Lively dogs and little kids - Peckham Rye Park

[dwe]

In the 5 pages of this thread it has moved away from the OP to speaking more generally.

My general point still stands that if you end up having to continually apologizing for your child's or dog's behavior then there is a fair chance the apology is pretty meaningless.

Of course in the OP it happened once, but we have no idea if it is the first time this dog has done this with its owner not on hand.

Apologies if I got the wrong end of the stick - it really comes back to the a point made previously and that is consideration towards other park users.

[Jeremy]

It's just a matter of mutual respect and tolerace. Try to teach your kids to respect dogs but not be afraid of them. Train your dogs not to approach strangers or jump up.

[Otta]

Well said Jezza!

[Louisa]

Jeremy the voice of truth speaks!

Louisa.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> It's just a matter of mutual respect and tolerace.

> Try to teach your kids to respect dogs but not be

> afraid of them. Train your dogs not to approach

> strangers or jump up.

Whilst this is undoubtedly true - the thread wasn't about kids hassling dogs. And whilst parents ought to encourage their children to be relaxed around animals, in the situations being discussed, it is wrong to infer that 'bad parenting' has any bearing on the distress of the child. Responsible dog owners should not feel defensive.

[keekybreeks]

all dogs should be banned from all public places in builot up areas- status animals for idiots- if you dont have the room to exercise a dog properly on your own property, then you should not be allowed one.

[Dulwichdarling]

Oh lord help us

[MissMadMoo]

^ Just what i was thinking........

[keekybreeks]

this is what you get when you divert a thread into some grubby little slagfest to justify whatever jaundiced views you hold. stop it.

[Dulwichdarling]

Well that's us told people, let us cherish this charming input

[keekybreeks]

im bowing out, just to let the unchuckle brothers have the last word.

be sure to make it condesecending ,pithy and hoy in the odd big word to make sure we understand how clever youse is

/

[Louisa]

I bet keekybreeks is one of those annoying posh joggers that get in the way when you're trying to have a nice relaxing stroll around the park.

Louisa.

[jctg]

It's threads like this that allowed what happened in Germany in the 1930s to happen.

[Dulwichdarling]

Okay then.......

And Louisa you are brilliant

[BrandNewGuy]

"That's brilliant, dears! Well, I think that's it for the day. Back on set tomorrow at nine."

Mike Leigh

[actuarygi]

I think the crux of the matter is what exactly does the OP mean by "bounded over", "jumped all around" and "vigorously investigating", and whether the fear that these actions aroused to the child means something on the dog, on the child or on the parents should be done, or any combination of them.

If a dog had actually knocked over the child, or have showed to be aggressively growling at the child, then this dog should be leashed and kept close to the dog owner, full stop. But it is not clear if any physical contact was actually made or aggressive behaviour shown. Coming for a sniff is what dog does. Rarely would the dog carry aggressive intention. Of course nothing is certain, but we don't leash a curious but unknown human being for approaching a child who then become frightened, even if he or she may be seen as a nuisance and the very real possibility that this human being has evil intention. In the park situation here, the parent has the full liberty to tell the dog to go away, and most of the time the dog will comply. The actual danger that an unknown dog poses to a child can only be known and put into a proper context if statistics on the probability of unprovoked dog attack is compared to the incidence of violence one may encounter on the street. This will inform us on what is the appropriate level of fear that a parent should teach the child towards an unknown dog coming up to him or her.

[mako]

surely someone could breed pet dogs with smaller teeth? they dont need those massive teeth when given dog food and not allowed to hunt?

[Lizzylonglegs]

actuarygi Wrote:

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

> I think the crux of the matter is what exactly

> does the OP mean by "bounded over", "jumped all

> around" and "vigorously investigating", and

> whether the fear that these actions aroused to the

> child means something on the dog, on the child or

> on the parents should be done, or any combination

> of them.

>

> If a dog had actually knocked over the child, or

> have showed to be aggressively growling at the

> child, then this dog should be leashed and kept

> close to the dog owner, full stop. But it is not

> clear if any physical contact was actually made or

> aggressive behaviour shown. Coming for a sniff is

> what dog does. Rarely would the dog carry

> aggressive intention. Of course nothing is

> certain, but we don't leash a curious but unknown

> human being for approaching a child who then

> become frightened, even if he or she may be seen

> as a nuisance and the very real possibility that

> this human being has evil intention. In the park

> situation here, the parent has the full liberty to

> tell the dog to go away, and most of the time the

> dog will comply. The actual danger that an unknown

> dog poses to a child can only be known and put

> into a proper context if statistics on the

> probability of unprovoked dog attack is compared

> to the incidence of violence one may encounter on

> the street. This will inform us on what is the

> appropriate level of fear that a parent should

> teach the child towards an unknown dog coming up

> to him or her.

I'm really struggling with a solution to this. As a parent of 2 small children who absolutely love & trust a dog owned by a close relative, I hope we would all behave in a calm manner to a curious dog who bounded up, sniffing around. BUT my son has recently been out on a nursery trip, where the class 'encountered' six dogs all off the lead. The dogs jumped up at the nursery class. I'm sure they were all very excited, as I'm sure was my son & his classmates, probably a toxic mixture. However, it would appear that no-one (nursery staff & dog walker) was in complete control. As a result, my son is now anxious when we come across an unleashed dog, to the point where I think he invites more curiosity from the dog. We have pets at home, & he is totally relaxed. When I am out with him, I hope to anticipate & talk to him about dogs approaching, how we keep calm & relaxed, but never assume a dog is friendly.

However, as with all statistical analysis, the problem that you pose applies to the population as a whole & not to the individual. For them, it is an an all or none; it happens or it doesn't. Unfortunately that is chance. Further analysis bears meaning for the population at large but not for a random encounter in a park.

I would agree with previous poster's ; there is a responsibility on both parents & dog-owners to take responsibility for their charge's whilst out in a public space. By which I mean be vigilant & try to anticipate even the most random behaviour.

[Azalea]

Where in the park did this happen?

[Horsebox]

If a dog bothers you or your child and there's a hint of savagery about the beast, a swift but firm boot/stick to the jaw should send it packing. At the very least it should shock the irresponsible owner to keep their pet under control.

I am in no way advocating cruelty to animals (I was once vegetarian, for a time); Self-preservation is the aim.

[LadyDeliah]

Louisa Wrote:

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

> It's what the middle classes do. Vent. Moan.

> Mostly about stuff that wouldnt bother anyone

> else. I hate what this area is becoming.

>

> Louisa.

Must say, I find myself in agreement with Louisa.

[rodneybewes]

Horsebox Wrote:

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

> If a dog bothers you or your child and there's a

> hint of savagery about the beast, a swift but firm

> boot/stick to the jaw should send it packing. At

> the very least it should shock the irresponsible

> owner to keep their pet under control.

>

> I am in no way advocating cruelty to animals (I

> was once vegetarian, for a time);

> Self-preservation is the aim.

Pretty much this. If it runs up to your kids uninvited give it a leathering.

[actuarygi]

Let's summarise the discussion to-date and identify the missing bits.

If 1 dog runs up to your kids uninvited,

then if the dog appears to be aggressive

then leathering

else

if the dog runs too fast or jump around or vigorously sniffs

then leathering

else do nothing

else if 2 dogs run up to your kids uninvited

then do ???

else if 3 dogs (and more) run up to your kids uninvited

then do ???

What about any difference to response for big / small / medium dogs ??

[rodneybewes]

Your summary is more confusing than the lengthy debate.

[actuarygi]

that is because all the indentation was gone when it was posted.