Angry Dog on Inside Edition - disarming by filing teeth?

Get to know other Positively members here.

Moderators: emmabeth, BoardHost

Post Reply
Paul&Muttley

Angry Dog on Inside Edition - disarming by filing teeth?

Post by Paul&Muttley » Mon Aug 24, 2009 2:55 pm

Last night I saw an episode on "Inside Edition" where a woman's dog would bark and snap at and bite anyone other than her or her husband. See: http://www.insideedition.com/news.aspx?storyId=3267

She said she had tried various trainers and behaviorists and even contacted Cesar Millan, who was either unable or unwilling to help. They were considering euthanasia, but a veterinarian offered an alternative he called "disarming", which involved cutting the fangs and filing down the front teeth so that the dog's bite would no longer be dangerous. :shock:

There were several highly critical opinions on this and they said that it was cruel and did not address the core behavioral issues. I tend to agree but I wonder why nothing else seemed to work. I think it would have been kinder to put this dog to sleep than continue to deal with a disarmed yet still very disturbed animal. And I am surprised that CM was unwilling or unable to help, and I don't know if Victoria was asked. If it was worth the publicity of national TV, one would think one of the famous trainers would have taken on the case. The dog's behavior did not seem that much different than other nasty little dogs that were cured by CM or VS. :roll:

Again, maybe it was just "good TV" to have this case handled in a controversial manner. Now that dog, owner, and vet have had their 5 minutes of fame, perhaps the dog can get the proper behavioral treatment that is still the underlying cause of this problem. :(

cookielover96
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 2:35 pm
Location: L.A. California

Post by cookielover96 » Mon Aug 24, 2009 6:13 pm

wow that is so sad I do wonder why they would do that to a dog. It probuably just needs help. I don't know but that is very sad... :cry:

Lis & Addy
Posts: 204
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 2:27 pm

Post by Lis & Addy » Mon Aug 24, 2009 7:21 pm

This is Cotton, an American Eskimo.

Cesar Millan did respond, and did temporarily achieve a significant change in the behavior of the dog (the episode was called "Raw Cotton"). As did, apparently, the positive reinforcement trainer, and a number of other trainers and techniques this family tried. They appear to have found nothing that they are willing to follow through on and apply consistently.

They keep this dog in the front yard with an invisible fence to contain him--nothing to separate him from unexpected visitors, or to warn the visitors that the fluffy white dog is Not Safe to Pet. They were unable to prevent the dog from biting a newspaper reporter whom they invited to the house. The list of inexcusably stupid things this family does in the process of not actually containing their dangerous dog, and not actually doing anything to make the world less scary and threatening for him, appears to be endless.

After having his canines surgically blunted, they had the gardener let him chew on his boot, to "prove" that he is now harmless.

I do sincerely believe that this is primarily attention-seeking behavior by the family, and this poor dog could have been much better off with a family whose priority was actually resolving his problems.

Lis

Paul&Muttley

Post by Paul&Muttley » Mon Aug 24, 2009 8:57 pm

Thanks for that additional information. There are very few dogs that are really so deranged that they cannot be made reasonably stable and safe to be approached and handled. Perhaps these people really did just want more attention and purposely avoided taking the proper steps to make him feel comfortable and safe in their home. I can't imagine any case where destroying a dog's natural abilities to bite would be justified. It seems more sensationalism and a cheap shot at getting on TV. And if they had already been on a CM episode, they already had that moment of fame. :?

Now they have achieved infamy. The poor dog would have been better served with a simple muzzle as a temporary measure and a truly loving home as a permanent solution. Why would they want an angry dog that was just deprived of its ability to do damage while it still tried to bite? Once the publicity goes away I'll bet this dog is relegated to a shelter or destroyed. :cry:

User avatar
Nettle
Posts: 10753
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 1:40 pm

Post by Nettle » Tue Aug 25, 2009 2:11 am

Even a toothless dog of that size could cause damage when biting, simply from the crushing power of the jaws.

One wonders what kind of idiot thought that one up. Dog would be better off PTS now. One is tempted to add "along with the owners". :evil:
They'd get another dog within the week I expect, if that one went.
A dog is never bad or naughty - it is simply being a dog

SET YOURSELF UP FOR SUCCESS

joji732
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:31 pm

Post by joji732 » Tue Aug 25, 2009 9:36 am

Actually, I got a nasty bruise from a 16 pound lhasa with very few teeth (the dog was 16 years old at the time - now 18 and still going strong!)

emmabeth
Posts: 8894
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 9:24 pm
Location: West Midlands
Contact:

Post by emmabeth » Thu Aug 27, 2009 4:36 am

I would think that they like many other people have 'tried' something in a half hearted and semi-ignorant way... not seen immediate results or not realised what the results they were seeing meant... and so moved on to something else.

This is SO common and worse when people believe that problems can be fixed immediately.

Poor Cotton.

Post Reply