Who gets the dog?

[juliepoudrier]

Eileen,

You say this:

The point I was trying to make is that Missy has feelings, and if a dog has a happy home and a bond with her owner, then it is a positive good for the dog to be able to stay in that home and with that owner. My longtime dogs could get used to another home, but they would rather be with me. Suppose Missy would rather be with her owner? Does that count for nothing? I just care more about Missy getting her just deserts than whether her owner gets his just deserts.

 

and then you say this:

But Missy almost certainly has made no moral judgment about her owner, or transferred her affections from him. I also think it would be very, very easy to determine who she is bonded to now, and impossible to mistake that for "enjoy[ing] seeing her former owner again." Actually, in my experience with trained dogs sold on in maturity, they generally don't enjoy seeing their former owners again. Once the bond has really shifted to the new owner, they are uncomfortable and uncertain when they see their former owner again, and try not to notice him/her. I think it would be very easy to discern her feelings.

 

 

I think it could be argued that while living in a shelter Missy/Lucky likely hasn't transferred her feelings from her owner. Who would she transfer them to? But let her stay with a new owner for a few weeks and the story may be different.

 

I guess I just don't understand why you feel so certain that Missy would be happier with her former owner than she would be with a new owner when we all (mostly) have experienced situations where a dog has transferred its affections, and, as you note, once transferred then the dog no longer seems to have the same feelings for the former owner.

 

And although you'll likely construe this statement as being about who deserves what or a statement on punishment, doesn't the fact that Missly likely wouldn't even be *alive* today have some bearing on the outcome (re: who gets her)? The original owner had no expectation of "owning" Missy beyond the point when he chose to leave her and assumed she was dying/dead. Perhaps Missy, being a dog, would not make a value judgment about that, but if I willingly give something of mine up then can I claim it later when someone else finds it? Yes, it's hard to keep value judgments out of that, but I think the abandonment, taken together with the ability of a dog to transfer affections and be perfectly happy with a new owner (if that ability didn't exist I doubt we'd have rescues and shelters, etc., because no adopted dog would ever be thought to be happy in its new situation) says to me that Missy will likely be happy with a new owner.

 

I suppose I'm also having a difficult time understanding an argument that states that the dog's feelings need to be taken into account when choosing who gets to keep the dog but that the dog couldn't possibly have had feelings about being abandoned on a mountain. Maybe the one sort of feeling is entirely cognitively different from the other sort of feeling, that is, the dog never recognizes abandonment because they live in the moment, but if you believe that then why wouldn't it follow that Missy would be perfectly happy with a new owner, living in the moment, neither recognizing abandonment nor rescue?

 

As for the story about Willow, yes, it was in TN. I had been part of the sheepdog community for two years at that point and didn't know very many people. And although I made unfortunate use of the word "deserves" the point was that Willow would likely have found happiness with a new owner--her rescuer--and although I'm sure she would have been thrilled to come home to me, what claim would I honestly have had at that point--the point where I separated myself from her emotionally by walking away and making no further attempt to find her?

 

I believe you're trying to say that Missy's original owner might have separated himself emotionally because of the stressfulness of the situation (which also led him to his subsequent inaction for the 8 days following), but once he psychically detached himself from her by assuming Missy was dead, then hasn't he essentially already severed that bond? (This is getting into a realm about which I am not greatly educated--the psychic responses of people and dogs--but I do believe that people cope by detaching themselves emotionally, and once that's done, then my question is whether the emotional attachment can be re-established in the same way that it existed before the detachment occurred. And if not, then would the original owner even have the same sort of bond with Missy that existed before the detachment occurred? Or would it be different? And if different, better, worse or just somehow different? I realize that this is getting pretty esoteric, but I think the questions I'm asking do speak to the whole "feelings" aspect of this discussion.)

 

J.

[Dana Nichols]

The Denver Post had an article today that the owner voluntarily transferred ownership of the dog to one of the rescuers.

[OurBoys]

I just don't believe dogs' minds work this way. Most normal dogs who've had a normal upbringing will cling to a person who's saved them from a bad situation, especially if that person is treating them lovingly. And the more helpless and scared they are feeling, the more they will cling. But Missy almost certainly has made no moral judgment about her owner, or transferred her affections from him. I also think it would be very, very easy to determine who she is bonded to now, and impossible to mistake that for "enjoy[ing] seeing her former owner again." Actually, in my experience with trained dogs sold on in maturity, they generally don't enjoy seeing their former owners again. Once the bond has really shifted to the new owner, they are uncomfortable and uncertain when they see their former owner again, and try not to notice him/her. I think it would be very easy to discern her feelings. And to me -- in the absence of any evidence the original owner was abusive or neglectful before this terrible occurrence -- she should go with the person she is drawn to and be in the place that feels right to her.

I guess that’s why we differ because I can see a dog’s mind working that way. But, I didn’t say Missy made any moral judgment towards her owner or transferred her affections from him. In fact, I stated she could be happy to see him again but I’m wondering if we’re viewing things differently because we are comparing working dogs and pet dogs.

 

To me, clinging is not the same thing as bonding. To me, clinging comes from fear. My Jake will cling to me by trying to climb up in my lap or lay by my office chair when a thunderstorm comes up if he doesn’t go looking for a cubby hole to hide in. Bonding, to me, has to do with respect and nothing to do with fear. I feel my dogs are bonded to me because, no matter how much they like other people, if they see me walking away, they are going to leave that person and come with me. I knew JJ was mine the night the obedience instructor, who was also JJ’s rescuer, took his leash and started walking away and JJ turned his head to look at me. When I told him “It’s ok”, he looked forward and walked with the instructor. If JJ saw her today, he would start acting like a wiggly, happy 10 month old puppy but the minute I turn around and start walking away, I would have no doubt he would start following me. Plus, no rescuer would adopt a dog out if they didn’t believe the dog could bond with its new owner(s).

 

Maybe I perceive this wrong but if a shepherd has had a working dog for 5 yrs, they’ve got a lot invested in the dog. I can’t see them not trying harder than Missy’s 1st owner did if that was one of their dogs. OTOH, I’ve seen/heard of pet owner’s giving up older dogs for lesser reasons. There are also a lot of pet owners out there who spoil their dogs but is that always being a good pet owner? (Think obesity or letting the dog rule the home.) If a food motivated dog knows it’s going to get a treat every time it looked at a particular person, who is that dog going to be drawn too? Would that make the person who the dog is drawn to the right person or would that mean that’s what the dog is trained to do/is used to doing? I’m not trying to discern Missy’s feelings but dogs don’t always know what’s best for them. A dog will drink antifreeze too but that doesn’t mean we’ll let them drink it. I’m also a firm believer that a person’s true nature will show itself under duress/extreme conditions. Missy’s 1st owner could have appeared to have been a great home on the surface but the one time it really mattered, he wasn’t there for her. The fact is he left Missy in the wilderness by herself expecting her to die a slow death.

 

I hope you don’t think I’m siding with the rescuer because I’m pro-rescue. A while back, a Border Collie was found swimming in the middle of a lake in Western NC. When the dog was pulled from the lake, it was turned over to the local rescue. The local rescue had doubts about returning the dog to its owner. (I don't remember if the dog was a rescue dog or not.) When we heard about the dog, I sided with the owner because of my JJ. If we lived close enough to the lake and he knew his way there, he would make a beeline to it every chance he could get. That’s how much he loves water. After interviewing the owner, the rescue returned the dog his owner. Apparently, that dog was the same way.

[Gloria Atwater]

The Denver Post had an article today that the owner voluntarily transferred ownership of the dog to one of the rescuers.

 

Oh, good. Then it's settled. Thank heavens.

 

~ G