Dog bites - who's responsible for the vet bill?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to copypaste pp because they get it and a lot of y'all need to.

"There's always a warning. People just tend to either ignore it or misread it. In this instance, the person in question should definitely have had the dogs separated and should have paid more attention. People who foster dogs should probably be required to take a class, but typically they aren't and rescue groups are mostly volunteers so here we are."

People ought to have a certification tests and an actual license to own animals the same way you need a license to drive a car. All dogs can bite, and the person on-duty is responsible for the animal(s) in their care.

"There is no such thing as attacking without provocation/ out of the blue. Sounds like there are many people on here who do not understand dog behaviour and should not be owners if you believe stuff like this. Unless your dog is cujo, there are always signs. If you ignore them and an animal gets hurt, that’s your fault as the supervising human."

Seriously. If you don't understand dogs, you'll think it's "out of the blue" when, to a more experienced/intelligent owner/handler, there are all kinds of signs. Even Cujo had signs, and a dog like that is a known issue; they don't "just snap" the way some of your idiots would allege.

If you're not willing to learn how dogs work, at least enough to handle them safely, you shouldn't have or handle dogs.

Okay, so I was the babysitter in this case who was attacked by the family's dog. I was 17 years old when I was attacked. What warning signs and obligations did I, as the person in the house have and ability to correct the dog that bit me. For what it's worth I did prevent the young children in the house from being bitten, my putting myself physically between them.

So this whole "there are always signs". If your dog is dangerous enough that someone has to be a dog mind reader to be safe around your dog, you are a bad dog owner who handed someone a hand grenade.

It's on the owners.

I'm sorry someone put you in a dangerous situation, but you're derailing the thread with something that isn't comparable to the incident in question.

re: your "case" - a 17-year old is a kid. I wouldn't my dog responsible for 3 kids. Dog probably should've been crated. But what likely happened is that the dog saw you as an outsider and was "protecting" its people (i.e. the human children it felt responsible for). Who knows what you were doing, or what the dog was thinking about it. All the more reason to not leave the dog to make those decisions. Dog should've been in a crate for everyone's safety. In your case, yes, I'd put responsibility on the owners, as everyone else involved was a minor or a dog.

But that's not what we're talking about here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to copypaste pp because they get it and a lot of y'all need to.

"There's always a warning. People just tend to either ignore it or misread it. In this instance, the person in question should definitely have had the dogs separated and should have paid more attention. People who foster dogs should probably be required to take a class, but typically they aren't and rescue groups are mostly volunteers so here we are."

People ought to have a certification tests and an actual license to own animals the same way you need a license to drive a car. All dogs can bite, and the person on-duty is responsible for the animal(s) in their care.

"There is no such thing as attacking without provocation/ out of the blue. Sounds like there are many people on here who do not understand dog behaviour and should not be owners if you believe stuff like this. Unless your dog is cujo, there are always signs. If you ignore them and an animal gets hurt, that’s your fault as the supervising human."

Seriously. If you don't understand dogs, you'll think it's "out of the blue" when, to a more experienced/intelligent owner/handler, there are all kinds of signs. Even Cujo had signs, and a dog like that is a known issue; they don't "just snap" the way some of your idiots would allege.

If you're not willing to learn how dogs work, at least enough to handle them safely, you shouldn't have or handle dogs.

Okay, so I was the babysitter in this case who was attacked by the family's dog. I was 17 years old when I was attacked. What warning signs and obligations did I, as the person in the house have and ability to correct the dog that bit me. For what it's worth I did prevent the young children in the house from being bitten, my putting myself physically between them.

So this whole "there are always signs". If your dog is dangerous enough that someone has to be a dog mind reader to be safe around your dog, you are a bad dog owner who handed someone a hand grenade.

It's on the owners.

So it wasn’t out of the blue - he was going after the kids, so it’s quite likely something they did set him off. Kids are not gentle with animals. You then put yourself in the way to protect them. It’s very disingenuous to say that the dog attacked you out of the blue, because that sounds like a straight up lie from your next post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to copypaste pp because they get it and a lot of y'all need to.

"There's always a warning. People just tend to either ignore it or misread it. In this instance, the person in question should definitely have had the dogs separated and should have paid more attention. People who foster dogs should probably be required to take a class, but typically they aren't and rescue groups are mostly volunteers so here we are."

People ought to have a certification tests and an actual license to own animals the same way you need a license to drive a car. All dogs can bite, and the person on-duty is responsible for the animal(s) in their care.

"There is no such thing as attacking without provocation/ out of the blue. Sounds like there are many people on here who do not understand dog behaviour and should not be owners if you believe stuff like this. Unless your dog is cujo, there are always signs. If you ignore them and an animal gets hurt, that’s your fault as the supervising human."

Seriously. If you don't understand dogs, you'll think it's "out of the blue" when, to a more experienced/intelligent owner/handler, there are all kinds of signs. Even Cujo had signs, and a dog like that is a known issue; they don't "just snap" the way some of your idiots would allege.

If you're not willing to learn how dogs work, at least enough to handle them safely, you shouldn't have or handle dogs.

Okay, so I was the babysitter in this case who was attacked by the family's dog. I was 17 years old when I was attacked. What warning signs and obligations did I, as the person in the house have and ability to correct the dog that bit me. For what it's worth I did prevent the young children in the house from being bitten, my putting myself physically between them.

So this whole "there are always signs". If your dog is dangerous enough that someone has to be a dog mind reader to be safe around your dog, you are a bad dog owner who handed someone a hand grenade.

It's on the owners.

So it wasn’t out of the blue - he was going after the kids, so it’s quite likely something they did set him off. Kids are not gentle with animals. You then put yourself in the way to protect them. It’s very disingenuous to say that the dog attacked you out of the blue, because that sounds like a straight up lie from your next post.

The kids were just eating dinner and the dog lunged at the kid who was just sitting in the chair. I had pet and greeted this dog and played fetch with him just fine. I got between the dog and the kid. No one had warned me the dog was food aggressive. So yes, for a caretaker the dog attacked out of the blue.

And for the dog sitter that absolutely can happen too. They can't anticipate a dog's specific aggressions without being warned. I've personally experienced a dog attacking without warning in the seconds before. The dog probably had displayed food aggression before to its owners, so the dog in OP's story had displayed reactivity to other dogs. But that's then the owner's warning to pass on.

Point is: yes, dog owners bear the responsibility for aggression.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to copypaste pp because they get it and a lot of y'all need to.

"There's always a warning. People just tend to either ignore it or misread it. In this instance, the person in question should definitely have had the dogs separated and should have paid more attention. People who foster dogs should probably be required to take a class, but typically they aren't and rescue groups are mostly volunteers so here we are."

People ought to have a certification tests and an actual license to own animals the same way you need a license to drive a car. All dogs can bite, and the person on-duty is responsible for the animal(s) in their care.

"There is no such thing as attacking without provocation/ out of the blue. Sounds like there are many people on here who do not understand dog behaviour and should not be owners if you believe stuff like this. Unless your dog is cujo, there are always signs. If you ignore them and an animal gets hurt, that’s your fault as the supervising human."

Seriously. If you don't understand dogs, you'll think it's "out of the blue" when, to a more experienced/intelligent owner/handler, there are all kinds of signs. Even Cujo had signs, and a dog like that is a known issue; they don't "just snap" the way some of your idiots would allege.

If you're not willing to learn how dogs work, at least enough to handle them safely, you shouldn't have or handle dogs.

Okay, so I was the babysitter in this case who was attacked by the family's dog. I was 17 years old when I was attacked. What warning signs and obligations did I, as the person in the house have and ability to correct the dog that bit me. For what it's worth I did prevent the young children in the house from being bitten, my putting myself physically between them.

So this whole "there are always signs". If your dog is dangerous enough that someone has to be a dog mind reader to be safe around your dog, you are a bad dog owner who handed someone a hand grenade.

It's on the owners.

So it wasn’t out of the blue - he was going after the kids, so it’s quite likely something they did set him off. Kids are not gentle with animals. You then put yourself in the way to protect them. It’s very disingenuous to say that the dog attacked you out of the blue, because that sounds like a straight up lie from your next post.

The kids were just eating dinner and the dog lunged at the kid who was just sitting in the chair. I had pet and greeted this dog and played fetch with him just fine. I got between the dog and the kid. No one had warned me the dog was food aggressive. So yes, for a caretaker the dog attacked out of the blue.

And for the dog sitter that absolutely can happen too. They can't anticipate a dog's specific aggressions without being warned. I've personally experienced a dog attacking without warning in the seconds before. The dog probably had displayed food aggression before to its owners, so the dog in OP's story had displayed reactivity to other dogs. But that's then the owner's warning to pass on.

Point is: yes, dog owners bear the responsibility for aggression.

NP here but you're wrong, again. THERE WERE SIGNS - just no one told them TO YOU, which obviously they should have and is horrendous that they didn't. But you're like "there aren't always signs!" when, in your case, there were.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to copypaste pp because they get it and a lot of y'all need to.

"There's always a warning. People just tend to either ignore it or misread it. In this instance, the person in question should definitely have had the dogs separated and should have paid more attention. People who foster dogs should probably be required to take a class, but typically they aren't and rescue groups are mostly volunteers so here we are."

People ought to have a certification tests and an actual license to own animals the same way you need a license to drive a car. All dogs can bite, and the person on-duty is responsible for the animal(s) in their care.

"There is no such thing as attacking without provocation/ out of the blue. Sounds like there are many people on here who do not understand dog behaviour and should not be owners if you believe stuff like this. Unless your dog is cujo, there are always signs. If you ignore them and an animal gets hurt, that’s your fault as the supervising human."

Seriously. If you don't understand dogs, you'll think it's "out of the blue" when, to a more experienced/intelligent owner/handler, there are all kinds of signs. Even Cujo had signs, and a dog like that is a known issue; they don't "just snap" the way some of your idiots would allege.

If you're not willing to learn how dogs work, at least enough to handle them safely, you shouldn't have or handle dogs.

Okay, so I was the babysitter in this case who was attacked by the family's dog. I was 17 years old when I was attacked. What warning signs and obligations did I, as the person in the house have and ability to correct the dog that bit me. For what it's worth I did prevent the young children in the house from being bitten, my putting myself physically between them.

So this whole "there are always signs". If your dog is dangerous enough that someone has to be a dog mind reader to be safe around your dog, you are a bad dog owner who handed someone a hand grenade.

It's on the owners.

So it wasn’t out of the blue - he was going after the kids, so it’s quite likely something they did set him off. Kids are not gentle with animals. You then put yourself in the way to protect them. It’s very disingenuous to say that the dog attacked you out of the blue, because that sounds like a straight up lie from your next post.

The kids were just eating dinner and the dog lunged at the kid who was just sitting in the chair. I had pet and greeted this dog and played fetch with him just fine. I got between the dog and the kid. No one had warned me the dog was food aggressive. So yes, for a caretaker the dog attacked out of the blue.

And for the dog sitter that absolutely can happen too. They can't anticipate a dog's specific aggressions without being warned. I've personally experienced a dog attacking without warning in the seconds before. The dog probably had displayed food aggression before to its owners, so the dog in OP's story had displayed reactivity to other dogs. But that's then the owner's warning to pass on.

Point is: yes, dog owners bear the responsibility for aggression.

Did you not notice the dog staring,. fixated on the child and/or the food? Overly alert tense body position? Dogs usually telegraph that kind of intentionally pretty loud and clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The dog owner, IMO. Your pet does something, it's your responsibility.

Dog needs to be reported to animal control as well.

This.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to copypaste pp because they get it and a lot of y'all need to.

"There's always a warning. People just tend to either ignore it or misread it. In this instance, the person in question should definitely have had the dogs separated and should have paid more attention. People who foster dogs should probably be required to take a class, but typically they aren't and rescue groups are mostly volunteers so here we are."

People ought to have a certification tests and an actual license to own animals the same way you need a license to drive a car. All dogs can bite, and the person on-duty is responsible for the animal(s) in their care.

"There is no such thing as attacking without provocation/ out of the blue. Sounds like there are many people on here who do not understand dog behaviour and should not be owners if you believe stuff like this. Unless your dog is cujo, there are always signs. If you ignore them and an animal gets hurt, that’s your fault as the supervising human."

Seriously. If you don't understand dogs, you'll think it's "out of the blue" when, to a more experienced/intelligent owner/handler, there are all kinds of signs. Even Cujo had signs, and a dog like that is a known issue; they don't "just snap" the way some of your idiots would allege.

If you're not willing to learn how dogs work, at least enough to handle them safely, you shouldn't have or handle dogs.

Okay, so I was the babysitter in this case who was attacked by the family's dog. I was 17 years old when I was attacked. What warning signs and obligations did I, as the person in the house have and ability to correct the dog that bit me. For what it's worth I did prevent the young children in the house from being bitten, my putting myself physically between them.

So this whole "there are always signs". If your dog is dangerous enough that someone has to be a dog mind reader to be safe around your dog, you are a bad dog owner who handed someone a hand grenade.

It's on the owners.

So it wasn’t out of the blue - he was going after the kids, so it’s quite likely something they did set him off. Kids are not gentle with animals. You then put yourself in the way to protect them. It’s very disingenuous to say that the dog attacked you out of the blue, because that sounds like a straight up lie from your next post.

The kids were just eating dinner and the dog lunged at the kid who was just sitting in the chair. I had pet and greeted this dog and played fetch with him just fine. I got between the dog and the kid. No one had warned me the dog was food aggressive. So yes, for a caretaker the dog attacked out of the blue.

And for the dog sitter that absolutely can happen too. They can't anticipate a dog's specific aggressions without being warned. I've personally experienced a dog attacking without warning in the seconds before. The dog probably had displayed food aggression before to its owners, so the dog in OP's story had displayed reactivity to other dogs. But that's then the owner's warning to pass on.

Point is: yes, dog owners bear the responsibility for aggression.

NP here but you're wrong, again. THERE WERE SIGNS - just no one told them TO YOU, which obviously they should have and is horrendous that they didn't. But you're like "there aren't always signs!" when, in your case, there were.

Which is the point I am making. There probably were signs here that the owner, not the dog sitter, ignored.

As for the other poster asking about whether the dog was tensed, I was feeding the kid, the dog was under the table so if it was displaying tensed behaviors I'm not sure how I was supposed to have spotted it. And that's the point. A dog who's aggressive enough you have to watch them constantly the onus is on the owner to warn.

I believe the poster that from their perspective, there was no detectable warning and believe the onus is 100% on the owners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The dog owner, IMO. Your pet does something, it's your responsibility.

Dog needs to be reported to animal control as well.

This.

Animal control is less concerned about dog on dog aggression than many of the posters here seem to believe. Unless the dog is loose and attacking pets in their own yards or that are being walked on leash or there are intentionally staged dogfights, this isn't really an animal control issue. Two dogs residing in the same home on a temporary basis and confined within the bounds of that home behaved like dogs and had a scuffle resulting in nonfatal injuries to at least one dog. No humans were injured. This is entirely predictable and on the human that should have been in charge. Dogs don't get yoinked and put down for this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The dog owner, IMO. Your pet does something, it's your responsibility.

Dog needs to be reported to animal control as well.

This.

Animal control is less concerned about dog on dog aggression than many of the posters here seem to believe. Unless the dog is loose and attacking pets in their own yards or that are being walked on leash or there are intentionally staged dogfights, this isn't really an animal control issue. Two dogs residing in the same home on a temporary basis and confined within the bounds of that home behaved like dogs and had a scuffle resulting in nonfatal injuries to at least one dog. No humans were injured. This is entirely predictable and on the human that should have been in charge. Dogs don't get yoinked and put down for this.

I grew up with lots of dogs and a dog biting another dog severely enough to have to visit an emergency vet is not "behaved like dogs". That is well outside the norm for dog behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The dog owner, IMO. Your pet does something, it's your responsibility.

Dog needs to be reported to animal control as well.

This.

Animal control is less concerned about dog on dog aggression than many of the posters here seem to believe. Unless the dog is loose and attacking pets in their own yards or that are being walked on leash or there are intentionally staged dogfights, this isn't really an animal control issue. Two dogs residing in the same home on a temporary basis and confined within the bounds of that home behaved like dogs and had a scuffle resulting in nonfatal injuries to at least one dog. No humans were injured. This is entirely predictable and on the human that should have been in charge. Dogs don't get yoinked and put down for this.

I grew up with lots of dogs and a dog biting another dog severely enough to have to visit an emergency vet is not "behaved like dogs". That is well outside the norm for dog behavior.

No,. really, dog on dog aggression isn't outside the norm. It is the entirely predictable result of people putting dogs together and expecting that it'll all be fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The dog owner, IMO. Your pet does something, it's your responsibility.

Dog needs to be reported to animal control as well.

This.

Animal control is less concerned about dog on dog aggression than many of the posters here seem to believe. Unless the dog is loose and attacking pets in their own yards or that are being walked on leash or there are intentionally staged dogfights, this isn't really an animal control issue. Two dogs residing in the same home on a temporary basis and confined within the bounds of that home behaved like dogs and had a scuffle resulting in nonfatal injuries to at least one dog. No humans were injured. This is entirely predictable and on the human that should have been in charge. Dogs don't get yoinked and put down for this.

I grew up with lots of dogs and a dog biting another dog severely enough to have to visit an emergency vet is not "behaved like dogs". That is well outside the norm for dog behavior.

No,. really, dog on dog aggression isn't outside the norm. It is the entirely predictable result of people putting dogs together and expecting that it'll all be fine.

Sounds like you have an aggressive dog you aren't dealing with. People send dogs to dog daycare and dog parks all the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The dog owner, IMO. Your pet does something, it's your responsibility.

Dog needs to be reported to animal control as well.

This.

Animal control is less concerned about dog on dog aggression than many of the posters here seem to believe. Unless the dog is loose and attacking pets in their own yards or that are being walked on leash or there are intentionally staged dogfights, this isn't really an animal control issue. Two dogs residing in the same home on a temporary basis and confined within the bounds of that home behaved like dogs and had a scuffle resulting in nonfatal injuries to at least one dog. No humans were injured. This is entirely predictable and on the human that should have been in charge. Dogs don't get yoinked and put down for this.

I grew up with lots of dogs and a dog biting another dog severely enough to have to visit an emergency vet is not "behaved like dogs". That is well outside the norm for dog behavior.

No,. really, dog on dog aggression isn't outside the norm. It is the entirely predictable result of people putting dogs together and expecting that it'll all be fine.

Sounds like you have an aggressive dog you aren't dealing with. People send dogs to dog daycare and dog parks all the time.

No. I don't have an aggressive dog. You are attempting to deflect and that's a fail for you. You don't appear to understand dogs or their behaviors particularly well at all. Daycares and dog parks are the two locations outside of an organized fighting ring where dog fights are most likely to occur. Many trainers behaviorists and vets will advise against them for just that reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The dog owner, IMO. Your pet does something, it's your responsibility.

Dog needs to be reported to animal control as well.

This.

Animal control is less concerned about dog on dog aggression than many of the posters here seem to believe. Unless the dog is loose and attacking pets in their own yards or that are being walked on leash or there are intentionally staged dogfights, this isn't really an animal control issue. Two dogs residing in the same home on a temporary basis and confined within the bounds of that home behaved like dogs and had a scuffle resulting in nonfatal injuries to at least one dog. No humans were injured. This is entirely predictable and on the human that should have been in charge. Dogs don't get yoinked and put down for this.

I grew up with lots of dogs and a dog biting another dog severely enough to have to visit an emergency vet is not "behaved like dogs". That is well outside the norm for dog behavior.

No,. really, dog on dog aggression isn't outside the norm. It is the entirely predictable result of people putting dogs together and expecting that it'll all be fine.

Sounds like you have an aggressive dog you aren't dealing with. People send dogs to dog daycare and dog parks all the time.

"People" these days are absolute idiots, especially when it comes to dogs. Dog parks are frequent bite sites, and "dog daycare" is either a very expensive option where the dogs are properly handled or even trained away from home, or a fancy cage.

It doesn't take an "aggressive dog" to have a bite incident, and a lot of y'all have dogs that are one slipped leash away from being the "aggressive dogs" you're trying to malign. Citing doggy daycare and dog parks as evidence of "safe dog behavior" just reveals your own ignorance.

Nobody smart takes their dog to a dog park, for a reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The dog owner, IMO. Your pet does something, it's your responsibility.

Dog needs to be reported to animal control as well.

This.

Animal control is less concerned about dog on dog aggression than many of the posters here seem to believe. Unless the dog is loose and attacking pets in their own yards or that are being walked on leash or there are intentionally staged dogfights, this isn't really an animal control issue. Two dogs residing in the same home on a temporary basis and confined within the bounds of that home behaved like dogs and had a scuffle resulting in nonfatal injuries to at least one dog. No humans were injured. This is entirely predictable and on the human that should have been in charge. Dogs don't get yoinked and put down for this.

I grew up with lots of dogs and a dog biting another dog severely enough to have to visit an emergency vet is not "behaved like dogs". That is well outside the norm for dog behavior.

No,. really, dog on dog aggression isn't outside the norm. It is the entirely predictable result of people putting dogs together and expecting that it'll all be fine.

Sounds like you have an aggressive dog you aren't dealing with. People send dogs to dog daycare and dog parks all the time.

No. I don't have an aggressive dog. You are attempting to deflect and that's a fail for you. You don't appear to understand dogs or their behaviors particularly well at all. Daycares and dog parks are the two locations outside of an organized fighting ring where dog fights are most likely to occur. Many trainers behaviorists and vets will advise against them for just that reason.

This. Every rescue and foster I've ever worked with (and, over a few decades, its a few) has specifically stated in the animal's contract that dogs are NOT to be taken to dog parks or allowed to run off-leash in anything other than a fenced backyard. Even that last part is dicey with a new dog, and definitely foolish with multiple dogs. My vets are also unequivocally opposed to dog parks, and have been.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The dog owner, IMO. Your pet does something, it's your responsibility.

Dog needs to be reported to animal control as well.

Absent further detail re: the circumstances, this is stupidly oversimplified. If I put my pet in someone else's care, they're responsible for what happens to my pet, and also potentially liable.

If your pet acts aggressively, it's your responsibility.

I have personally been bitten by a dog for the family I babysat for, there was no provocation and nothing I could have done in that moment to prevent getting bitten.

If a dog attacks another dog without provocation or warning there was nothing the person watching the dog could have done.

The pet sitter absolutely could have done something. They should not have taken the relatives dog.