test required. And it’s not random magic afterwards either. The Merle genes meet in 25% of the offspring on average and disaster results. And if you’re trying to make some grand point about killing Down fetuses, 9 in 10 are aborted. So society has left you and your life at all cost attitude in the dust.
You are a VERY insensitive person Christopher
I’m not insensitive at all, you’re just confusing bleeding-heart-savior-complexes with the actual results.
In this case people who THINK they’re caring and sensitive are actually abusing these dogs by (1) Breeding them with high-probability disabilities that are known consequences of breeding choices that don’t need to be made. (2) Not forming stable relationships with them and rehoming them often. (3) Not doing anything successful to overcome their disabilities with training and rehabilitation versus mere “caring” which seems to mean “I’ll feed this dog and use it as an ego boost where I announce to the world that I’m “saving” it but when it actually comes to doing hard work which will need to be done for the rest of this dog’s compromised life, I’ll quit and get someone else to take it.”
Feeling pity for these dogs is simply not enough, and you’ve clearly equated feeling pity with being sensitive and thus righteous. NNNggg. Your exsanguinating heart doesn’t offer any actual help to these dogs. And yes, being put down, killed, is superior to being neglected and tortured with uneducated indifference once the glow of “I SAVED THIS DOG!” wears off and the hard task of actually caring for it becomes crystal clear.
The situation is not “just sad.” It’s 100% preventable.
So yes, I TOLD YOU SO. And that makes me better than you and certainly better than the people who bred this dog. Of that there is little doubt, and it’s not even a high burden.
Anyone who recognizes that this is immoral breeding, torture breeding, for the most shallow of reasons is better than denialists like you and the people –including every Great Dane club in the world– who perpetuate this evil.
You don’t like the writing? Hah! This post has gotten over 100,000 hits. I don’t think the world agrees with you on that count.
Chris, i am with you on the breeding situation, it got badly out of hand, profit rules 🙁 but some of your responses just don’t add up, don’t work with the whole prob!! let’s try to fix the problem other then stir it in one direction!! 🙂
Frank recently posted..You will be missed 🙁
I have a 14year old Rat Terrier who lost his sight when he was 2. We never thought of putting him down, or “rehoming” him. He is our baby boy. We just take precautions to accommodate him. We don’t move the furniture, or his food and water dish we talk to him a lot so he can distinguish our between our voices. He is 14 now, and starting to slow down a lot. We can just enjoy the time we have left with him, btw, he is an excellent smuggler. He sleeps with me every night.
~Aaron~
Congratulations, you didn’t blind and deafen your dog intentionally and you didn’t dump it at a shelter for someone else to have to care for it.
So your story has little relevance at all to the point of my essay.
I adopted a 13 year old blind hound from a shelter earlier this year. She is amazing. We moved a few weeks ago and she has settled right in. She gets along wonderfully with my 2 male dogs that were already here and she is as gentle and sweet as she can be. She has just started climbing on the couch to lay near us. Her favorite things in the world are bully sticks, dog beds, and sunbeams. I am SO glad that I saved her and I hope that she has a happy life with me for however much time she has left.
Well, more proof that dogs with disabilities don’t stay in homes and get dumped. While you’re fishing for an award for “rescuing” your dog, remember that you couldn’t buy a used dog if someone else didn’t trade it in.
So I say again, is it moral to intentionally produce these dogs for sake of their coat color when doing so places them at high risk of deformity and abandonment?
You didn’t specify if your dog is congenitally blind from excess white pigment or is blind from old age or some other reason. Blindness from double merle is often accompanied with other sensory issues and neurological problems. It’s not simple blindness, these dogs often snap at phantom threats, have motor coordination problems, seizures, etc. And they have no normal life before their impairment to help them come to terms with the world.
Heck, even dogs that go blind in old age often become more aggressive and likely to bite simply because things startle them. Those of us who would never abandon our aged dogs learn to cope with these things as long as we can preserve the quality of life, but look at your case. Someone decided that an old dog wasn’t worth the effort. It sucks that they ditched their dog, but it’s a reality.
Breeders can’t stop dogs from getting old, but we can prevent color related disease RIGHT NOW. So it’s unethical to not do so. That’s the point, which apparently you missed because you’re too busy fishing for savior-points and bawwing over the bullshit story of “seeing eye companion dogs” which is nonsense.
I’m seeing a lot of comments in regards to the blindness about breeding… Her blindness was NOT caused by color genetics. She had entropian, it’s not the same issue that arises from the double Merle gene that produces deaf and/or blind dogs. I have a brindle Dane with entropian, obviously it’s not caused by a double Merle gene or she wouldn’t have it! Any dog can have it, but loose skinned breeds are more prone.
Actually the eyelash issue is likely caused by her color genetics. The color leads to an eye with insufficient volume to keep the eyelid in its proper place and so, since the eye orb is deflated, the eyelid curls under and you have the issue.
How in the hell does looking for a new home have anything to do with a dogs eyesight? Because she is “looking” for a new home doesn’t physically mean she is looking with her eyes. You are really stupid. And its no wonder its beyond you!
The 2nd couple to adopt them are jerks for disposing of Lily and keeping Maddison. I have no respect for anyone who dumps an animal because they’re deemed an inconvenience. Maybe their personalities and home weren’t the proper environment for both dogs. Anyone watch Dog Whisperer?? Dogs react to energies. Maybe Lily sensed she wasn’t liked or appreciated by the people and re-directed that onto Maddison? Whatever the case, the relationship could’ve been fixed. People give up to easily when things get tough, and these jerkweeds threw in the towel and ended up just being another set of people to give up on that poor blind dog. Flakes! I hope Lily has a new loving home and is receiving the care and respect she should’ve gotten from the beginning.
“Maybe Lily sensed she wasn’t liked or appreciated by the people and re-directed that onto Maddison?”
Seriously? Just admit you hate people and like imagining the worst about anyone who falls short of your perfectionist ideal of who ‘deserves’ to own a dog. Your misanthropy is obvious.
It is not misanthropy to be disgusted, frustrated and disappointed dealing with possibly at its highest fifth or six grade comprehension and reading level of individuals calling themselves pure bred dog breeders. They apparently refuse to embrace new genetic breeding facts and be able to comprehend their importance. They do not apparently have the ‘common sense” to follow new genetic breeding strategies based on new genetics when handed to them on a Silver Platter.
Kathy, I’m responding to Vee. I even quoted the specific comment of hers I’m responding to. She is not angry at the breeders, she is hating on the adopters and theorizing that the reason the dogs got into a fight was because they could sense their owners didn’t love them. That’s lunacy.
Pai, I agree that the theory that the dogs got into a fight because they sensed the owners did not love them is totally not rational. Her statement does not put the responsibility where it belongs with the Breeder. I believe she likely does not comprehend the lethal known biology of the harlequin gene. However, seems as this fashion trend spreads within breeds she is hardly alone. http://www.clemson.edu/glimpse/?p=1175
Happy ending
Yes, bad things are done to dogs by people; but good things, too. Let’s not confuse the two
http://dogstrustblog.blogspot.com.au/2012/01/lily-and-maddison-new-year-update.html
This story was published in 2012. What is the status of Lilly and where is she now?
Facebook update on Lily and Madison from the Trust that rehomed them. https://www.facebook.com/DogsTrust/posts/10150422173186880. Dogs Trust
Nov 23, 2011
Please forgive the long post but we wanted to ensure that we were able to answer all the questions that were arising from the story of Lily and Maddison
We appreciate that it can be frustrating waiting to hear more about such a public appeal, but we had to consider the dogs’ wellbeing first and did not want to release half the story; it was, in fact, only this week that we had a full update to give.
A home was found for both Lily and Maddison and due to Lily’s special circumstances the settling in process needed to be very gradual. Both dogs were returned to us while behavioural work and assessments were carried out. However, despite the best efforts of staff and the very committed new owners it became evident that Lily and Maddison were no longer happy to live together. Quite simply the nature of their relationship changed in their new home environment and after careful consideration and many attempts at re-introduction in different surroundings which continued until very recently, the decision was made that they would need to be rehomed separately.
Maddison remains very happy in her new home and Lily is doing fine back at the rehoming Centre. She is getting on very well without Maddison as living with her in a home environment just didn’t seem to work and was clearly stressful for her. The staff at Dogs Trust Shrewsbury are looking after her so well and she is not short of love and hugs. Our number one priority has always been the health, welfare and safety of both dogs, and this decision was not made lightly.
We hugely appreciate the concern and affection shown for these two dogs by supporters around the world, and thank you for your patience in awaiting this update.
Q)Why did it take so long for Dogs Trust to post an update on Lily and Maddison?
Dogs Trust has worked tirelessly with both Lily and Maddison since it became evident that they could not stay together in the home environment. We wanted to give both dogs as much time as they needed to settle down before giving an update on them. Their welfare is our priority above all else.
Q) Why were Lily and Maddison separated?
The dogs went to their new home together on 29th October and within one day of being in that environment Lily started to show signs of aggression towards Maddison and eventually attacked her. Maddison became very frightened of Lily and the family who was so willing to take on these two huge dogs were heartbroken to have to make the decision to contact Dogs Trust again to make them aware of their concerns. It was then decided that for the welfare of Lily and Maddison they should be returned to Dogs Trust where Training and Behaviour advisors could asses the unexpected situation.
Q) What happened when Lily and Maddison were returned to Dogs Trust?
From 30th October- 7th November Canine Carers and the Training and Behaviour Advisor at Dogs Trust Shrewsbury worked with Lily and Maddison every day to try to rehabilitate and reintroduce the dogs to each other. They did a scent transfer in their kennels and made sure that they were introduced to each other in different locations at the Rehoming Centre to give them the best possible chance to rebuild their relationship. Staff produced a daily report on their progress and gave them the most thorough assessment possible.
Sadly, the nature of their relationship seemed to have changed totally since being in their new home environment together.
Lynn Barber our Head of Training gives this assessment:
‘The aggressive reaction Lily had towards Maddison in her new home is almost certainly because she is blind, meaning she will have adjusted and reacted differently compared to a dog with full vision. Lily had been living in a home for six years and in an environment that she was comfortable in and used to. The move to kennels with Maddison would not have been too hard for Lily as the kennel environment is limited and easier to adjust to. This means her relationship with Maddison would have been easy to maintain and remained stable.
Until that point assessment proved that the dogs were happiest together and that they offered each other valuable support – rehoming Lily and Maddison together became the Rehoming Centre’s priority.
Sadly for Lily moving to another home proved extremely stressful and she struggled to adjust to the new environment, find her way around, and build a new relationship with her owners whilst maintaining her friendship with Maddison. The stress and uncertainty Lily felt during the move resulted in her attacking Maddison. Unfortunately some fights in the dog world are so distressing that it becomes too difficult to forgive each other. After weeks’ of trying to reintroduce the dogs it was clear that they were extremely distressed in each others’ company and happiest when kept apart.
For the safety and wellbeing of the dogs Lily and Maddison will be rehomed separately. Human company and affection in their new homes will help to take the place of dog companionship and ensure their happiness’
Originally, when Lily and Maddison came to Dogs Trust, they got on very well in a kennel environment. This is the reason that we sent out a rehoming appeal Looking for a home that would take them both on. We could not foresee the change in Lily’s behaviour towards Maddison in a home environment but had to act accordingly once this was highlighted to us. Due to the nature of the attack on Maddison in the home Dogs Trust had the responsibility for the safety of both dogs and the family members who took them on.
They were finally separated on Thursday 17th November .
Q) Why did the new owners decide to keep Maddison instead of Lily?
The staff at Dogs Trust had made a decision after thorough assessment that they would need to be rehomed separately – for the welfare of both dogs. The family were willing to take Maddison back without Lily. Rehoming Centre staff were relieved as Maddison was not coping very well in kennels.
Maddison was most suited to the family as she has never shown signs of aggression towards other dogs which is important as the daughter of the family has two dogs who regularly visit the house.
Staff at Dogs Trust Shrewsbury are confident that they will find a wonderful home for Lily as there was so much interest in both dogs but also interest from people who would be keen to rehome just one of them. She will have to go to a special home where she is the only pet. Lily adores human contact so it will also have to be a home where she has company for most of the day.
Thankfully neither Lily nor Maddison have shown distress or anxiety apart and in fact the only time they have shown anxiety is when they are together.
Q) Is Dogs Trust involving Great Dane Rescue in the story of Lily and Maddison?
Where appropriate we have worked with breed rescue organisations when rehoming some of our dogs but on this occasion with Lily and Maddison we didn’t feel it was necessary as we could not have foreseen the change in nature of Lily and Maddison’s relationship. Dogs Trust has previous experience working with and rehoming Great Danes successfully.
Q) What is Dogs Trust doing to help Lily now that she is back with them?
Firstly, Lily is getting lots of hugs and attention from the staff at Dogs Trust Shrewsbury. She is being thoroughly assessed by the Training and Behaviour Advisor and we are carefully looking at rehoming possibilities for her.
Q) Has Dogs Trust informed the Daily Mail about the changes in Lily and Maddison’s relationship and circumstances?
By the time the story of Maddison and Lily’s rehome had gone to print the attack had happened. Unfortunately it was too late as the story had already gone to press. However the Daily Mail have since been informed of the current situation.
this is why dogs should not be bred. There are plenty of “oops” dogs to keep dogs going. If only humans would think with their heads and not their bank accounts and get real jobs instead of living off the spoils of other life forms in this world. Note to everyone – no matter what the bible says, animals are not here for us to use and abuse.
Sorry you feel that way Ryan (about dogs not being bred), but I think it’s a stupid position. You’re saying that we should abandon dog breeding to people who simply have accidental litters? That’s like saying we should not teach anyone to drive and leave that to people who have accidents. And we shouldn’t train doctors or dentists and just leave that to back alley hacks. No contractors, architects, and builders because some weekend warriors cut their fingers off.
The fact that some people fail and suck is not reason at all to abandon the thoughtful and learned pursuit of a hobby or a job or any endeavor.
I totally agree to people needing to stop breeding, puppys who dont get adopted get sent to shelters or to puppy mills. Think about it thousands maybe more puppys are dying the instant your reading this comment. Your/ everyone elses animals should all be spayed or neutered
This isn’t a “pet overpopulation” problem. This isn’t about breeding puppies in general. This IS a breeding problem, but it’s about HOW people breed not in what volume they breed. It’s about making the choice to breed Merle to Merle (and this includes Harlequin) when this is known to produce blind, deaf, and neurologically compromised puppies.
This is specifically an issue with the Great Dane Breed Club and the Registry. Both of which could ban Merle/Harlequin to Merle/Harlequin breedings right now.
It has little to do with the shelter problem.
I totally agree
Dude, what’s your problem? Why not keep trying and keep hoping?
Not sure anything else needs to be said for this crackerjack editorial other than “what a crock”. I might be inclined to read another article from this author once he graduates public school, but it’s unlikely.
Sure, 99% of the coverage of these dogs is saccharine sweet as if some shelter and some new owners would just magically fix the problems that were inflicted on these dogs by poor breeding. And I point out that nope, it wasn’t a happy ending, because it RARELY ever is, and you get upset because you’re too immature to accept reality and would rather have a pleasant fiction. You’re living in the fantasy world, buddy.
Trying to breakup a serious dog fight, even between 2 animals that used to be best buddies can be a dangerous and terrifying experience for both owners and dogs. I have known careers of doctors ended when they tried to grab 2 of their fighting pets and ended with permanent damage to the hands. Someone who was a truly responsible dog breeder would have put the blind animal down quietly with no fanfare, rathering than hoisting their problem that they produced on the unsuspecting public. If they really felt this dog should have been saved, they should have saved it themselves. When “breeders” save seriously defective dogs, so they can tell a sob story and then unload them on the unsuspecting public, I believe that is despicable behavior. The public who enters a pet store and “saves” the poor little puppy that they “just couldn’t leave behind” is promoting and supporting puppy mills.
Anyway, what is the definition of a “breeder”? A breeder is someone who owns a female dog that gets pregnant and has puppies. An ethical breeder is someone who carefully checks out their potential puppy buyers. Is willing to take back a dog they bred ANYTIME DURING THE DOGS LIFETIME. Typically a reputable breeder is involved with dog competition, in order to judge the adherence of their dogs to the breed standard. They are willing to discuss genetic defects,( surprise all living things contain genetic defects). Reputable breeders work to improve the health and temperment of their breed.
All different breeds have different traits and purposes that they were bred for. Owners of purebred dogs are fond of the individual breeds quirks. Buyers of quality purebred dogs want to know that the puppies were brought up and properly handled from day one.
As an inbred burden on society and my caring family (a father who has already left and a mother who will no doubt abandon me eventually) with psychological and physical issues common to my ethnic group, more so in the more inbred lines such as mine (inadvertedly as well as advertedly quite a lot further back), I appreciate the fact that society (at least a good part of the countries who pride themselves on being developed) has not yet gone back to the ways of old – condemning my kind to living in horrid sanitariums, condemned to basements, being lobotomized or euthanized. In fact, those of us who try to be thoughtful and rid people of the burden of us are generally the ones being locked up and (medicinally) lobotomized these days (it’s a mad world).
I am less appreciative of the fact that non-humes are considered so much less worthy of life than “The Holy Human”. That last sentence is not a (what would be faulty) judgement on your views or writings as human-supremacist, but on the views of world in general.
I don’t believe in the death penalty. I believe we are responsible for the lives we put into this world, responsible for them as a community. (*gasp* Socialism! Kill it with fire!) That’s also why I belive the lack of encouragement from the governments of the world for people to learn and know their ancestry and which inherited diseases they and intended mates carry (a backlash most probably born of the taboo you mentioned: speaking of people with lifelong disabilities as a burden) is tragic. Just as the lack of responsibility being shown by people breeding animals, as they happily ignore health for looks. Also, when it comes to some traits: what one individual considers a disability another considers a blessing, or simply just different. Like being of the female gender, for example. If you look at it objectively then the human is a somewhat disabilitated organism all together, a greater burden to the planet and ecosystem than a productive and supportive member of it.
Then again, as someone said: The Christian bible (and the Torah and perhaps Koran as well? I apologize, one of my genetical defects is a bad memory) does claim that we are pretty badly inbred (and of course science has proved that we -are-, although with the somewhat large difference of non-bushmen humans stemming from a number of humans around the 300.00-ish rather than 2-ish) which could lead to some amusing philosophical theories of there perhaps being a god or a more highly developed sapient species from another part of the universe and he/they believed a little too much in inbreeding… only to eventually abandon their botched breeding project much like a box of kittens left in the forest. Even though everyone knows euthanasia would have been the kinder option.
So, in closing, while I agree with some of your points and views, I disagree with you (and a great part of the world, I know. I dunno how that happened. All that inbred lust for killing in my pedigree and that’s the part where my genes chose to mutate! *sigh* Oh well, we shall wish my relatives better luck with their spawn. Most have heavily outcrossed and their offspring will likely outcross as well, what with the country’s current heavy influx of a variety of other human breeds – as well as my breedingline’s seemingly inherent curiosity for all new things) heavily on others. The ‘others’ of course mostly being a question of differing ethics and beliefs rather than facts or right or wrongs (then again, I don’t “believe” in rights and wrongs ;)).
And I really do hope that if we’re going to continue to play with genetics like we so like to do, we try to play in a less stupid way than we have and are.
Sincerely,
The inbred burden on society; lucky previous owner of old-type, and struggling current owner of new-type, German Shepherds and longtime hobby mouse breeder known as Lin.
Christopher why are new Adopters and programs putting people up on a pedestal for Adopting such pure breeds? Now we have a Pit bull adopters under an organization called Victory adopting pit bull pairs? Well, this might just have a worse ending than the Dane pair in my viewpoint.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/18/pit-bull-guide-dog-jeffrey-jermaine_n_4296456.html
This program as I understand it Rescue Me.Com with a published magazine began with the Victory of rescuing Pit Bulls from the fighting pit.
The article on changing times of Adoption ownership is hard to wrap any common sense thinking around.
We are not bleeding hearts; we are imperfect beings with perfect solutions.
Our empathy comes from our creator.
The fact that our solutions do not work out perfectly is because they are applied in an imperfect world.
The world would be literally a hell without us, as it is it’s almost that, but there is some good in it still, because we aim to stick around.
You’re welcome!
Christopher sounds like a p.o.s. with no heart. People like you make me sick. OMG I’m sick you better put me down. Around here you’d get royally fucked up for even thinking about telling someone to put their dog down bc it has a problem. Our animals are family and they get treated like family. You’d also get fucked up for thinking you’re smarter than everyone just bc you’re a p.o.s. that’d put down a dog that needs help. If we were to follow your advice then your sorry ass would be put down bc you obviously got problems.
Wow, Tex, you’ve got some issues to work though. Perhaps you better see someone.
Ok well its obvious who the idiot here is, the owners. No dog deserves to be put to sleep or taken back to a shelter after it she is already disabled. Lilly should not be put to sleep under ANY circumstances. Those of who dont agree with me please feel free to comment and tag me or whatever, i will show you why its unacceptable 🙂 your welcome. No animal, of any breed or type should be put to sleep. Lilly attacked madison. Oh no. Yes it is bad but that just means work with Lilly not kill her. You dont understand how she feels, specially being blind. Madison probably scared her or something along those lines to make Lilly feel that she needed to protect herself. That isn’t her fault. Like Bully breeds (pitties,amstaff,etc.) its how the owners train and treat them. So it sounds like her owners just need to either take care of her better or put her in training. Not kill her. That is unacceptable, and should NOT be tolerated. Animals are family and are privileges, not pieces of crap to be taken lightly. They need to be loved and taken care of.
And again, you’re wrong.
The idiot here is the person who bred this dog. They are the cause of the dog’s suffering and of all the down-stream chaos created by choosing to breed ignorantly and cruelly. The rest is fumbling trying (mostly unsuccessfully) to fix or ameliorate the problems caused by the very specific act of breeding Merle/Harlequin to Merle/Harlequin.
Above that, the blame is on the Great Dane breed club and registries like the AKC who have not banned this practice knowing full well that their “color family” culture is not just allowing but encouraging breeders to do this.
Grace: Do you even realize that the blind Great Dane has likely had it’s eye lids sewn shut? Do you know why? Because likely it never had any. No one even the bleeding hearts can look at two empty holes where eyes should have been. Now who insensitive here.
Grace: This is preventable and ethical Great Dane breeders have taken the reins. This is one time a movie actually helped a breed. The public wanted not a harlequin but a fawn/sable. Hopefully some day in the near future DS will be also. It is public opinion hopefully that will stop this cruel breeding practices. You might not like it and many who do this type of Rescues support this type of breeding. Like it or Not.
Yes, blind people are such a burden… They should be euthanized as well. I’m sorry but, I do not agree with you at all. I’ve had pets who were or became blind, they’re just as sweet and loving as any other pet. You don’t know what went on… Just what the owners said. Dogs, even blind ones, can sense so much more than humans are capable of. Anything, including the new owners, could have instigated the “attack”. If these dogs have been together for that long, then you have to look at other factors.
Rat girl you miss the entire message. This blindness is preventable. I have had dogs go blind on me as well. Please understand this is preventable. Today there is no excuse for blindness. Your argument is mute.
I know of some people who breed great danes for wounded soldiers and people with balance problems, service dog project is the organization
Im wondering why? They’re so short lived? It must take a lot of training parent selection puppy selection etc then for the dog to drop dead after a few short years?
The bitter tone of this article (“Knee-jerk bleeding hearts”?) is just weird. Was everyone who offered to adopt the pair of dogs an extremist/socialist left-winger? No right wingers were “stupid” enough to offer? Really? The facts about issues with disabled dogs is a cautionary tale on its own, without the off-the-wall editorializing. The “reporter” who spat this out has bigger issues than Lily. Stick to the facts, man. And for God’s sake get some help for your anger problem.