Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Put it this way... if a dog runs up to me and grabs something from my hand I will expect the owner to retrieve said item and apologise. I would also hope they'd take measures to try and train their dog not to keep doing it. That's all.

The original post said nothing about a dog taking something....

If someone is walking through the park and a dog is running about it may very well come back when called buy it may not straight away. A bit like human beings really

That's all

Dulwichdarling Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The original post said nothing about a dog taking

> something....


Hmmm... that's wierd, someone else must have added that bit. Still, the point remains. If you're dog has upset a small child by jumping up at him apologise. Don't make silly excuses like 'he's only playing', or 'hes saying 'hello', or whatever. It's pretty simple.

It's the shared space thing again isn't it. Shared space needs give and take by everyone using it.


I do think that as a society we've become over protective, of everything from our kids to our rights over others. If the worst that can happen to your child, is a hapless payful dog running about, then you should be thankful imo. Most of the things we fear are learned from our parents/ peers anyway. If a child is frightened by a playful dog, then all the more reason for the child to engage with dogs as soon as possible to overcome the fear.

You're right, that wasn't in the OP. I guess the original story got exaggerated somewhere during the course of the thread. But regardless - If my dog jumped up at a small kid leaving them very upset (whether it's snatched something or not), I'd apologise. You think that's wrong?

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It's the shared space thing again isn't it. Shared

> space needs give and take by everyone using it.

>

> I do think that as a society we've become over

> protective, of everything from our kids to our

> rights over others. If the worst that can happen

> to your child, is a hapless payful dog running

> about, then you should be thankful imo. Most of

> the things we fear are learned from our parents/

> peers anyway. If a child is frightened by a

> playful dog, then all the more reason for the

> child to engage with dogs as soon as possible to

> overcome the fear.


But maybe the kid doesn't wish to engage with a 'playful' dog at that particular moment. Why should it be forced to? Maybe you should train your dog not to jump up at people when it's out and about - or maybe if you see it running towards someone you should recall it? A lot of dogs are molly coddled in my opinion and that's part of the problem.

Well read the op again and then ask who is reinforcing the child's fear there?


The answer is the parent by picking the child up and isolating it from the dog. The result is that the child learns that every dog the runs towards him is a threat.


Edited to say, so I would question the parents fear/ attitude towards dogs, before that of the child.

A Rottweiler bounded up to one of ours when he was on his tricycle and to be honest I grabbed him off the trike and had a go at the owner when he finally caught up with his dog. As the owner suggested to me the dog was harmless I guess I overreacted.


I didn't try and pet the dog either.


What about this then Blah Blah (I posted it earlier)?

I agree MadMoo, and they then take their cues from that over protectiveness, and the result is an exaggerated fear of all sorts of things.


For example, in the same scenario as the OP, I would grab the dog (if it has a collar), and play with it. Then the child learns instead that the dog wants to play, and not harm him. Not always possible I know, but I've done that before.


We seem to have this impression that the country is full of unruly man eating dogs and bad owners. It's not. The overwhelming majoirty of dogs are properly socialised.

Here's what I take from this - Whilst out in public, try and keep your dog under control. If he gets out of control and upsets someone, don't make excuses by personifying your dogs actions 'he's playing... he's saying "hello" etc. Just apologise. It's simple.

No but the reaction is not the best reaction for dealing with percieved fear. That's my point.


Dogs often sniff bags because they are looking for food. It's what dogs do. At no point was the dog actually interested in the child clearly. So in that scenario I would still engage with the dog and let the child see there is nothing to be afraid of.

Dog owners are all so freaking evangelical. Maybe the kid / their parent's don't want to get to know your dog. Or maybe not right at that moment. It's not for you to take responsibility for ensuring the kid is 'properly socialised' with your hound. Just keep your dog under control and don't let it run off, harassing random people.

I respect a whole load more the parents who approach me to ask if their kids can pet my dog.

The reason they do this?. To avoid exactly the issues the OP has.


Teach your kids how to respect dogs/ animals and interact with them rather than instil unwarranted fear?

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You're right, that wasn't in the OP. I guess the

> original story got exaggerated somewhere during

> the course of the thread...


Does anyone actually read other people's posts?


The "dog taking child's toy" was a post by j9duff yesterday at 8.24pm about separate incidents in the Park - not a case of the tale growing in the telling.

It's about give and take rahrahrah. It's a shared space. Everyone needs to make the best of it. Dogs will run about because they need to exercise. They will occassionally pinch a ball or try to play with others. Dog owners should apologise if offence is caused, but similarly others should stop instilling fear into their kids, when there is no need of such.

MissMadMoo Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I respect a whole load more the parents who

> approach me to ask if their kids can pet my dog.

> The reason they do this?. To avoid exactly the

> issues the OP has.

>

> Teach your kids how to respect dogs/ animals and

> interact with them rather than instil unwarranted

> fear?


You think it's a parents responsibility to introduce their children to your dog in a controlled manner? I'm sure they'll be over the moon that they have your respect. Presumably the ones introduced to an out of control dog, which is running out of sight of it's owner, at a time not of their choosing, should have done more to prepare themselves?

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

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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