Ellen Degeneres and the dog thing?

Question

They don't care what kind of abusive hell a kid lives in but the dog adoption people are all over her like flies on you know what.....the inmates really run the asylum. IT'S A DOG! and it sounds as if it was being loved and cared for. What the hell do they want?

Answer 1

People, people! I have adopted a dog from Mutts and Mom's and can tell you that they are an amazing organization with huge hearts. The volunteers are courageous in my book for going into shelters to rescue animals, knowing that they only have the ability to take a few in foster care. My dog came from Kern County shelters near Bakersfield where over 66% of over 25,000 animals are euthanized every year! I thank this rescue every day for my little dog who beat the statistics. Furthermore, to those of you who aren't knowledgeable of the rescue-- they go through the adoption contract ITEM BY ITEM when you sign it. It isn't like the agreement is in fine print. AND-- to top it off, Ellen gave them a $600 donation. Heck, I give more than that to animal rescues every year and I am "middle class" America. Ellen did a sad thing by adding such emotion considering that she had the dog for 3 weeks. $3k of training in under three weeks? Doesn't sound like she gave the dog a fair shot in her home at all. Unfair to do this to such a grass-roots organization that has accomplished so much with so little.

Answer 2

Sad? Yes. "The saddest thing that has happened in America?" Not even close. Yes, I feel sorry for everyone involved. How much better it would have been if she had remembered that she had signed a contract and called the rescue group when the dog wasn't a good fit for her household. Had she called and said, "I can't keep Iggy, but the good news is, I found a great home for him," it's likely the group would have considered the new home. The hairdresser would have had to have filled out an application and had a home visit (I've adopted from rescue groups before). The group wants to know that the new home can care for the dog - that's what they do, keep pets from abusive situations. If the home was a good fit, it's likely the family would have been approved. Ellen could have paid the adoption fee. End of problem! What's really sad is that she didn't think of that, and that the people running the rescue service have been getting hate mail and death threats for doing what Degeneres agreed they would do if she couldn't keep the dog. It's beyond sad that people are over-reacting.

Answer 3

Absolutely ridiculous... My question is this... at what point does this shelter finally give up ownership of the animal because it seems to me that after two weeks and thousands of dollars that the pet sure would be Ellens and not the shelters. I find it ridiculous that after two weeks they still have claim to the animal. Perhaps I could understand 24 or 48 hours, or perhaps known neglect or abuse being an extenuating circumstance, but beyond that.... and then to state that they signed a contract it sounds as if that is not entirely true and the agency did not follow through on the contract stipulations on their end, so, if a legal avenue is pursued it would be very interesting.

Answer 4

Inmates running the asylum??? The dog I have no doubt was loved, cared for and given a very nice home. The pet adoption agency evidently is seeking some free PR advertising--which it surely hopes will boost its pet adoptions....which spells out $$$$profits$$$$, courtesy of controversy.

Ellen should and I hope does sue the pet agency. This is an issue where she paid to own a dog. She signed papers to the effect that she owns the dog--and can do with the dog (which inculdes home placement) as she sees fit.

Pet adoption papers are NOT the same as binding contracts for people adoption!!! It's time this "pet adoption agency" finds out that cold hard fact with an equally chilling resonant lawsuit.

Answer 5

it sounds like the dog agency is really behaving in an illogical way. it just doesn't make any sense, if they are truly concerned about the well-being of the dog.

i feel terrible about the family and ellen having to go through this.

regardless of the fact that their contract may grant them the right to take away the dog in this case, i think their actions were in bad faith and that they were not in the true spirit of the contract.

i'd really like to know the true motivation for removing the dog from the family. i can't see doing that - with POLICE no less - unless they had knowledge and proof that the dog was being abused. as in beaten, starved, tortured, or otherwise endangered. if it wasn't, then it should have been left with the family while they were allowed to make an application and get approval.

i wrote an email to them. hopefully they will get it.
and hopefully thousands of others will do the same.
it looks like they've pulled their website.
probably bandwidth related?

Answer 6

M&Ms are being cowards. They have taken their links off of almost every place they were on the web. They just need to do a house inspection which they could have done if they didn't just stand in the backyard for two hours waiting for the police to show up! Let the family go through the process and be allowed to adopt the dog. If they wanted good publicity, they would have taken it in that direction. I hope they get their funding sources cut off! Most of all, my heart breaks for that little girl and my heart also goes out to Ellen and Portia. Bless their hearts!

Answer 7

The Dog Agency wanted to take the dog back to make more money and "Donations" off of the celebrity brought with it because it lived in Ellen Degeneres' house for a couple of weeks. The Mutts and Moms wanted to make more money off of it. It is a cute, adorable, easily adoptable pet. Do you really believe that agencies like these small ones don't make a good deal of money ??? I would love to see the salary that the owners of this agency PAY themselves every year! Boo to you Mutts and Moms, your petty little attempt to profit off this dog has really backfired and you will probably not get many ADOPTIONS again! Shame on you! Try adopting pitbulls or big dogs not CUTE easily adoptable little foo fooo dogs!

They are allowed to reap a salary even when non-profit!

Answer 8

It's a dog, yeah, so we need to protect it just like it was an infant because it can't speak up for itself or report rotten owners that aren't treating it right!!

Well, duh! I've adopted all my animals from the shelter for the last 20 years and we all have to sign saying that if we don't keep the animal then we'll turn in back into the agency.

Why should she be exempt from the rules if she's a celebrity? It's for the animals' protection, to keep people from "dumping" unwanted pets on unsuitable homes.

If the hairdresser and her kids want the dog, let them go down to the shelter and apply to adopt it themselves! If they really are fit and proper people to provide a suitable home, the agency will decide and not Ellen Degeneres.

Answer 9

Don't know what they want, but the fact that they will not deal with children under 14 is wrong, there are young children that love dogs and take good care of them. We grew up with cats and dogs and took very good care of them. Even bringing homeless injured animals home to care for. If they were wild they were released. I started doing this at the age of 6, so Marina would have denied me a dog based just on my age. With so many needing homes she needs to rethink her policy.

Answer 10

How are they supposed to know the family is nice? Just because Ellen's a celebrity, it doesn't mean she can violate a contract. She should have contacted the adoption agency and said "I'm giving the dog to this family. Please check the family out and see how nice they are" or whatever.
E-mailing the company mean e-mails or whatever doesn't change the fact that they were doing their jobs. The reason people care about this is because it's celebrity gossip.