My Photo

Keep Up

Flickr


  • www.flickr.com
    christiekeith's items Go to christiekeith's photostream

« I'm a Girl Blogger | Main | Write a Blog? Go to Jail. »

02 March 2005

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Travis

Christie,

Well, as somebody who had the honor of knowing Colleen, and also having the honor of being her personal back massager:

Amen.

Travis

Shari

There are canine traits that are nature, not nurture. Reliance on the Assess-a-Pet test not only guarantees the demise of a number of good *dogs*, over time it would assuredly guarantee the demise of many excellent *breeds.*

Among them would be the Chow. Colleen would have been toast. Included in breeds eliminated from potential shelter adoption would be any breed indifferent to strangers, protective by nature, those loyal guarders of both persons and property. The human-loving but other animal aggressive breeds would be gone; as would dogs with a strong inherent prey drive. GSD, Rottweiller, AmStaff, APBT, Chow, Shar-Pei, and so very many more (including many sporting breeds)would be killed in preference to being offered for adoption.

Emphasis on retraining is absent, as is emphasis on proper placement. Dog and prospective adoptive family should be carefully matched.

Instead, doggy genocide lurks behind that Assess-a-Hand.

Shari

Debra

I don't think "kiss my ass" was appropriate. More like "bite me".

I have had the pleasure of a couple of bad dogs. I have 2 now. Two that would not be safe in most homes and a 3rd that only a very experienced rottie owner should have. Great dogs. My life if enriched by their love. Their lives are enriched by my providing an environment they can be safe in.

I certainly don't experience anything that would lead me to believe that even 70 percent of dogs from shelters should be euthanized for bad temperaments. But I think we would improve the planet by euthanizing or at least sterilizing the folks who bring them in or cause them to be there.

Anne

Ugh. Yes, you may have been able to scrape by with a dog with issues, you were lucky...no, society was lucky. Does no one realize how many unwanted dogs are out there that do not have behavior and or aggression issues? I have spent hours with behaviorists from around the country, Dunbar, Donaldson and even Ms. Sternberg. I did an intership with her. And until you work with agressive dogs and see first hand the problem. Don't talk. Society can definately do without agressive dogs. And for those of you who do not believe that there is such a thing as a "bad" puppy...I have seen them, there is a difference.

Tom

I do not doubt that there are aggressive dogs that are dangerous. The test of Sue Sternberg is garbage. I have two lovable, friendly, and spritied yorkies who would flunk her test. They would like see the hand as a toy. THe yorky can be a very attentive breed. They will raise their ears, etc when they hear just a slight curious sound.

What is wrong with these tests are they are being performed in shelters in stressfull situations.

What is missing are baseline tests. We do not know how dogs in well cared or situations who have never been a problem with children, families, etc would fare on that test.

There is no data that except in maybe the most aggressive dogs that this Sue Sternberg's test actually discriminates between likely adoptable dogs and ones with serious problems.

THe portions of the test that I saw look like a one size fits all sort of test.
Breeds are different, dogs within different breeds have different needs.

The science behind the test is very lacking. It does not match reality.

My two yorkies love each other to the exterme. THey will have little squables over at the food bowl. THey would not hurt one another to say the least.

The test is tailored to be easy to administor by low paid workers at city animal shelters.

I have a dog that actually did flunk her test, not just her test, but her test given by her as a demonstration of how to do it for our rescue group. In this dog's original home, she had been regularly grabbed by the collar and struck in the head. At 11 months old she found herself staying in a kennel waiting on a foster home, and quickly falling apart. She was panicked by the confinement, the noise, everything.

The president of the group brought her out for Sue to assess. We never got to the rubber hand. Sue grabbed her by the collar and flung her hand at the dog's head. The dog struggled to get away. Then the hand came at her again. On the third time the dog snapped. She didn't bite, but she definitely acted like she might. Sue catagorized this attack as "unprovoked" and said she should be put down. And Sue wasn't wrong that this wasn't a dog for most homes, and was in fact a "bad" dog.

So naturally I took her home.

I discovered she was a ball freak who was scary smart and loved kids. I practiced grabbing her collar and throwing the ball. Then grabbing her collar and waving the ball in her face. She got to where she couldn't wait for you to grab her collar. She had such great drive that we joined a search and rescue team. She had problems with separation anxiety and was never good with strangers if she was in the car or otherwise confined, but her chance to shine was when we searched the woods. I will never forget that look of pride on her face when she found someone. She didn't care if it was just practice, she loved having a job.

We've since moved away and are no longer on a team. She's starting to slow down a little now and her muzzle is grey. But she still knows the names of all her toys, recognizes all my shoes and what they mean for her (heels = bad, sneakers = good, hiking boots = really good). She knows what time my son gets home and waits for him by the front door. In the evening, she keeps the same vigil for my husband. And she won't go upstairs to bed until her entire flock is up there too.

I am a dog lover and have owned and adored several dogs, and fostered many many more. But when I think of losing her, my sweet girl, my soulmate, I am filled with despair. This dog is special.

I work in rescue, I work with shelters, I understand what people are saying about liability and danger and I commend Sue Sternberg for raising awareness and working to help shelter dogs, but just as not every breed is for everyone, not every dog is for everyone. That doesn't mean these problem dogs aren't for anyone! I worry that in our quest for bomb-proof dogs, we are slowly eliminating the dogs with high drive, the dogs with more intelligence, the dogs with quirks, or maybe just a rough start. These dogs are worth saving! These are the dogs I like!

Do we want all dogs to be Golden Retrievers? Goldens are great, I used to have one, but when my house was burgled, she kept the robbers company; thank goodness she wasn't hurt. If someone had attacked me with her there, she wouldn't have known what do to. I honestly do not think she had it in her to bite a person, no matter what the provocation. I guess this makes her a "good" dog? She was a good dog, she was a gentle soul and I loved her a lot, but she was very different. Like Colleen, my current dog wants to keep her family safe and is prepared to follow through on that. She's sometimes sneaky and has been known to disobey a direct order if she knew something about it that I didn't. This is what good guide dogs do and it's a good thing! When my dog snapped at the evaluation years ago, she reacted the way any reasonable and intelligent creature (person or dog) would have if their previous experience had been what her's was.

She will always have some baggage, but that doesn't make her not worth saving. To me it's dogs like her that are what having dogs is all about.

Something to keep in mind when you're talking about breeds is that all breeds are still, in shelters, meant to be adopted out as companion animals. Companion animals very often to families with small children. People that can handle the true problem dogs, that can manage the kinds of dogs that you've mentioned, are very few and far between.

And it should not matter what breed the dog is. If the dog is aggressive, the dog is aggressive. Period. And if an animal is aggressive, it should not go out into the community. Who cares whether or not it's a pit bull or a golden retriever with massive prey drive? The dog /still has/ prey drive, and I don't think the kid that gets mauled is going to care what breed gave him a hundred stitches.

AL

Oddly enough I came across Sue's show by accident at 5:00 a.m. Through Bloodshot eyes I surfed the tube as our 2nd Night home, 1 month old Half Rottie half Shepherd Gnawed my hand after waking me whining for attention. I was so amazed at her ridiculous method's I had to record it to show my 13 Yr. old daughter how insane so called Professionals handled Dogs in a "NO KILL SHELTER." I clearly thought it a "Normal Reaction" and that any Smart dog would take her "Phony Hand" as just that and would Anticipate a snap or snarl or snip. I saw it as entrapment like a Prosecution lawyer would setup to provoke a "Bad Dog" scenario to win a case.(As bad as "If The Glove Don't Fit) Sadly in this case, it deemed the dog's Execution. I played with Riddick and Thought of My Boy Buster who left us 3 months ago after 13yrs of being the best friend and companion me, my wife and 3 kids could have hoped for. He was a boxer/Black lab mix that was Deemed "BAD" at 4 months old by its owner by my wife's folks house in Ohio. We lived in NY and were visiting when we saw him chained to a tree where he spent the last month according to her folks. We were surprised how aggressive he was when we approached and over time he knew us and actually got exited when he saw us. He was extremely protective of his food and certain actions also drew a bad reaction from him but I could see it was not in him, just how he acted. I grew up with 3 German Shepherds at a time at my folks and learned enough to read dogs pretty well. The owner was amazed how he took to us and asked if we wanted him...We took em home and he was great. They called him Buster I soon nicknamed him "MUSH" and he was a 30lb lapdog in a week. He never growled Nipped or barked in anger towards us again but proceeded to Destroy anything in chewing range and over the next few months he mauled our couches (3 Sets) tables,Walls,Christmas trees (Presents Too) and wouldn't stop regardless of our training till my crying wife broke and considered giving him up. I knew it would stop and thank God it did when My daughter was born and buster found his new role. When she cried he rushed to the crib and back to us prodding with his nose and tail wagging until we checked on her. Growing up they were inseparable with him as an incredible guardian alerting us many times of a dangerous condition or where she got off to. He stayed between stranger's and her and if you did get close he stay right their and keep an eye on her. If we even raised are voice to her he would respond with a "Watch It" Growl or Bark. Even when she pulled his ears or anything he would never even consider acting out. This behavior continued as he took on the guardian role for my next two kids over the next several years. His attention was always making sure they were safe. No One could get near them without the sniff test and he wouldn't leave their side till they were gone. Five years ago we moved to P. A and Buster loved the 2 1/2 acres. He was alert to every inch of it and helped us adjust to the outdoors warning us too many times of bears and snakes etc. with incredible accuracy, and a protective reaction that would scare away a Grizzly.(He was 110 lbs at this time)He Never bit anyone but let you know he would if need be.I continued to work in N.Y and stayed at my folks a few nights a week leaving my wife and three kids alone,but fully protected by my "Bad Dog".They felt safe and I never worried cause I knew Mush was their and he'd never let anything happen to his family. About 3 months ago it was movie night and just as the family sat down he laid down by the door (his favorite spot) and had a heart attack. We all lost a part of us that night and never realized how much we relied on him. I stayed away less and My wife would call scared somtimes,even using our house alarm for the first time in 5 years. The kids wouldn't venture out in the woods and played less outside. I didn't like going to the woodpile (or Outdoors) at night without him. He passed on June 6th and on July 12th we went back to Ohio (now worried about the house with no mush to scare away bad guys)to visit the wifes Sister and drop off my son for a week to spend time with his grandparents.While driving back home we saw a sign saying "Shepard Puppies" and I had to stop and look....I got my last dog here I Thought....Any males I asked??..."One Left... Your daughters Got Em..." I looked over and he was Exactly like our mush....Black with a white cross on his chest....and she picked him out already! The guy said he was lazy one that just laid around and chewed everything all day. The guy asked if I want to meet the parents...Their out back...."buster's" the dad...I said No Way as my family looked at each other and my daughter walked towards the car and off we went. That was 2 months ago and I see a lot of Mush in Riddick and I only Hope he turns out the same.....except the chewing part....Just like Mush. Wow, Sorry got off the Subject but what I meant to say was I'm glad Sue didn't Meet buster First cause he'd been dead Instead of the best thing to happen to my Family for the last 13 years.

JEN

i am so in agreement with you that i almost want to quote this in my signature, but i dont want to scare off the people who turn their dogs/cats into kids aka furbabies, plus im sure youd want to approve my quoting you anyway. keep up the good work

cindy

I enjoyed reading about your friend & guardian. I am currently looking for a dog for myself & my one yr old to make a threesome for our little family. I remember when I was 3-4 yrs old and playing in our shepard's dog dish with her. My mother tried to come near me and the dog reached out to warn her. It scared me at the time but unfortunately I later found out that, when angry, my mother had a temper of her own. The dog was only matching her temper and saying "Leave this one alone". Dogs just know. That dog followed me around for the next 5 yrs. She waited at the door when it was time for me to come home from school. She got distemper & the vet told me that the only way she would live was if I stayed still since she followed me everywhere. Ever try to stay still as a 7-8 yr old? She passed away, but she saved me from some spankings I would have otherwise gotten. Her name was "Pilsmal, the Far out Pooch". She was my first true friend. In today's world they would have put her down. My dad would never of allowed that to happen. He believed dogs were never bad, just sometimes misplaced. We expect dogs to be perfect humans while people get to have a license to act like uncivilized animals when they wish as long as they don't get caught & if they do get caught they have a great excuse no matter how it hurt others. Animals offer such balance to the world. Thanks again for sharing about your dog, it reminded me of a long lost friend & a father who on a deep level understood my attachment to her & hers to me.

Emily

I just want to say what an excellent article this is. It sums up not only the profound problems with a test never shown to accurately predict aggression, but the whole idea that aggression should reult in a death sentence rather than extra care and support. It is convenient to think digs that will fail this kind of test must die, but it is not true. the difference in failure rates between facilities show clearly that this test is of our need for excuses not the correct fate for the dog.

Barbara Saunders

I believe we need a fundamental shift in the way we think about "safe" dogs. Animals, including (perhaps especially) human beings have the potential to be unsafe. It is not the responsibility of dogs to transcend being animals in order to be child-lover-parent-friend substitutes for needy human beings seeking "unconditional love." It is, in my opinion, the responsibility of human beings to continue to care for those animals whose human-bred traits have lost their purpose to us.

Cindy Cooke

I have a request from an attorney looking for an expert witness who can speak about the deficiencies of the Sternberg test and other temperament tests used by many shelters. Please forward any suggestions to me at anstamm@charter.net. Thanks in advance.

Cindy Cooke
Legislative Specialist
United Kennel Club

Sharon Azar

Having had 3 of my rescued dogs labeled 'dangerous' by Madame Sternberg, I can't tell you how much your article "The Goodness of a Bad Dogs' meant to me.
Incidentally, all three 'dangerous' dogs were gotten out of her clutches, given lots of time, energy and love, then placed into fantastic homes. After many years, I still get letters and postcards from the people who adopted Maggie, a pit mix.
Also, I lived with a 'bad' dog named Franz(husky/wolf) for 17 years and he was my greatest teacher.
Best,
Sharon Azar
WOOF!

Jill

I had a "bad dog". I loved my lab-shephard mix, Mattie Lou, and was devoted to her, and shared ten years of my life with her. She was treated gently and lovingly the entire time I had her. I spent many hours and many dollars with obedience schools and trainers, trying to figure out ways to deal with her issues. But I never felt like she was safe, and when my daughter was born, she proved I was right when she snapped at the baby as she crawled by her. She spent the last two years of her life being as well cared for as ever before, but always on the other side of a baby gate from where my child was. I felt guilty on behalf of both my beloved dog and my beloved child. I wish someone had done something to make this dog unavailable to me before I fell so deeply in love with her. I am a devoted pet owner, and would never have turned her over to a shelter so some other family would have to deal with her problems. I also could never have lived with myself for euthanizing her, so I just put up with her unpredictable temperament, and kept her separate from my child. Mattie Lou died of cancer when my daughter was two years old. She had an especially aggressive cncer, and although she was under the care of a veterinary oncologist, and even though I spent thousands of dollars on her treatment, in my heart I was actually relieved when the treatment failed, and I had a "legitimate" reason to euthanize her. I thought my guilt would kill me.
I think shelters and rescue groups owe it to society to do everything in their power to not rob people like me from having the privelage of having a gentler, more trustworthy dog as a companion. I sometimes feel like I lost a decade of my life to that dog. I went several years without a dog after her death because I didn't want to put my child in a position to have her heart broken if it didn't work out again. We now have two gentle, loving dogs, and I am glad I decided to trust again. But I am not so sure others would come to the same conclusion, or have access to all of the same information as I do (I am a veterinarian).

Robert

You say "I wish someone had done something to make this dog unavailable to me before I fell so deeply in love with her" and Sternberg's temperament testing very well may have accomplished that. By killing the dog. The thing is her methods have not undergone any empirical testing to show they can distinguish between a dog who may nip a baby and one like Colleen who will protect a family member from any and all threats.

Sternberg's behavior in Shelter Dogs wasn't an evaluation, but a desperate attempt by a disturbed person to prove she is infallible, and all at the poor dog's expense.

Sue Sternberg can kiss not only my ass, but the ass of my loving, fiercely loyal, over protective shelter dog Jake. Who, by the way, would never put up with some unhinged idiot repeatedly jabbing at him with a rubber hand on a stick. He would, however, without hesitation throw himself into the breach to protect any member of his extended family.

In all seriousness Sternberg herself needs a temperament test, better known as a psychological evaluation. The woman clearly has mental problems.

Leigh Sansone

Ms. Keith, your comments are terribly irresponsible. Having this blog post turn into a hate-fest for Sue Sternberg is unproductive, unkind, unwarranted, and unfair, because you don't actually know Sue Sternberg or anything first-hand about her test, and you aren't a dog behavior or training pro by your own admission (at least at the time of your writing in 2005).

I have seen Ms. Sternberg perform temperament testing many times. She is skilled at reading dog behavior, and in part because she is a shelter owner herself, she is very concerned that dogs who are adopted stay successfully in their homes. It was out of concern for shelter dogs and families who adopt them that she created the test you speak of so critically. (Incidentally, her testing is currently undergoing scientific testing, which is a very good thing.) Your comments have contributed to an inaccurate image of what testing is for and of who Sternberg is. Thus, you have fostered a posting environment where a poster actually suggests that Sternberg is mentally unstable. That poster should, of course, shine that harsh light on himself before casting aspersions on a stranger, as such specious accusations smack of the poster's own issues. Sue is a nice woman and a true dog lover, not someone with pure bred dogs at home giving lip service or feeling defensive because her own dogs have behavior issues.

Now, before you dismiss me as "waxing rhapsodic" about Sue Sternberg, consider how much your perspective is clouded by your own admitted ignorance and antipathy toward someone you don't know. And remember that you, Ms. Keith, posted two links to quite vitriolic, personal attacks on Sternberg, but no link to her website (www.suesternberg.com), to the actual test, or to her own words (www.suesternbergtruth.com - in fairness, this site was only created in Oct. 2010, after Sternberg tired of receiving death threats from the sort of unstable people who read, believe, and act on the sort of irresponsible "opinion" writing you have done in this instance - a blog post which you've never revisited to modify or comment on, though people continue to comment on it and post the link). Standing against wrong-headed and misplaced vitriol is not the same as waxing rhapsodic. It helps my case that I have first-hand knowledge and facts to support my position, and you have only your admittedly biased opinion.

I have read your blog here and your recent commentary about the New York state bill (fed 2011) being considered which would allow rescues access to remove dogs slated for euthanasia from kill shelters. While I appreciate your perspective, Ms. Keith, (in that blog post and this one), I disagree with your opinions about "sanctuary" and kill v. no kill shelters. And, when it comes to your post here, you felt it necessary to personally attack and curse a stranger and veer WILDLY off the subject originally at hand - "bad/good dogs" and temperament tests. You seem to take the existence of such tests as an affront against your beloved dog, hence your level of emotion on the subject. Perhaps you did so because you don't know much about temperament testing and you did not have facts at hand. I will try to help inform you about some facts about temperament testing.

1) In a perfect world, no healthy dog would be euthanized for aggressive behavior, and the time, know-how, and monetary resources to work with those dogs would be endless. But because this world is not perfect, shelter resources have to be allocated and prioritized. Some dogs will be adopted, some will be euthanized. MANY shelters just euthanize based on time, without ANY consideration to adoptability. THAT COURSE is partly what temperament tests seek to avoid. And instruments like temperament tests are one way to decide to which dogs resources are best allocated. It is cold, hard reality. It really is a hard reality. I agree with you there.
2) The Assess-a-Pet (AAP) test is designed to be used in a shelter setting. But testing is not to be administered until the dog has been in a shelter at least 3 days. The image of a newly admitted, starving dog being handed food then having it snatched away is simply false. By three days the majority of dogs in the shelter setting have typically begun to adjust to the shelter environment and have detached from their former owners and begun to show affinity for shelter staff. SO testing should not be done until then.
3) When the AAP is started, the tester DOES use her hands on the dog, not the Assess-a-hand (AAH). The test begins with the dog in its kennel run, but moves to on leash interaction then petting and stroking by the tester. But when the food guarding test is used, it is not safe to use a human hand and risk serious damage. So the AAH is better and more realistic than a broomstick, and safer than a gauntlet glove, through which many dogs can still bite and break bones. It is easy to criticize the AAH when it's not YOUR hand doing the testing. AAP test also doesn't use a real CAT or a real CHILD to try to get a sense of how the dog will react to those family members. I would imagine most people would not want to criticize test portion or volunteer their own cat or child? I don't think it would be wise...

4) To address one poster's comment, the point of acting rather rough and unskilled when handling a dog during testing is to simulate the treatment that a dog might experience at the hands of a regular pet owner, not in the care of an experienced dog person or trainer like Sternberg. I'm sure to the untrained eye it looks mean, but Sternberg does not hit or choke dogs during AAP testing, contrary to the acts she has been accused of above. I am sure that perception is a matter of perspective. But if, during testing, the tester handles the dog as a trainer would, then the dog WILL react differently. And that's not helpful if one wants to test how sociable and tolerant the dog is in an average pet owner's house. What if there are kids in the household, and they do something untoward with the dog? It is imperative to see how tolerant the dog is in less than perfect handling situations.
5) AAP isn't started by using a fake hand. That step is MANY steps from the beginning of the testing. The dog isn't given a food bowl immediately upon arriving at the shelter, and then startled by a fake hand trying to take it away.
6) Sternberg's Assess-a-hand (AAH) is not treated as a toy by the dogs she assesses. And YES, the difference is obvious to anyone who knows dog body language. The SAFER test by Dr. Emily Weiss, which is used by the ASPCA and other shelters, and several other versions of temperament testing also use the same rubber AAH hand; the alternative is a human hand which just isn't safe.
7) AAP testing is not just done once, but is repeated later in the dog's shelter stay.
8) The AAP test is not pass/fail test given only once. There are many different responses, ranged from great to dangerous, and each step of the test has its own range of responses. The image of a dog "failing" and being dragged off to death row is completely false.
9) I don't have statistics at my disposal, so I apologize for that; but here in NYC the majority of dogs that daily come into the city shelters (City Animal Control) are fighting dogs. Our dog spay/neuter programs have been VERY successful in the northeast over the last 20 years, and one result is a much smaller percentage of nice mixed breed pets coming into shelters. MANY more of the strays and shelter dogs are from fighting stock because the people who breed THOSE dogs aren't so responsible about breeding practices, etc. So that accounts for at least some of Sternberg's commentary that many dogs in shelters are unadoptable or unsafe - I don't know if she said 75-85%, but the %s are high.

Those facts are just a few that are important to know about the AAP. I'm much less familiar with SAFER and other tests, so I can't speak to the details of those testing situations. However, I can say that at least SAFER and AAP are instruments that shelter staffs can use in deciding whether a placement of a shelter dog will be successful when adopted by the average dog owner or family. I am a professional trainer, so I feel comfortable using the AAP or similar testing even at a shelter which doesn't use temperament testing - this is how I chose my current and previous dogs, neither of whom have (had) any serious behavior issues. I can speak from actual experience that, administered properly, AAP is an excellent predictor of the future success of a dog in a home. USED properly by trained people. But for the average owner, I would ONLY recommend shelters who properly use testing on their dogs.

It is clear that you had a wonderful bond with your dog Colleen. NOTHING can take that away from you. But what if Colleen had been adopted by a family from a shelter which didn't use testing, as a surprise for the kids? What kind of nightmare scenario do you suppose would have occurred there? Does the greatness and lack of safeness (I presume you're speak of Colleen's greatness, not your own) which you mention trump the danger of such a dog in the wrong hands? Do you think that a family would ever adopt another dog if they had experienced Colleen, if she had injured or even just frightened the kids?

Your emotional assessment and dismissal of Sternberg and AAP, Dr. Weiss's SAFER, and all other assessment tools for shelter dogs is simply wrong-headed. MANY shelter workers and trainers end up with dogs like Colleen precisely because they fall in love with them and ARE CAPABLE of safely handling them and managing the potentially dangerous behaviors such as those you detailed with Colleen. So good for you for having had such a wonderful relationship. But SHAME on you for such irresponsible, specious, unprincipled writing and an uneducated, unprovoked attack on someone about whom you know next to nothing. I hope you will try to educate yourself in the future and tone down the ugly rhetoric. I just doesn't behoove someone who clearly means to be a dog advocate.

Eliza Wingate

In defense of rescue groups, we often feel compelled to protect our community by not adopting out dogs with issues when there are so many that can go anywhere. It is not a situation to be taken lightly. It is often excruciatingly difficult to find the right home for a dog with a litany of issues. I am always amazed when I come across people and their dogs where the people wrap their whole lives around their dogs issues. They too are protecting their community while loving their chosen companion. How can any test really tell the whole story, but we have to begin somewhere. I have had over 350 foster dogs in my house over the years, knowing nothing much about them when they came. I have been bitten only once, by a Chihuahua.
What is truly sad is that there are still more dogs than homes.

Yvonne Presley

It's OK to "save" bad dogs and it's OK for shelters to try to find good homes for them. It is NOT OK for shelters to give adopters false or incomplete information about their dogs, especially if children are in the mix. Sue Sternberg's fake hand method leaves a lot to be desired and should not be the only piece of the pie when it comes to temperment testing. Head start training...education...truth...That is what shelters should promote. Follow up help is also important. Sternberg recommeds all of these things. She advises dog owners to NOT spoil their dogs by treating them like children and then being upset when they misbehave. In the end, the fault is not with the rescuers or shelters, it is with the irresponsible humans who breed or buy from pet stores.

Christie

How dogs are bred and raised is indeed the responsibility of whoever bred and raised them.

How they are SHELTERED and RESCUED is only the responsiblity of the shelters and rescuers. That's the job you signed up for when you do that work: Rescuing and sheltering. Don't like what the job entails? Get another job. Think that killing dogs is a form of rescue? Get another job. I'm really sick of this whole evasion of responsibility by endlessly blaming upstream actions. When you take a pet into your shelter or rescue, you are responsible for them from that moment on. YOU. Deal with it or get out.

Jenn

Your garbage and can kiss my ass! Sue Sternberg is a genius!! Have you ever sat down in person with her while she does some training? Your a worthless.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner