Ellen Degeneres and her dog
|
|
I was waiting for this to pop up 
I think the rescue agency is in the right. I think Ellen did the worst thing possible by bringing this up on her show. She should have gone to them and profusely apologized and asked for them to make an exception to their rules because the family had already bonded with the dog. The agency should have been able take the dog and then do a home check. If they approved of the situation despite it being against their "usual" preference then they could release the dog and maybe do extra follow-up checks to make sure the dog was working out. Because Ellen brought this up on her show many people and possibly animals will be unnecessarily hurt  |
| i agree with amanda... i do feel sorry for ellen, i dont think that she intentionally did anything wrong.....BUT, she should not have made it public. I think she did a disservice to herself, the family and the rescue group.
Just because you CAN use the media, doesnt mean that you SHOULD..... |
| I think she was over tired and stressed and felt really bad for what she did.
We haven't heard from the rescue as to why they did or don't feel the new home was appropriate. Perhaps they just have their noses bent out of shape by the "unauthorized" transfer. I know NEOESR has the same or similar clause in their adoption papers. They want to re-home the dog themselves if something goes wrong with their placement. So I'm torn. I understand the desire and/or need for the rescue to stay in control of the placed dog, but only hearing one side of it -Ellen's- it sounded like a good home. But who knows? Maybe the new family isn't qualified. Maybe they don't want the dog to go to a home with kids, maybe it had bitten children in the past? Maybe they don't have a fence? Then again going to the new home on a pretense of vetting the home and dog-napping the dog shouldn't have been tolerated and assisted by the police chip or no chip, IMHO; it seems to me it was a civil contracts matter and I feel the rescue should have been forced to go to court to re-gain custody. Maybe calmer heads will prevail and they will invite the home to apply to adopt, they will vet the home and re-home the pooch there if they are qualified. If I were on the board, I'd look for a way to make everyone happy and a good outcome for the pooch before having to spend money to defend a suit brought by Ellen's moolah and/or her followers. |
| From what I have read their policy is not to place with families with children under 14 years of age. Both children in the household were under 14. |
Ron wrote: We haven't heard from the rescue as to why they did or don't feel the new home was appropriate. Perhaps they just have their noses bent out of shape by the "unauthorized" transfer.
From what I've read, I think the rescue said they don't home small dogs in families with kids under 14 (and the 2 girls were 11 and 12). I also think they were bent out of shape... |
| Personally, I think the rescue was right to take back the dog. The contract Ellen & her partner signed clearly said they were to return the dog to rescue if it did not work out.
The rescue has a policy not to place puppies or small dogs in homes with children under 14. While this family may very well be a wonderful home for a dog, it was not Ellen's place to make that decision. That responsiblity is up to the rescue group. They are the ones with the experience and expertise in placing dogs. She should NEVER have brought this up on national television.  |
Beaureguard's Mom wrote: She should NEVER have brought this up on national television. I think it will be a great opportunity to talk about rescue and the overpopulation problem (crisis?), and maybe commercial breeders issues going forward. |
| I agree that it could have been and suppose there is still the possiblity of that happening, but it looks more like a bashing of rescue groups, at this point, by Ellen-can-do-no-wrong fans. |
| Here's a pretty good discussion/postings about it
http://www.celebritydogwatcher.com/2007 ... h-threats/ |
| I understand the rescue woman's position and agree that Ellen handled it wrong. Ellen agrees she handled it wrong. But I disagree that the rescue woman should have taken back the dog the way she did. It's not a black and white world and she clearly did not look at the whole picture. If 11 and 12 year old kids were handling it fine, the family was happy and the dog was well-loved, then the rescue woman should have agreed to make an exception and have been grateful that the situation was resolved without her having to source another new home for the dog. Just think about how much instability the dog had already gone through, was getting settled and loved and now needs ANOTHER home. That's crazy and does not have the dogs best interest in mind.
She couldn't have possibly given more bad press to rescue organizations as well as her own. She could have achieved the same result by calmly approaching Ellen and the new owners and asking them to work within the outline of the contract. She caused ridiculous drama by going to the house, refusing to let go of the dog and getting the police involved the way she did. Think those kids are going to grow up being fans of rescues? She had the opportunity to teach and set a great example and instead she blew it. |
I have to ask... 
How do we know this family was a good fit for the dog? Yes the kids are heartbroken and they are personal friends of Ellen's, but how do we know that they were really were a good match? |
Quote: [ think she was over tired and stressed and felt really bad for what she did. Quote: I think it will be a great opportunity to talk about rescue and the overpopulation problem (crisis?), and maybe commercial breeders issues going forward.
This is what I agree with. She's always been a big dog advocate person. I think when this happened, as she said on tv... she did not intend to bring it up but couldn't control her emotions since it happened before the show. As far as "is this family right?" Who knows right now. How do you know a family is right when you trust a rescue to place the dog? Just b/c they have the space, money, and backyard. I told my friend everything she should say when a rescue wanted to contact her, which included a white lie about her kid. I'm not saying this family WAS right, but at least Ellen knows this person personally, and obviously felt the dog would be a good/better match. |
Amanda P wrote: I have to ask...
How do we know this family was a good fit for the dog? Yes the kids are heartbroken and they are personal friends of Ellen's, but how do we know that they were really were a good match? How do we know they're not? The rescue woman's only reason she's given is that the kids were under 14 years old. I think that's pretty weak rationale to justify the havoc and drama she's caused to the dog, the family and the rescue cause. |
rdf wrote: Amanda P wrote: I have to ask... How do we know this family was a good fit for the dog? Yes the kids are heartbroken and they are personal friends of Ellen's, but how do we know that they were really were a good match? How do we know they're not? The rescue woman's only reason she's given is that the kids were under 14 years old. I think that's pretty weak rationale to justify the havoc and drama she's caused to the dog, the family and the rescue cause. I asked because all I am reading is how Ellen says they are a good family and now the kids are heartbroken. Everyone is willing to accept Ellen's ability to match rescue dogs with potential families as a given? As far as their 14 and over rule. Too bad, that is their rule. Like any person with authority knows if you break the rule for one person it gets harder and harder to maintain standards and regulations for the good of everyone. The rescue group shouldn't have to justify the suffering of the family. The fault for that lies with Ellen and Portia for not following the rules in the first place. |
Amanda P wrote: rdf wrote: Amanda P wrote: I have to ask... How do we know this family was a good fit for the dog? Yes the kids are heartbroken and they are personal friends of Ellen's, but how do we know that they were really were a good match? How do we know they're not? The rescue woman's only reason she's given is that the kids were under 14 years old. I think that's pretty weak rationale to justify the havoc and drama she's caused to the dog, the family and the rescue cause. I asked because all I am reading is how Ellen says they are a good family and now the kids are heartbroken. Everyone is willing to accept Ellen's ability to match rescue dogs with potential families as a given? As far as their 14 and over rule. Too bad, that is their rule. Like any person with authority knows if you break the rule for one person it gets harder and harder to maintain standards and regulations for the good of everyone. The rescue group shouldn't have to justify the suffering of the family. The fault for that lies with Ellen and Portia for not following the rules in the first place. But to reiterate - the rescue woman could have handled the situation by approaching Ellen and the new family in a civil manner and requesting Ellen abide by the contract. She went off half-cocked and is now reaping what she sowed. There was no indication that the dog was in harms way, so why refuse to put the dog down and call the police? She didn't behave in a rational manner. She didn't manage the situation respectfully. I'm not saying her rules are wrong, but there should always be room for exceptions if individual situations warrant, and that does not a precedent make. The rescue is always the deciding factor, she just made a poor choice in her BEHAVIOR. As to whether the family is "right" for the dog, we can't know. But there certainly was a better way to handle it, and Ellen already accepted the blame for not managing her end correctly. |
| I think it probably could've been handled better by everyone involved - not just the rescue group & Ellen. |
Joahaeyo wrote: As far as "is this family right?" Who knows right now. How do you know a family is right when you trust a rescue to place the dog? Just b/c they have the space, money, and backyard. I told my friend everything she should say when a rescue wanted to contact her, which included a white lie about her kid. I'm not saying this family WAS right, but at least Ellen knows this person personally, and obviously felt the dog would be a good/better match.
Exactly what kind of "white lie" did you have your friend tell the rescue about her kid? That the kid was older than he/she actually was or that they didn't have a kid at all? Either way, I consider this to be a little more serious than a "white lie". The rescue could be responsible if something happened to the child. Depending on the dog and the family, most rescues WILL make exceptions to their rules. Most of the time they don't have much more to go on than gut instinct about the family and sometimes things don't work out. Most of us in rescue probably have bent the rules to some extent but few of us go out in public and blatantly admit it. |
| I'm sure the rescue could have handled it better. This is a sticky situation that rescues probably hope they don't have to deal with.
I have read several versions of what happened as far as the retrieval of the dog, and am not sure which is correct. All parties could have behaved better and made the situation resolve itself more smoothly. I think what frustrates me the most is that this could have been so easily avoided. I guess that is why despite being a huge fan I hold Ellen/Portia ultimately responsible for any pain and suffering encompassed in this whole mess. |
| We don't know that Ellen didn't have lengthy conversations with the rescue, we don't know anything except for what wee are getting second and third hand.
I do now agree that Ellen is to blame for 90% of this, as she should never have given away that dog in the first place. She put the family at risk for the heartbreak. If Mutts and Moms are like the rescues in which I have been involved, the ownership of the dog and restriction on re-homing and return requirements were all carefully explained at the time of the contract signing. It's really a big big thing with the rescues. I don't like the way the rescue handled the dognapping but then again they shouldn't have been in this position to begin with. |
| I understand the dog was not neutered before being placed and the adoption fee was $600.....?...... Ellen was not explained the contents on the contract...which should ALWAYS be done. The dog was placed in a home with cats....Duh...was the dog cat-tested by the rescue group?
These are all "questionable" in my eyes, as far as the rescue group goes. Now for Ellen... She didn't read what she was signing? How can she evaluate a home, when she herself gave the dog all of a couple of weeks to get settled in to HER home? Did she have the new home sign a contract that the dog goes back to her if it didn't work out? There was nothing to stop the new family from dumping the dog at a shelter, if it started being mouthy, peeing, chewing etc...The new home didn't have a contract with anyone. The rescue group has to know where all their dogs go. Possibly they have a policy filed in thier corporation that says no kids under 14...If thier agency is filed that way they have to abide. Lots of questions...But if the new home was OK, and the age rule could be bent, then they should have kept the dog..Providing all else was OK and they signed the adoption contract. Ellen has already had it neutered...Thanks god.. |
| I think both sides screwed up....but the real concern, in my opinion is how this is going to reflect on dog rescue in general.
The average person (in our media obsessed culture) forms a lot of their opinions from highly publicized nonsense like this, and I'm afraid of how many people will now have an unfair, negative view of how rescues operate. |
| An adoption fee of $600 for an unneutered pup, if true, sounds really really suspicious to me. That makes it sound like either they were taking advantage of a celeb or they were selling puppies. |
ravenmoonart wrote: I think both sides screwed up....but the real concern, in my opinion is how this is going to reflect on dog rescue in general.
The average person (in our media obsessed culture) forms a lot of their opinions from highly publicized nonsense like this, and I'm afraid of how many people will now have an unfair, negative view of how rescues operate. This too, is my concern. How many dogs and families will feel the affect of this for months to come.... |
Joahaeyo wrote: As far as "is this family right?" Who knows right now. How do you know a family is right when you trust a rescue to place the dog? Just b/c they have the space, money, and backyard. I told my friend everything she should say when a rescue wanted to contact her, which included a white lie about her kid.
PLEASE don't ever lie to a rescue. It only makes more work for the rescue not to mention heartache for the family if it doesn't work out and then they have to explain to the rescue that they lied. There is a reason why rescues have the rules they do. It's not to be an elitist club, it's because rescue people have experience and know what works and what doesn't. If you have to lie to get a dog from rescue, you shouldn't be getting that dog. Not to mention, a great way to never get a dog from a rescue again is to lie to them. Rescue people talk to each other and they will make sure no one deals with someone who breaks the rules ever again. |
| I had to look this up because I had no idea what ya'll were talking about.
Here is the video from the show segment in case people haven't seen it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGBVh_EDZnM Here's a video with the rescue place taking the dog from the family. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ffBmnFS ... ed&search= IMO, the family have 1 small dog already and a fenced in back yard, if what we are seeing is the truth. I can understand the supposed rescue's concern but maybe they need to reconsider their decision to take the dog. Did Ellen seriously think bringing a young puppy to a household of cats was going to be a seamless transition? Especially a terrier mix? Sounds like she had no clue, and I really don't think it was right that she made the rescue seem like bad people on national TV. |
| I know rescue is a great thing, and the animals should be returned if they can't be kept. My experience with a local rescue was already colored by the person running it. She had no people skills and was so rude that I opted to drive across country for another rescue. |
VerveUp wrote: Did Ellen seriously think bringing a young puppy to a household of cats was going to be a seamless transition? Especially a terrier mix? Sounds like she had no clue, and I really don't think it was right that she made the rescue seem like bad people on national TV.
Wouldn't it be this rescue's screening responsibility to determine that BEFORE placing the dog with Ellen? The rescue places the dog with a family full of cats but now takes it away from a family with another dog that he does get along with? That just makes no sense at all. Of course Ellen should have just contacted the rescue in the first place, but I can totally see doing exactly what she did myself. "Oh...crud...this isn't working out very well....WAIT - OMG, Jane wants a puppy! Hey, WHAT A GREAT SOLUTION!" Remember it was Ellen who was honest...she could have just omitted the fact that she gave the dog away when the rescue woman called - she could have said, "He's GREAT, thanks for asking." and the rescue would have been none the wiser. Ellen did make the rescue seem like bad people on national TV....whether that was appropriate or not I won't judge - but this particular rescue person is no "rescuer". She sold that dog for $600....that's a broker, not a rescuer. And to handle the situation the way she did reinforces that she's just in it for the money. She wanted to resell that dog again. I believe that the way she's acting now, she's making an attempt to set up a lawsuit against Ellen and Portia by filing the police report and claiming harassment. The more this goes on the more I think the rescue woman is a complete schmuck. |
| I agree with everything stated, but still wouldn't change what I told her to do or what I have done in the past to get my cat who otherwise wouldn't have been allowed to come with me. I'm a bad person I guess. I fib when needed. I can live with that. <shrugs>
I totally see how it looks, and how things could turn out... but I also knew those things rescues are worried about weren't going to be an issue with this family. They only listed the dog as something it wasn't because they weren't sure due to lack of resources. Nothing indicated from the actual visit that the havanese would remotely be the sweetest happiest go lucky dog in the world nor would what they had to say about the dog. Rescue even indicated that they felt bad about what they listed b/c of how it limited the responses. In otherwords, they didn't feel what they wrote fit. So, I guess we can go on and on about it, but the dog went to the right home, and I knew it wasn't "a risky chance." Nor do I feel the least bit guilty or bad for what I did. I do understand those who still disagree, but I guess the only thing you can do is keep note not to give me a rescue.  |
| Oh boy did this situation get buggered up!!! Ellen should not have put rescue in a bad light on tv. People, with their own forums, on tv really have great influence. Rescue should not have acted so strickly. Why couldn't they have just left the dog there, on a trial basis. Yes, they have younger kids, but, these kids are experienced dog siblings. The whole thing just stinks. And I've heard (not sure if this is true) that rescue has now place this pup with a new family. |
VerveUp wrote: I had to look this up because I had no idea what ya'll were talking about.
Thanks for that- I didn't know either!! |
I don't really know a whole lot about this fight back and forth with Ellen and the Moms&Mutts Rescue group, but I do think the rescue's rules about no kids under the age of 14 is a little ridiculous. There is a big difference between a 3 or 4 year old, and an 11-13 year old. The hairdresser's kids were 11 and 13. Surely the rescue could look at the families with older kids, who are still under age 14, on a case by case basis. What would a 13yr old do to hurt a dog that a 14yr old miraculously wouldn't??  |
| Now I hear that Oprah's personal dog trainer has offered to step in and help with training that will reunite the puppy with the hairdressers family... |
| The saga continues...........
I heard that the rescue group DID try to make it work with the hairdresser's family, but they did not want to sign anything or go over any paperwork... And now I understand that they now have a new puppy from another shelter/rescue..... (reaches for more popcorn and puts feet up) |
| I heard on the radio this morning that Ellen is so distraught that she has canceled her show for the rest of the week. Don't know if that means tapings or what. |
| If it is true, I think it means she needs a rest. |
Bosley's mom wrote: The saga continues...........
I heard that the rescue group DID try to make it work with the hairdresser's family, but they did not want to sign anything or go over any paperwork... And now I understand that they now have a new puppy from another shelter/rescue..... (reaches for more popcorn and puts feet up) I watched an interview with the rescue's lawyer last night and he confirmed that as well. The rescue wanted to work with the family but they refused to come in and sign paperwork. No one seems to know why they wouldn't other than standard Hollywood dramatics. One thing I did miss. Where is the dog now? |
| I'm sure they are keeping the new family a secret to protect them from all the threats and hate mail the rescue is getting, but the dog has found a new home (placed by rescue). |
Joahaeyo wrote: I'm sure they are keeping the new family a secret to protect them from all the threats and hate mail the rescue is getting, but the dog has found a new home (placed by rescue).
Or even from dognapping. It wouldn't surprise me that if some of the people making threats found out where the dog was that they would take it. |
| Statement from Petfinder.com:
Quote: Pet Return Policies
Many shelters and rescue groups insist, through their adoption agreements, that if a pet cannot stay with his adoptive family, the adopters must return him to the group. Why do they do this? Between 500,000 and 1 million pets adopted from shelters and rescue groups find themselves homeless and in the shelter once again. One foster mom said it best, "I found the dog on the street, starving. I nursed her back to health. She slept in my bed. I sang her back to sleep when she had nightmares when she first came to me. Then I adopted her to a wonderful family. A year later, I got a call from animal control because she was at the shelter and she was going to be euthanized. The family had gotten divorced and she ended up on death row!" This too-common experience leads rescue groups and shelter to put strict policies in place governing what happens if the adoption doesn't work out. In effect, the rescue group and shelters are promising to always be there as a safety net for the pets. This can be very comforting to adopters. Finding a New Home for Your Pet Some pet parents, who have the best intentions for their pets, feel that they can do a better job of finding a new home for their beloved pet than a shelter or rescue group. Their rationale is that they know their pet best, they can keep it in their home until the perfect new home is found, and they can help ease the transition for the pet. Often times, this is a natural transition - a family member, trusted friend, or a colleague gets to know the pet, falls in love, and the ownership of the pet is unofficially transferred to them. This is a controversial point of view, even amongst shelters and rescue groups who may feel that they have more experience identifying pitfalls and risk factors when identifying new families. Research, however, suggests that there is no difference in the success rates of the adoptions between organizations that screen heavily versus those that have more open adoption policies. It also bears noting that shelters and rescue groups, understandably, want to keep in contact with new families to be able to lend their support and continue to get updates about the pets they cared for. So we have two groups, the shelter and the pet parents, who both want what is best for the pet, but who may have very different points of view. The silver lining is that everyone really wants the best home possible for the pet. If we could ensure that same future for all the pets available on Petfinder.com, our job would be accomplished. http://www.petfinder.com/statement.html |
| Well, that was about as well written as you can get.
Thanks for finding that Nancy! |
| This sentence bothers me, and I find it very hard to believe. I would like to see the reasearch documents.
Quote: Research, however, suggests that there is no difference in the success rates of the adoptions between organizations that screen heavily versus those that have more open adoption policies.
Rescues, who are more likely the groups that screen heavily, generallly have a very low return policy. A group that doesn't screen would adopt to those folks who "adopt and dump"...like our dear Ellen....She has had at least 3 dogs in the past 3 years that she got on impulse and then returned or re-homed...a young border-collie, a Morkie, and then this little pup.. I guess Mum's and Mutts didn't do their background checks. |
Bosley's mom wrote: I guess Mum's and Mutts didn't do their background checks. How could they? They only charge $600. |
| It made news here in Aus too, I have to agree with the adoption agency, she signed and agreed to the contract for adoption.
Relly I think there is more things newsworthy & more important then her Oh Whoa is me teary eyes on world wide news. She agreed to the adoption agencys agreement and did not abide by it, so they really have no other choice but to pull the dog from the family ellen forwarded the dog onto. |
| So, its been awhile since I actually logged on, but I figured that this topic would be on here somewhere and I read most of the comments (wow there are a lot of them). I don't think however, any of us are in a place to judge. As was mentioned a few times, we don't have any information from an unbiased sources and none of us are god. I have aquired all of my pets from humane socieities, and I know from experience that neither of them have ever checked our information. We were approved for Sophie once we signed the dotted line and the place we got chucky from couldn't wait to send him out the door. Chucky has since moved to Michigan with my parents and thier three other cats(apparently whom ever had him before had him as an outdoor cat and we couldn't keep him from escaping the apartment), and I don't know whether or not there was any stipulation saying that we needed to bring him back to the shelter or not, but I know for sure that he has the perfect home where he gets to sleep on a porch all day and chase mice and squirrels all night with his two brothers and sister. I know that at the shelter we got him at there are plenty of year + cats that have been there as long as we have been here (3 years) and strongly believe that he is where he should be and where he is happy. |
Didn't find exactly what you're looking for? Search again here:
Custom Search
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|