Do you think it's child abuse for Mutts and Moms to take away the children's dog?

Question

Mutts and Moms is the organization who took away Ellen Degeneres' dog from her hairdresser.

Answer 1

I don't know that it falls under child abuse but the entire situation has been handled terribly wrong by all the adults. I think that Ellen (who i like very much) made a mistake going national with a problem she new would cause an emotional response. I think the Mutts with Moms got their panties in a wad about something a simple interview with the hairdresser and her daughters would have solved. The situation now has escalated to the national level of a kindergarden "cat" fight. It is a no win situation for everyone, $3000 and the dog couldn't be controlled???? Now the dog has been yanked bodily away from two littles girls who there has been no evidence to indicate were not proper caregivers for a fiesty little pupand handed over to what,, the pups 4th home. Gee will it hurt the dog to be yanked again worse than it has hurt the two girls or worse than it would the people who have him now...it is so totally a lose lose situation.
Ellen should help her hairdressers children to get a new pet and apologige to them for her lacsidaisical attitude that envolved them in such a mess and they should greive there grief and get on with there lives.
The head of Mutts and Moms who is so threatened by some one with more money and influence than she has should take a good look at her balance sheet because she depends on good will and money from these very people she is acting like she despises, (if she doesn't have a problem then why the tantrum and grabbing the dog with out any attempt at resolving the problem, just an attack).. I think she also should have to send a written apology to the children ,written because she shouldn't get with in a mile of dogs or children with the attitude I have seen displayed on the telly.
I also think the we the people need to get a grip and get over it, but I certainly would send my money to other animal shelters NEVER to Mutts and Moms.. Violence verbal or physical is wrong and all the adults have acted abominably......
NOW it needs to stop. NO more yelling screaming, no more threats just sit back and let the $$$ fall the other way.

Answer 2

I think it was a cold heartless act done meerly out of greed.
Realizing a celebrity had adopted the dog they saw dollar signs the second they discovered the contract had been broken.It had absolutely nothing to do with the welfare of the dog.If that were the case Mutts and Moms would have demanded the dog be returned until these people went thru proper screening and an exception to the 14 yr.old rule could have been determined by watching these kids relate to the dog.
I think any shelter or rescue that has a 14 yr.old rule added to their contract should realize that some children under that age are far more mature than their years.It should go by the child not the age.Because when most kids are 14 all they care about is the opposite sex and hanging out at the mall when they are'nt living on their phones.Their demanding social life gives them little time to care for a dog.I know alot of adults who brag they adopted a dog from a rescue or shelter who don't have the sense to care for themselves let alone a dog.
These people did'nt care about the dog and should not be in buisness at all and I'm certain that because they did'nt bother to add Ellens or Portias name to the micro-chip they had every intention of pulling something like this anyway.
And what I find really outrageous is that Ellen has borne the brunt of this when it was her other half that actually adopted the dog.
I wish the public would have handled this better by merely picketing this store rather than making death and arson threats because the dollar signs got bigger when people did this and poor Ellen will probably have to pay but I certainly hope not.
Had there just been a peaceful demonstration where people were informed of the deviousness of the owners and their hatefullness over the matter their sales would have dropped dramatically and the dog would probably have been returned to the little girls immediately.

Answer 3

No, I don't.

Ellen DeGeneres and her partner Portia De Rossi signed a contract when they adopted the dog from Mutts & Moms. Rescue adoption contracts prohibit giving the dog away to a third party if the dog's a problem or people no longer want it. The dog must be returned to the rescue.

A contract is a contract. Ellen and Portia signed a contract to adopt this dog and then broke the contract. If anyone should know about a contract, it should be people in show business who deal with contracts on a daily basis.

Ellen did the absolutely wrong thing in handing the dog to her hairdresser and her children. She broke the contract. Mutts & Moms, the rescue from which Ellen adopted, has every right to take the dog back if the terms of the contract are broken.

This has been blown way out of proportion in the media. I think people get the "pet store" mindset - I buy it, and it's mine and I do with it whatever I want. Rescues are not pet stores. When you adopt from a rescue, you are screened, you fill out an application, you sign a contract. You don't just pay them a couple hundred dollars and go home with the dog the same day. Most rescues require references and home visits. It's because they don't want the dogs to be given from one person to another, or dumped at the shelter or on the Interstate when people get "bored" with them or they have "issues".

I'm sick of everyone slamming the rescue in this for sticking to their adoption requirements and contract. The contract was very clear - you no longer want the dog, it must be returned. Period. And the rescue's requirements do not allow the hairdressers' family to adopt a toy breed because her children are too young.

Answer 4

As others have already said, that is not a muzzle that the doggy in the picture is wearing. It is a device that helps train dogs to walk on leash. (The "muzzle" you claim the dog is wearing wouldn't prevent any dog from using its mouth.) As for Mutts & Moms taking away Iggy from the new home Ellen DeGeneres picked -- the group was right to do that. DeGeneres had no right to do what she did, and she would have known that had she read her agreement. The group is acting only in the best interests of the dog. Do you know how rescue groups operate? Typically, they have prospective adopters fill out questionnaires to find out more about them to find out whether they're suitable, and typically they do "home visits," which gives them a firsthand view of the home one of their animals (whom they have rescued and lovingly taken care of) might be going to. Know your facts before you criticize rescue groups. If Iggy were a human child and was no longer wanted by his adoptive parents, would you be comfortable with them handing him over to someone else? Or would you rather the adoption agency do what it's trained to do and use ITS expertise to find the right home? Some will say, "Well, it's only a dog," and that's the problem. Iggy isn't "just" a dog.

Answer 5

Yes. I think it's abusive to the animal too, who also got shafted by the letter of the law.
I don't think the org. is abusive as an organization. I think it is more of a control issue. You broke a rule. Dog got a good home but the rules are more important than the dog getting a great home.
The dog and the children and Ellen and the hairdresser are caught in the middle. It makes people think twice about adopting without considering the contract and how draconian efforts to stick to it can become.

Answer 6

I don't think it was child abuse, but it was definitely cruel. At what point when you buy something in the U.S.A. is it not yours. According to the agency if it was 10 years later they still would of came and took the dog. It's silly and stupid, if this rescue organization cared so much, how come they never did a home check on Ellen and her partner?

Answer 7

Was reading the latest on this just this afternoon. Learned Mutts and Moms won't give animals to families with kids under 15, part of their policy, and that they've already given Iggy to a third family. The hairdresser's girls are 10 and 11. I might be wrong, but I think company/organizational policies are not punishable.

Answer 8

Im getting abit tired of this too.. people need to drop it. The rescue is only doing their job, and following thru with their contracts and regulations. If you want to blame anyone, blame Ellen for not paying attention to the contract she signed. She did not have the right to give the dog away!

Someone mentioned the rescue being on a power trip? Ellen is using her influence as a celebrity to make a big stink about this. That's a power trip!

Answer 9

Are you kidding me! Trust me, worse things happen to thousands of children everyday besides having a dog taken away. Seriously, they'll get over it! How about parents taken away from children? That would be more trama than a dog. Give me a break... I've lived with worse things and having a dog taken away is sad, but no where near child abuse.

Answer 10

To answer the question, having a dog taken away is not child abuse, though it is very sad (possibly even traumatic) for the child or children involved who cared deeply for the dog.