Dog bit my son, need advice.

clappyhappy

monkeysnapper wrote: »

i have a 2.5yr little girl and have 2 westies , very friendly and i always supervise all of them because my little girl can get very rough at times, the dogs have very much got used to her over the last 2.5 yrs but at the very start they were very nervous around her, but would never trust a dog 100%, its a real tough one, you really dont want to start fighting with your neighbors in my opinion. And you didnt really see the dog biting your child, im not saying it didnt happen .

Tell us a little more of what happened after this incident happened, did they except responsibility , what did they say?

They said this never happened before, I just cleaned my sons face and left as I wanted to phone shannon doc.

poldebruin

monkeysnapper wrote: »

i disagree with everything you have written, stupid, ,, hay lets just kill the dog, ok we dont know what happened but lets kill the dog anyway, what if someone came up to you with a pen and stuck it in your face, and your reflex was to push away, and lets say that person fell and banged their head, should you then be killed . jjeeez

Perfect analogy you made there :rolleyes:

Unfortunately for the dog it does not really matter what happened (and you making up what could have happened does not count) in the lead up to it biting a child in the face, just the fact that it did bite a child's face.

You can argue it's unfair on the dog, but blame the owners for that, not the OP.

jam_mac_jam

mhge wrote: »

When I was a child, we were told "leave the dog/cat alone" on a daily basis, and it worked. If our dog snapped at me or bit me, I'd be in trouble not her. Today you just put the dog down.

I got bitten quite badly as a child on the arm as I was rubbing a dog, so you cant really blame the child all the time. In that case I didnt do anything, very used to dogs and was just saying hello to him. A bit in the face is a bit worrying, unusual for a dog to do that but you can't always assume the child did something. I wouldnt rush to have it put down though either.

ISDW

Sorry this happened to your child OP, I hope it hasn't made him scared of dogs now:(

I think you should go and talk to them, and take any bills with you. Although, as they haven't called to see how he is, I wouldn't hold out much hope that they'll act responsibly in this.

I'm not saying that the dog should be pts, however, if the owners won't talk with you in a reasoned way, and accept responsiblity, and realise that they have a problem with this dog, then I think you should inform the dog warden. Poor dog may end up being pts, and as always it will be the owner's fault for not supervising properly but, if they can't see that there is an issue here, then something worse could happen in the future.

ceegee

monkeysnapper wrote: »

poldebruin wrote: »

Disagree with nearly everything posted here. Especially the "dog being a dog" part. Dog bit a childs face, if there's a chance of it happening again you have to take the cautious/safe route and put the dog down.

i disagree with everything you have written, stupid, ,, hay lets just kill the dog, ok we dont know what happened but lets kill the dog anyway, what if someone came up to you with a pen and stuck it in your face, and your reflex was to push away, and lets say that person fell and banged their head, should you then be killed . jjeeez

On the other hand would you deem the person puncturing your face a risk to the general public? If so why not a dog who does the same? Theres no evidence of the ops child interfering with the dog prior to being attacked

jam_mac_jam

ceegee wrote: »

Seems to be a lot of owners on this forum who can never admit a dog may be liable for its actions. Where exactly are you getting this prodding and ear pulling from? From what the op has said the child hadnt been interacting the dog prior to being attacked. Sometimes dogs attack without provocation, making s**t up to justify the dogs actions doesnt make it less guilty. The op believed both dogs were restrained, its possible they had been - why tie one up but not the other? Sometimes its not the victims fault, or the owners, its the dogs fault.

Completely agree with you there. You would think all dogs were angels. It must have been the childs/ parents fault.

Cherry Blossom

Just to clear this up, demanding to have the dog put down is not an option for the OP. The system doesn't work in this way and if the OP turns up at this persons house asking for the dog to be pts I doubt it will have any constructive effect on the owners.

OP - It would help if can tell us what was said/done at the time of the incident. Was the dog put away? Did you get any sort of an apology? What was the general attitude of the dog's owners to the incident?

Personally I would call round and ask them what their intentions are towards ensuring this doesn't happen again. If you are not met with satisfactory answers then I don't see what option you would have at that point other than reporting the incident to the dog warden.

clappyhappy

goat2 wrote: »

had your younger child been invited to this party, and what age group was the party for,

He had been invited but I kept him at home as he is too young to be left there for the few hours. It was for an 8 yr old.

Dilbert75

I got bitten quite badly as a child on the arm as I was rubbing a dog, so you cant really blame the child all the time. In that case I didnt do anything, very used to dogs and was just saying hello to him. A bit in the face is a bit worrying, unusual for a dog to do that but you can't always assume the child did something. I wouldnt rush to have it put down though either.

That may not have been your fault but you can be pretty sure it wasn't the dog just biting you because it liked the taste of human flesh. Something somewhere or sometime caused that dog to react like that. Its owners were responsible for its behaviour and for ensuring that it didn't come into contact with anyone whose well-intentioned rubbing it couldn't handle.

That said, I would never encourage a kid to approach a dog they didn't know - it's a bad habit and someday it could have that result.

goat2

your statement did say that you were looking the other way anyway, so maybe the child pulled dogs ears or tail,
i have a dog that if you touched his tail you would get a nice snap.
baby was near pond on its own. as you say you heard the scream, so if the child fell in pool it would not have been able to let out a scream

stovelid

WolfgangWeisen wrote: »

"Call the warden and have it put down".

How Irish. With wardens of such remarkable quality as Mr.Frank Coote doing the rounds in Ireland, who can't even tell one breed from the other, I would never advise that anybody call these "experts" for advise on animals.

We have one child who quite clearly wasn't being watched with an animal about, the attack wasn't seen so lets not pretend the attention was just taken for a single, co-incidental moment. We have a dog who was let loose around a bunch of kids who were most likely prodding it, pulling at its ears and other aggravations, so we have completely irresponsible behaviour on the part of the owners too.

So why, out of everyone involved, should the dog be punished and lose its life? Especially when nobody appears to have even seen the events leading up to it? Who leaves a child alone, unwatched, beside a pond anyway?!

Your beef here is with the owners. Ask them for the medical bills and put in a claim against them if they refuse to. I would also warn them that in future, if you see their dog loose around children, you'll report them as they clearly aren't doing their jobs as owners.

Two irresponsible parties and a dog being a dog, yet the dog is the one people seek to punish and then the irresponsible humans get off scot free. How absolutely Irish.

Posts like this are precisely the reason why most normal people avoid this forum.

Cherry Blossom

monkeysnapper wrote: »

stupid, ,,

Personal/insulting/abusive comments will be heavily moderated in this thread.

monkeysnapper

clappyhappy wrote: »

They said this never happened before, I just cleaned my sons face and left as I wanted to phone shannon doc.

its really dissapointing they havent been over to see you, it shows no compassion for your little boy, i dont want to come across as pro dogs, its just people jump to killing dogs to quickly without getting all the facts correct.

did anybody say what the breed of the dog was,

maybe you should just visit and say just to let you know my boy is ok, then just read the vibes so to speak, then maybe say in future can you make sure if your dog is outside loose can you make sure it has a muzzle on .

strandroad

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I got bitten quite badly as a child on the arm as I was rubbing a dog, so you cant really blame the child all the time. In that case I didnt do anything, very used to dogs and was just saying hello to him. A bit in the face is a bit worrying, unusual for a dog to do that but you can't always assume the child did something. I wouldnt rush to have it put down though either.

No I'm nor saying that it's always the child's fault; some dogs are just vicious but more often than not there is a reason why a dog has launched an attack. It could have been acting in defense, it could have been taunted by this child or other children previously. It should definitely be kept away but also children should have been supervised and this child clearly wasn't - he could have ended in the pond, harmed the fish etc.

The point is that putting the dog to sleep without addressing other issues will only result in the owners getting another dog and other children wandering unsupervised around. No gain, one life lost.

Cherry Blossom

stovelid wrote: »

Posts like this are precisely the reason why most normal people avoid this forum.

And that's backseat moderating.

Lisha

THe child need not have been directly annoying the dog to have gotten bit. In a kids party situation with noises, laughs, screams, shouts, balloons bursting, the list goes on and on the dog was most likely terrified before he evensaw the younger child. The dog quite simply may have been acting out of a terratorial instinct.
The fact remains the owners were wrong, the dog should have been locked away for the dogs own as well as the kids safety. IMHO supervision on its own in this instance could not be enough.
THe owners definately should understand that they were reckless leaving a dog loose among kids.
TBF they did not call after child's welfare as they know they are in the wrong.

The owners were wrong

and this thread disintigrating into a debate on who has the more value a child or a dog is just silly.

For the dogs own safety it should have been kept totally away from the kids

monkeysnapper

adrenalinjunkie wrote: »

Personal/insulting/abusive comments will be heavily moderated in this thread.

sorry i saw that after i wrote it, it wasnt ment to be taken that way , i wasnt saying poster was stupid but comment, but i can see how it was taken that way, sorry

clappyhappy

I am not demanding that the dog be put down. As said my worry is that this dog could bite again, my son is very very lucky, only one punctured mark on the corner of his mouth and three bruised teeth marks on his cheek. His lip or cheek could have been ripped off and him scarred for life. When the owner pulled the dog away from my son seemingly he boxed the dog in the face, all I heard was him shouting at the dog, other neighbour saw him hitting the dog.
I am not after money for bills or getting the dog put down. I do think the dog needs training and it should have been tied for party or a muzzle put on him. It is the fear of it happening again to mine or someone else's kids.

WolfgangWeisen

poldebruin wrote: »

Disagree with nearly everything posted here. Especially the "dog being a dog" part. Dog bit a childs face, if there's a chance of it happening again you have to take the cautious/safe route and put the dog down.

Well, that's because you clearly haven't an idea what you're talking about, isn't it?

The parents and the owners are responsible here, the issue would never have arisen if both parties had not been so irresponsible in their parenting and dog ownership responsibilities.

clappyhappy wrote: »

Don't know where you are going with your Irish remarks. Kids weren't unsupervised, I had just arrived did not know that they had a dog loose around the kids for the party,as I saw the other dog tied up. And the fish pond is a three ft diameter, about 6 inches deep for 2 fish in it. As also said I was no more that 20 ft from him.

I mention Irish because here in Ireland the attitude toward animal welfare is absolutely appalling. The UK is making strides in putting the blame on the owner in cases where the animal bites, and not the dog, because they've conducted a lot of studies over the last few years that show in almost every single case, it is the dog owners fault that the incident took place.

Here we just like to blame the dog and have it destroyed. Simple solution, eh? Well, the Irish aren't one's for taking responsibility for their own actions or inactions, are they? Let's not get into listing examples because there's lots of them!

Now, you throw a kid into the mix that isn't being watched with a dog on the loose, who itself isn't being watched, and I point the finger quite squarely at the humans in this case. Kids are known to trigger normally stable dogs due to pulling/prodding/interfering with the dog and as such, both should be watched carefully when around eachother. Multiply that with a load of kids and a dog out navigating between them and the propensity for something to happen is amplified.

That child should not have been left unsupervised and the dog should not have either. This is the fault of the owners and parents, so why is it that the dog should be punished?

The simple answer is it shouldn't. But hey, it's much easier to go and call the warden and gardai and have them deal with the owners, than getting some balls and going over and demanding that they do a better job as owners to ensure they don't irresponsibly let such things happen again, and demand the medical fees incurred from them.

ceegee wrote: »

Seems to be a lot of owners on this forum who can never admit a dog may be liable for its actions.

Well, there have been sufficient studies done to show that in almost all dog bite incidents, the owner is responsible for the incident. So, why shouldn't people be skeptical?

Where exactly are you getting this prodding and ear pulling from? From what the op has said the child hadnt been interacting the dog prior to being attacked.

He wasn't watching the dog or the child so there is nothing to support this.

Sometimes dogs attack without provocation, making s**t up to justify the dogs actions doesnt make it less guilty.

Studies conducted by experts don't qualify as "making **** up" to justify it. It's the facts.

The op believed both dogs were restrained, its possible they had been - why tie one up but not the other? Sometimes its not the victims fault, or the owners, its the dogs fault.

Prove it.

Anyway, here's your typical parent, child and dog attitude right here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0EWAfN61Ok&feature=related

If that dog had reacted, I'm sure the same people here would be blaming the dog.

Facts of the matter here:
An unwatched child on the loose around a dog
An unwatched dog on the loose around children
Both of whom should never be left alone with each other yet were.
A set of owners who weren't watching their dog or controlling it responsibly
A bunch of parents who weren't watching their kids or controlling them responsibly.

The dog is certainly not the one whose life should be ended here, and the child shouldn't be held responsible for doing what children do either. The parents and owners are responsible and should deal with it as responsible adults, not point the finger at one another's responsibility and seek to punish it.

Lisha

clappyhappy wrote: »

When the owner pulled the dog away from my son seemingly he boxed the dog in the face, all I heard was him shouting at the dog, other neighbour saw him hitting the dog.


I am not after money for bills or getting the dog put down. I do think the dog needs training and it should have been tied for party or a muzzle put on him. It is the fear of it happening again to mine or someone else's kids.

Thats not a good sign, yikes, cross owner, cross dog

You are dead right the dog does need training but given the quote above about him boxing the dog, frankly the owner needs training too

Now I know maybe he reacted out of character after seeing the dog bite but it not really right is it?

Just out of interest do you see them walk the dog regularly?

(im not saying the dog is more important than the child just a qt to ascertain the level of care the dog gets. a happy dog being less likely to bite again. At the very least the dog should always be muzzled around kids)

WolfgangWeisen

stovelid wrote: »

Posts like this are precisely the reason why most normal people avoid this forum.

Normal people? You mean, the one's who are responsible for the soaring number of dog attacks every year and the destruction of thousands of poor, innocent animals simply because these "normal people" didn't do their research before or after taking the the animal on?

It's a shame like things like facts, telling people to act responsibly for things they take on and advice deter these "normal people" from engaging really. It is their problem though, you should understand that. Animal ownership is a serious responsibility and if people aren't willing to deal with the seriousness of it, to reap the rewards that do come with behaving responsibly, then they should absolutely not be owning animals.

That is relevant to the topic though. The owners here are clearly responsible so lets sort out a plan for dealing with them, instead of taking the lazy and extremely typically Irish approach and just blaming the animal and seeking to have it destroyed.

I am just glad the justice system is a little more sophisticated than those seeking to use it to punish innocent animals though. Not by much, unfortunately, but it's something.

goat2

i had not seen this sentence about owner boxing dog on face, cruel thing to do, they do not know how to train the dog,
what make of dog are we speaking of, big, small,
i am not surprised the dog can get angry, being badly treated by owner can be a big cause of that

clappyhappy

Lisha wrote: »

Thats not a good sign, yikes, cross owner, cross dog

You are dead right the dog does need training but given the quote above about him boxing the dog, frankly the owner needs training too

Now I know maybe he reacted out of character after seeing the dog bite but it not really right is it?

Just out of interest do you see them walk the dog regularly?

(im not saying the dog is more important than the child just a qt to ascertain the level of care the dog gets. a happy dog being less likely to bite again. At the very least the dog should always be muzzled around kids)

I agree completely, as said I didnt see what owner did, just heard from friend. I do not agree in any shape or form of the dog been attacked either. He does get walked most days, they have a huge garden so plenty room to run around also.

Cherry Blossom

WolfgangWeisen - Stay on topic, if you want to be constructive perhaps you can offer some advice to the OP as to what you think they should do to ensure this doesn't happen again.

clappyhappy

goat2 wrote: »

i had not seen this sentence about owner boxing dog on face, cruel thing to do, they do not know how to train the dog,
what make of dog are we speaking of, big, small,
i am not surprised the dog can get angry, being badly treated by owner can be a big cause of that

Not sure of breed, he looks like a huskey but isn't a huskey. Asked them before what it was, think he mentioned Japanese huskey or something along those lines, bit of a language barrier there im afraid.

poldebruin

WolfgangWeisen wrote: »

Well, that's because you clearly haven't an idea what you're talking about, isn't it?

Quite the contrary - I know exactly what I'm talking about. I'm not confusing the issue or muddling the argument as your long and sometimes ridiculous post did.

The facts are that a dog bit a childs face. Who should be to blame, what the child did to provoke, what the UK are doing, what type of parent the OP is for letting his child wander close to a duck pond is all irrelevent in this particular case IMO.

The poster has asked the forum what they would do in this circumstance - and I told him.

moving_home

ISDW wrote: »

Sorry this happened to your child OP, I hope it hasn't made him scared of dogs now:(

I think you should go and talk to them, and take any bills with you. Although, as they haven't called to see how he is, I wouldn't hold out much hope that they'll act responsibly in this.

I'm not saying that the dog should be pts, however, if the owners won't talk with you in a reasoned way, and accept responsiblity, and realise that they have a problem with this dog, then I think you should inform the dog warden. Poor dog may end up being pts, and as always it will be the owner's fault for not supervising properly but, if they can't see that there is an issue here, then something worse could happen in the future.

this is the most sensible reply on this thread. I do not agree that a dog should be put down for biting a child but the owners need to take steps to mitigate the risk of it happening ever again and put the work into rehabilitating the dog as it can be done. In this case they obviously have their own kids so it would definitely be in their best interests to do this.

As an aside and a reply to the OP's comment on the owner boxing the dog in the face after he bit the child, I am getting really sick of seeing people in our estate hitting their dogs with their leads as a method of correction :mad: how do people think this is an appropriate way of training a dog

TheBegotten

Was it a small dog? A westie or terrier or god-forbid a jack russell. They tend to be more...on edge. They also can see small children as threats. After a hyper-active party it was most likely adrenilin, etc. Dog should get punished though, whatever the situ. What's the politically correct way now?
p.s. it sounds like an atika (spelling?)

Lisha

Wonder was it a japanese akita? Could have been a cross with this and another too

poldebruin

clappyhappy wrote: »

I am not demanding that the dog be put down. As said my worry is that this dog could bite again, my son is very very lucky, only one punctured mark on the corner of his mouth and three bruised teeth marks on his cheek. His lip or cheek could have been ripped off and him scarred for life. When the owner pulled the dog away from my son seemingly he boxed the dog in the face, all I heard was him shouting at the dog, other neighbour saw him hitting the dog.
I am not after money for bills or getting the dog put down. I do think the dog needs training and it should have been tied for party or a muzzle put on him. It is the fear of it happening again to mine or someone else's kids.

Poor dog(s). It still needs reporting though.

Personally I would be a little reticent about going to the neighbour's house to discuss it at all. He sounds like a bit of a t*t.