Family dog put down by accident

[Rott-n-GSDs]

There's no way on EARTH I leave one of my dogs for even a second in a shelter. If they have a policy that requires a hold for whatever reason, I fight it. If I lose, I sleep on the dang kennel floor with my dog until they release him.

[Gwenhwyfair]

I agree with you... and in red, that about sums it up.

Human beings have a great deal of risk aversion but at the end of the day accidents happen. Going overboard because of an accident only ends up costing society as a whole.

Originally Posted by selzer

Ouch! You are firing me from a really crappy job where I make next to nothing and have to put dogs to sleep. Now I can apply for unemployment benefits, help with my mortgage or rent, help with my utilities, help with medical, and possibly keep all of these benefits while getting a GED and a college degree.

In the meantime, the shelter loses a worker that made a mistake. How many of us lose our jobs when we make a mistake? How many of us have ever made a mistake?

We have no idea what series of events caused that mistake, but OFF WITH HER HEAD!

American products, our health care system, our safety services, etc. must be exemplary considering one mistake here will get you fired and sued, even in a minimum wage job.

[marshies]

I'm not familiar with American law, but I think it wouldn't be too different from Canadian law. But wouldn't the responsibility be with the animal control, since the employee acted negligently while at work. So technically, the employee can turn around and say, well, the agency was negligent in training. At least that's how negligence would be in Canada.

I agree with the ruling so that others who are involved with pets will really be more diligent in their care and treatment of our beloved pets, but I really think it should be directed towards the organization.

[Lenny]

Originally Posted by DharmasMom

No one has claimed you are upset.
Oh, and if the mistake happened and the dog was accidentally tagged then all the checking, double checking and triple checking in the world wouldn't have changed things since the dog was already tagged. That is why the investigation needs to be done- to see HOW the mistake occurred and to ensure it never, ever happens again.

I know no one claimed I was upset. Just making sure. Hard to tell in text.

On what you said above, then the person who tagged the dog to be put down should have triple checked. Heck, I read over emails three times before I send them at work and nothing dies if something is wrong in an email.

And my analogy is rock solid. Because it was to point out one thing isn't always to blame for the other. "Accident" or not.

[Gwenhwyfair]

In red usually, that's another bizzare thing about this case.

I do not mean this as a put down, because I don't expect you to be familiar with U.S. law (and the social mores which are VERY different here) the underlying message being, especially in the state in question, what's more important a dog's life or a human's?

Originally Posted by marshies

I'm not familiar with American law, but I think it wouldn't be too different from Canadian law. But wouldn't the responsibility be with the animal control, since the employee acted negligently while at work. So technically, the employee can turn around and say, well, the agency was negligent in training. At least that's how negligence would be in Canada.

I agree with the ruling so that others who are involved with pets will really be more diligent in their care and treatment of our beloved pets, but I really think it should be directed towards the organization.

[selzer]

I think that what blame is not held by the owners should be by the entity that makes the policies, and trains the employees too. Why oh why is that dog spending the week-end in a shelter after the owner found him?

That is my major beef with this whole thing. If that dog was not there, then the employee would not have tagged him, and the tech would not have euth'd him.

About double and triple checking the euth list, yeah, that would be what we monday morning quarterbacks would do, if we spent a week volunteering at a kill-shelter, tagging dogs to be euth'd, and putting dogs down. We would be looking for any out for the dog. We would be crying as we led the dog down the aisle to the needle.

But after week one goes into week two, and month one goes into month six, and we lead hundreds of dogs down that aisle that we can find no out for, I am sorry, but we are not going to probably double and triple check each and every dog on the euth list. We would have to protect ourselves within our minds to just go on every day, and we would not be shedding tears as we lead the dog to the needle.

It is not the fault of the workers who have to put down dogs, it is the fault of irresponsible dog owners who dump their dogs. Mistakes ARE going to happen. If this shelter puts down five dogs per year, this mistake would never have happened. If this shelter puts down a thousand dogs a year it is far more likely.

[nmlvaio101]

I am glad. It's just awkward to considered any family pet an object (in the eyes of a court). For many GSD owners, we raised them as a child, train them every day, and they protect/ comfort us. And for anyone to say they are an object of our possession is just wrong. And for people to think about the money investments is just wrong, but we do invest countless money and hours caring for them. For a court to tell us they are only worth a few bucks is pointless.