Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I think this is a difficult one as it is about a balance of freedoms.


People who are severely dog-phobic will almost certainly encounter dogs in the park, but they might also encounter them on the streets too. It is not reasonable to ban dogs from parks and streets since this would impinge on the freedom of the dog owner and affect the wellbeing of the dogs. However, I think it is reasonable to have clearly marked areas of the park where dogs are kept on a lead and it should be mandatory to keep dogs on a lead on public streets etc..


Is it unreasonable to suggest a severely dog phobic person should therefore avoid areas of the park where dogs are allowed to free run offlead?


I think overall the only realistic option for the severely dog phobic person is to seek treatment for their phobia and perhaps avoid areas where it is known dogs free run. I cannot see a practical alternative.

If someone is dog phobic they have a choice-get treatment -it is available or avoid areas were there are dogs. It's the same with any phobia ( spiders, birds, flying etc etc....)-which is defined as an irrational fear to a stimulus-either confront it or avoid.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • A friend has asked me to recommend Juliene for regular cleaning as she has some slots available. Her phone number is 07751426567
    • I'd put short odds on that but who would be his likely successor?
    • Hi, I went to the council's planning portal to look at the application, and I encourage others to look at it. It looks like a pleasant building, with thoughtful landscaping. as Pugwash said, the big oak would be retained, only two smaller trees are supposed to be cut, one of which is already dead according to the Tree Survey. It sounds like 38 people in great need of it will gain supported housing thanks to this development, a very positive change. Of course a solution has to be found for the 3 who will need to find other accommodation during the works, but that doesn't seem enough of a reason to oppose the development. The current building is 4 stories, so I would be surprised if one extra storey was considered objectionable, especially considering the big oak stands between the building and the neighbours' back gardens and the fact that the neighbours it's backing onto are all 5 stories houses themselves or only have blank walls facing the building. In the context where affordable housing is sorely missing, a 100% supported housing development is great news. Personally I've never seen a less objectionable planning request
    • I also wonder if all this, recently events and so many u turns is going to also be the end of Kier Starmer.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...