My son just gone to A&E our GSD attacked :( **UPDATE POST #57**

Fenian Army

On the bright son your son, vastly more important than the dog, now has a safe home environment, the way it should be.

EURATS

John_Rambo wrote: »

EURATS wrote: »

No offence but they are guard dogs and working dogs and that's what they are bred for.

Oh right. I thought German Shepards were bred in Germany to work the field with livestock as a Shepard.

Ur mixing it up with a collie. Innocent mistake Rambo!

DBB

EURATS wrote: »

John_Rambo wrote: »

EURATS wrote: »

No offence but they are guard dogs and working dogs and that's what they are bred for.

Oh right. I thought German Shepards were bred in Germany to work the field with livestock as a Shepard.

Ur mixing it up with a collie. Innocent mistake Rambo!

Errr, the clue is in the name eurats.
Shepherd. From Germany.
Innocent mistake though!

Rommie

EURATS wrote: »

Ur mixing it up with a collie. Innocent mistake Rambo!

I think someone needs to look up the word Shepherd in the dictionary. German Shepherd dog, or Deutscher Shaferhund, does certainly not translate to the word guard. A shepherd dog, remarkably enough, was bred to herd sheep!


Op: very sorry to read about your situation. If there was a chance of the dog biting again though, it was perhaps best to leave him go. No one would be able to trust him, and new owners knowing about a bite history would probably keep him confined; not something any dog deserves. Ultimately, you made the right decision, as hard as that may be to believe right now.

fasttalkerchat

If you aren't going to put the dog down make sure you make it clear to the new owner what happened. Hope your son makes a recovery.

PucaMama

IrishHomer wrote: »

I am located in Offaly. The vet is booked to take him away in one hour not sure how I will cope this dog is my shadow he is besotted with me and me of him

im sorry, but who are you more fond of? the dog or your child? i no it can be hard for you. but seriously, your childs safety is more important here.

RoverZT

PucaMama wrote: »

im sorry, but who are you more fond of? the dog or your child? i no it can be hard for you. but seriously, your childs safety is more important here.

Can he not love them both?

endacl

Dog was on the sofa? Way to make him feel entitled....

If you treat a dog like a human, they'll be delighted to treat you like a dog, and dogs like to know who's who in the pecking order.

Hope your son is ok, but if you do keep this dog, assessment or not, or replace him, please make sure he knows he's at the bottom of the bottom of the food chain, pack-wise. He eats last, never sits on your level, and always obeys. And obeys everybody.

PucaMama

RoverZT wrote: »

Can he not love them both?

i said who does he love more? you cant put a dog ahead of your child

Muff_Daddy

RoverZT wrote: »

Can he not love them both?

Of course he can.

But reading his posts, he seems more upset about the possibility of losing his dog then the fact that his own son was savaged and scarred for life.

Its a sad story OP, and I really feel for you, but it's a no-brainer, your family must come first. The dog has to be put down unfortunately.

star-pants

guys back off the OP, they're perfectly entitled to say they'll miss their dog, for a lot of people a pet becomes part of the family. Doesn't mean the OP isn't putting his son first. Anyone who's just here to rubberneck & post holier than thou posts can leave thank you.

endacl

star-pants wrote: »

guys back off the OP, they're perfectly entitled to say they'll miss their dog, for a lot of people a pet becomes part of the family. Doesn't mean the OP isn't putting his son first. Anyone who's just here to rubberneck & post holier than thou posts can leave thank you.

Very true. However it is so often the case that a problem with a dog does not begin with the dog, as appears to be the case here.

Many of the posts are only inappropriate in the context of this thread, but otherwise entirely valid. Although I certainly sympathise with the OP's predicament, a Shepherd is generally not an entirely suitable animal to have sitting on a family sofa. While not inherently aggressive, it is a breed that was bred to be assertive. Without clear, predictable and consistent boundaries, it will be as assertive as it likes.

In the overwhelming number of cases, a dog will react to any given situation as a dog, more specifically as a dog with a clear (in its own mind) position within a pack. The more owners understand this, the more 'predictable' a dog's behaviour will become in a given situation.

While, personally speaking, I don't wish to have a pop at the OP and the horrible position he finds himself in, I would hope that dog owners who haven't thought about this may he given cause to do so. So, I suppose, any comment I made was really for them.

Train the owners, to speak. And the dogs to a large part will train themselves. They're not a part if the family. They're a dog that lives with the family. It's unfair, in my considered opinion (fwiw) to treat them otherwise. A dog that's treated as a four legged human can become an over-anxious dog. Or an aggressive one. Doesn't matter how much we consider them a member of the family. They will remain a member of a pack. They're hard-wired to do so...

Synopsis: OP, I hope your son is ok. Other readers of the thread, your dog is a dog, not a hairy quadruped human.

I may have rambled. It's late...

DBB

There has been a lot of talk in this thread of the dog being dominant, of needing a dominant master, of thinking his place in "the pack" is too high, of needing to lower his perceived position in "the pack".

For the sake of confused owners who read this thread, who love to have their dog up on the furniture with them, who feed their dog regardless of when they eat themselves, who greet their dog with the same enthusiasm as their dog greets them, and who *gasp* allow their dogs walk ahead of them out on walks (without pulling, of course!), all without problem and without the dog ever showing any sign of aggression, I'm posting here to let these owners know not to change a thing!

Why?

Because this unqualified, untrained advice that your dog will try to dominate you if you do the above is proven to be utter hogwash, and those who keep spouting it reveal their lack of training and qualification by spouting it.

Watching a few episodes of The Dog Whisperer, himself untrained and unqualified (known in the medical/psychological professions as a Quack), does not make anyone an expert. Instead it spreads the misinformation about what dogs are really all about.

I would connsider it extremely, extremely unlikely that this GSD was trying to be pack leader, or asserting his so-called dominance over the child. This misdiagnosis by people on this thread, and critically by those who advised the op by email/phone, and by the op himself, resulted in any remedial actions being wrongfully designed and applied. This is why it is a BIG mistake for owners of aggressive dogs to seek advice from such quacks, and even worse for quacks to give advice on such a serious matter by email of phone, without seeing the dog. That is one of the mistakes that reveals them as quacks.

This dog was resource guarding. He was resource guarding both himself, and the OP. I would venture that there is a big dollop of fear to throw into the equation too. The dog was possibly undersocialised or poorly socialised. None of the behaviours resulting from these emotional states are caused by some mad desire by the dog to be "pack leader". Quite the opposite in fact.

And the treatment for such behavioural problems is poles apart from what the quack will have advised by basing his diagnosis on "dominance". "Dominance"-based treatments increase fear, and resource-guarding. Advising that the son, who the dog has already shown resource-guarding aggression towards, to feed the dog? Madness. Utter madness.

Wrong diagnosis equals botched treatment.

True dominance between dog and human is quite rare, and lots of other causes need to be ruled out before true dominance can be accurately diagnosed. This requires significant expertise and training, and it is this ability to differentially diagnose that sets the qualified behaviourist apart from the quack.
This one-size-fits-all online-expert diagnosis of the dog being dominant is so far off the mark in this case, I'd laugh were it not so serious and utterly damaging. Thanks to the botched, inapproriate advice given by an "expert" who thinks it's okay to diagnose and treat an aggressive dog who has "form" via email or phone, the dog is now dead and a child is injured. Had advice been sought from one of the qualified people who were posted in response to the op's cry for help 7 whole months ago, this may not have been the case: certainly, had real expertise been sought and advice applied, the child would not have found himself in a position to be injured. This event was well-flagged to the OP 7 months ago.

It's time for "pack leaderists" to wake up and educate themselves properly, and drag themselves out of the Dark Ages of dog training/behaviour. I'd suggest a good starting point is to look up www.dogwelfarecampaign.org, or better still, get a copy of John Bradshaw's recently published "In Defence of Dogs". Everything the aspiring advice-giver needs to start to know is in there. Even Cesar himself has started to realise the error of his ways and has been taking advice from those who are qualified to advise. Good for him, though he has a long way to go. Time for his minions to follow suit.

Sittingpretty

DBB wrote: »

There has been a lot of talk in this thread of the dog being dominant, of needing a dominant master, of thinking his place in "the pack" is too high, of needing to lower his perceived position in "the pack".

For the sake of confused owners who read this thread, who love to have their dog up on the furniture with them, who feed their dog regardless of when they eat themselves, who greet their dog with the same enthusiasm as their dog greets them, and who *gasp* allow their dogs walk ahead of them out on walks (without pulling, of course!), all without problem and without the dog ever showing any sign of aggression, I'm posting here to let these owners know not to change a thing!

Why?

Because this unqualified, untrained advice that your dog will try to dominate you if you do the above is proven to be utter hogwash, and those who keep spouting it reveal their lack of training and qualification by spouting it.

Watching a few episodes of The Dog Whisperer, himself untrained and unqualified (known in the medical/psychological professions as a Quack), does not make anyone an expert. Instead it spreads the misinformation about what dogs are really all about.

I would connsider it extremely, extremely unlikely that this GSD was trying to be pack leader, or asserting his so-called dominance over the child. This misdiagnosis by people on this thread, and critically by those who advised the op by email/phone, and by the op himself, resulted in any remedial actions being wrongfully designed and applied. This is why it is a BIG mistake for owners of aggressive dogs to seek advice from such quacks, and even worse for quacks to give advice on such a serious matter by email of phone, without seeing the dog. That is one of the mistakes that reveals them as quacks.

This dog was resource guarding. He was resource guarding both himself, and the OP. I would venture that there is a big dollop of fear to throw into the equation too. The dog was possibly undersocialised or poorly socialised. None of the behaviours resulting from these emotional states are caused by some mad desire by the dog to be "pack leader". Quite the opposite in fact.

And the treatment for such behavioural problems is poles apart from what the quack will have advised by basing his diagnosis on "dominance". "Dominance"-based treatments increase fear, and resource-guarding. Advising that the son, who the dog has already shown resource-guarding aggression towards, to feed the dog? Madness. Utter madness.

Wrong diagnosis equals botched treatment.

True dominance between dog and human is quite rare, and lots of other causes need to be ruled out before true dominance can be accurately diagnosed. This requires significant expertise and training, and it is this ability to differentially diagnose that sets the qualified behaviourist apart from the quack.
This one-size-fits-all online-expert diagnosis of the dog being dominant is so far off the mark in this case, I'd laugh were it not so serious and utterly damaging. Thanks to the botched, inapproriate advice given by an "expert" who thinks it's okay to diagnose and treat an aggressive dog who has "form" via email or phone, the dog is now dead and a child is injured. Had advice been sought from one of the qualified people who were posted in response to the op's cry for help 7 whole months ago, this may not have been the case: certainly, had real expertise been sought and advice applied, the child would not have found himself in a position to be injured. This event was well-flagged to the OP 7 months ago.

It's time for "pack leaderists" to wake up and educate themselves properly, and drag themselves out of the Dark Ages of dog training/behaviour. I'd suggest a good starting point is to look up www.dogwelfarecampaign.org, or better still, get a copy of John Bradshaw's recently published "In Defence of Dogs". Everything the aspiring advice-giver needs to start to know is in there. Even Cesar himself has started to realise the error of his ways and has been taking advice from those who are qualified to advise. Good for him, though he has a long way to go. Time for his minions to follow suit.

THANK YOU! you said what I thought so well.

The amateur dog whisperers need to realise we are dealing with dogs not with wolves.

OP I'm genuinely so sorry for your loss, this is a very hard lesson. I hope your son recovers well.

IrishHomer

Thanks for the past few posts enjoyed the read. Totally heartbroken myself and my partner. The child is on the mend he was also very very stressed he has been told the dog went to a foster home to make it easier on him. Just on the dominance issue the dog was totally respectfully of me and my partner. He worshipped me and me of him. Not sure where I go from here life is very empty without dogs. I used to take him everywhere with me I often said to myself I should have named him shadow as he really was my shadow. I am so upset my hand is shaking writing this post.

fasttalkerchat

RoverZT wrote: »

Can he not love them both?

Clearly he can't have both.

IrishHomer

Just on the dog attack incident my so entered the dogs space (immediately in front of the dogs face) and the dog just flipped probably defensive mode for his personal space.

borderlinemeath

DBB wrote: »

There has been a lot of talk in this thread of the dog being dominant, of needing a dominant master, of thinking his place in "the pack" is too high, of needing to lower his perceived position in "the pack".

For the sake of confused owners who read this thread, who love to have their dog up on the furniture with them, who feed their dog regardless of when they eat themselves, who greet their dog with the same enthusiasm as their dog greets them, and who *gasp* allow their dogs walk ahead of them out on walks (without pulling, of course!), all without problem and without the dog ever showing any sign of aggression, I'm posting here to let these owners know not to change a thing!

Why?

Because this unqualified, untrained advice that your dog will try to dominate you if you do the above is proven to be utter hogwash, and those who keep spouting it reveal their lack of training and qualification by spouting it.

Watching a few episodes of The Dog Whisperer, himself untrained and unqualified (known in the medical/psychological professions as a Quack), does not make anyone an expert. Instead it spreads the misinformation about what dogs are really all about.

I would connsider it extremely, extremely unlikely that this GSD was trying to be pack leader, or asserting his so-called dominance over the child. This misdiagnosis by people on this thread, and critically by those who advised the op by email/phone, and by the op himself, resulted in any remedial actions being wrongfully designed and applied. This is why it is a BIG mistake for owners of aggressive dogs to seek advice from such quacks, and even worse for quacks to give advice on such a serious matter by email of phone, without seeing the dog. That is one of the mistakes that reveals them as quacks.

This dog was resource guarding. He was resource guarding both himself, and the OP. I would venture that there is a big dollop of fear to throw into the equation too. The dog was possibly undersocialised or poorly socialised. None of the behaviours resulting from these emotional states are caused by some mad desire by the dog to be "pack leader". Quite the opposite in fact.

And the treatment for such behavioural problems is poles apart from what the quack will have advised by basing his diagnosis on "dominance". "Dominance"-based treatments increase fear, and resource-guarding. Advising that the son, who the dog has already shown resource-guarding aggression towards, to feed the dog? Madness. Utter madness.

Wrong diagnosis equals botched treatment.

True dominance between dog and human is quite rare, and lots of other causes need to be ruled out before true dominance can be accurately diagnosed. This requires significant expertise and training, and it is this ability to differentially diagnose that sets the qualified behaviourist apart from the quack.
This one-size-fits-all online-expert diagnosis of the dog being dominant is so far off the mark in this case, I'd laugh were it not so serious and utterly damaging. Thanks to the botched, inapproriate advice given by an "expert" who thinks it's okay to diagnose and treat an aggressive dog who has "form" via email or phone, the dog is now dead and a child is injured. Had advice been sought from one of the qualified people who were posted in response to the op's cry for help 7 whole months ago, this may not have been the case: certainly, had real expertise been sought and advice applied, the child would not have found himself in a position to be injured. This event was well-flagged to the OP 7 months ago.

It's time for "pack leaderists" to wake up and educate themselves properly, and drag themselves out of the Dark Ages of dog training/behaviour. I'd suggest a good starting point is to look up www.dogwelfarecampaign.org, or better still, get a copy of John Bradshaw's recently published "In Defence of Dogs". Everything the aspiring advice-giver needs to start to know is in there. Even Cesar himself has started to realise the error of his ways and has been taking advice from those who are qualified to advise. Good for him, though he has a long way to go. Time for his minions to follow suit.

My two are sitting up here on the sofa beside me as I'm typing. both about 25kg, eat when they're hungry (Coco actually sticks her paw into her bowl looking for her dinner:D) and there's a competition between them as to who gets through the door first.

The best bit of advice I read was in a book called "Give a dog a home, How to make your rescue dog a happy dog" by Graeme Sims. His methods are completely anti dominance and it has detail on dogs body language and how to read it. He also asks "Can you really be the pack boss?" and answers it himself with "NO. But what we can do is to become a friend with authority"

The one line that stood out for me was when he said "As I get older I realise that having the best behaved dog in the world rather misses the point - what we should aim at is to have the happiest dog in the world"

The happiest dogs to me are the ones without issues or fears, completely happy with their family and get the most out of simple pleasures like a good long walk or run or a nice tin of sardines mixed into their dinner. (Well, mine do anyway:))

Sittingpretty

IrishHomer wrote: »

Thanks for the past few posts enjoyed the read. Totally heartbroken myself and my partner. The child is on the mend he was also very very stressed he has been told the dog went to a foster home to make it easier on him. Just on the dominance issue the dog was totally respectfully of me and my partner. He worshipped me and me of him. Not sure where I go from here life is very empty without dogs. I used to take him everywhere with me I often said to myself I should have named him shadow as he really was my shadow. I am so upset my hand is shaking writing this post.

I'm so so sorry. It's such a sad outcome

I have a female GSD myself and I know how it is they tend to attach themselves to one person more than others.

Please don't be too hard on yourself, you did what u thought was best at the time.

borderlinemeath

IrishHomer wrote: »

Thanks for the past few posts enjoyed the read. Totally heartbroken myself and my partner. The child is on the mend he was also very very stressed he has been told the dog went to a foster home to make it easier on him. Just on the dominance issue the dog was totally respectfully of me and my partner. He worshipped me and me of him. Not sure where I go from here life is very empty without dogs. I used to take him everywhere with me I often said to myself I should have named him shadow as he really was my shadow. I am so upset my hand is shaking writing this post.

You did what you thought was best in your situation. And the white lie to your son was probably a good idea. You are heartbroken you can only imagine how he feels on top of his injuries.

The time will come when you feel you are ready for another dog in your family. And your kids are old enough now to play a full role in socialising and training.

Wibbs

Rommie wrote: »

I think someone needs to look up the word Shepherd in the dictionary. German Shepherd dog, or Deutscher Shaferhund, does certainly not translate to the word guard. A shepherd dog, remarkably enough, was bred to herd sheep!

Well yes that was the original purpose, to standardise and improve the various German Sheep herding working dogs. This resulted in a bright, very trainable large dog that could be used for other purposes like security and search and rescue etc. "Guarding" was part of that mix. However one of their plus points was they were reliable at this work and not inappropriately aggressive. The original breeder was very much about integrating them as a family dog. The problem can come with more recent breeding for looks rather than temperament. Of the GS I've met over the last decade or so compared to ones I encountered before I've come across more nervy ones. That's just my persona experience mind you so hardly indicative of the breed. I've had both pure and mixes of GS and they've been family/house dogs and never a moments worry. Well the odd time, but like people even the most peaceful can lose the rag over a lifetime. In every case it was my fault too.

Sittingpretty wrote: »

The amateur dog whisperers need to realise we are dealing with dogs not with wolves.

The thing is the same would apply to wolves. If Cesar tried a dominance roll with even a very submissive wolf he'd need the services of a surgeon or priest soon after. Wolves don't dominance roll each other. The submissive one rolls over in the face of a dominant one by choice, the latter doesn't force the issue and if it has to, then it's a full on fight in play. The "dominant" one is usually a parent, or older sibling. They're a family group, in a similar way to a human family, hence they could fit in with us so well and you don't(or shouldn't) see mothers and fathers "dominating" their kids.

I would say though and it's obviously only my humble that sometimes in rightfully recoiling from this dominance(say in Mexican accent:)) guff, some may go too far the other way and make the mistake of letting their dogs run riot. Just like some right on parents end up with little monsters with no respect or self control. Again IMHO it's rarely an either/or thing. The dog has to be happy and treated like a dog. I mean this in a good way BTW in the sense that their needs as dogs are understood by owners. EG don't hug them, they don't tend to like it. And they should understand our needs and boundaries. This goes double for large working breeds, especially if headstrong in general obviously.

Andromeda_111

OP I'm so sorry to read this thread and everything you and your family have gone through over the past couple of days. I hope your son heals quickly and that you cope well with your sad loss. It must be a terribly emotional time for you.

uriah

Your son is on his way to hospital with serious injuries after your dog - with plenty of warning - attacked him.

And you are on an internet forum asking advice?

EURATS

DBB wrote: »

EURATS wrote: »

John_Rambo wrote: »

EURATS wrote: »

No offence but they are guard dogs and working dogs and that's what they are bred for.

Oh right. I thought German Shepards were bred in Germany to work the field with livestock as a Shepard.

Ur mixing it up with a collie. Innocent mistake Rambo!

Errr, the clue is in the name eurats.
Shepherd. From Germany.
Innocent mistake though!

Just because a dog is called a boxer..does it mean we will see one in the Olympics?

EURATS

Rommie wrote: »

EURATS wrote: »

Ur mixing it up with a collie. Innocent mistake Rambo!

I think someone needs to look up the word Shepherd in the dictionary. German Shepherd dog, or Deutscher Shaferhund, does certainly not translate to the word guard. A shepherd dog, remarkably enough, was bred to herd sheep!


No wonder they lost the war if they thought GS were the animals best suited for herding sheep.

mathepac

uriah wrote: »

Your son is on his way to hospital with serious injuries after your dog - with plenty of warning - attacked him.

And you are on an internet forum asking advice?

I'm sorry folks but I have to respond to this post rather than just report it on the basis of the warning already issued by mods above.

OP and his family have just been through a major trauma and are no doubt still in shock. If you had taken time to read the thread through you would know that their son is thankfully home from hospital and hopefully on the mend, physically and emotionally.

I can sense enormous conflict in the OP's situation and any course of action taken after events such as these is bound to be almost as upsetting for them as the events themselves.

I think OP and his family deserve our empathy, prayers and good wishes, not criticism or cheap shots. In times of crisis people reach out for the familiar and for friends (even e-friends) to try to help spread the burden of pain, conflict and confusion and to seek re-assurance.

I wish them well in their recovery as I'd have assumed every mature and reasonable person here does.

Now I'll refer your post for any action the mods deem appropriate.

Hellrazer

uriah wrote: »

Your son is on his way to hospital with serious injuries after your dog - with plenty of warning - attacked him.

And you are on an internet forum asking advice?

For that comment you can take a small break from the forum.Theres already been two warnings given on this thread and obviously youve decided not to listen to either of them.

Rommie

EURATS wrote: »

Just because a dog is called a boxer..does it mean we will see one in the Olympics?

The name "Boxer" is supposedly derived from the breed's tendency to play by standing on its hind legs and "boxing" with its front paws. Another theory is that it came from the nickname 'boxl' that was used for the Bullenbeisser, one of the dogs thought to be an ancestor of the boxer, and is in fact an english corruption of the word boxl. There is a reason behind the name for every breed, why would they call it a german SHEPHERD if it wasn't a shepherd? That's like calling a retriever a retriever because it played the banjo, instead of retrieving.

And just to let you know, the german shepherd existed since the late 1800s, and was originally bred as a shepherd dog. Granted, with its intelligence and loyalty, it joined many other fields of work too, but claiming that they were bred 'just' to be a guard dog couldn't be more wrong.

EURATS

Rommie wrote: »

EURATS wrote: »

Just because a dog is called a boxer..does it mean we will see one in the Olympics?

The name "Boxer" is supposedly derived from the breed's tendency to play by standing on its hind legs and "boxing" with its front paws. Another theory is that it came from the nickname 'boxl' that was used for the Bullenbeisser, one of the dogs thought to be an ancestor of the boxer, and is in fact an english corruption of the word boxl. There is a reason behind the name for every breed, why would they call it a german SHEPHERD if it wasn't a shepherd? That's like calling a retriever a retriever because it played the banjo, instead of retrieving.

And just to let you know, the german shepherd existed since the late 1800s, and was originally bred as a shepherd dog. Granted, with its intelligence and loyalty, it joined many other fields of work too, but claiming that they were bred 'just' to be a guard dog couldn't be more wrong.

Thanks for the history essay. Some good points. The retriever playing the banjo bit made no sense but no problem anyway.

When was the last time they were used as a shepherd? Because I really couldn't see my own dogs in that role. They would more than likely eat the sheep. Although if trained for that role....maybe. Sooner get a collie!!!

ppink

EURATS wrote: »

Although if trained for that role....maybe. Sooner get a collie!!!

this is going completly off the topic but German sheps are smart enough and willing enough to be trained for just about anything- as can be seen for their wide range of uses around the world.