What's Best for Iggy?

This is just such a sad story.  So many pets don't have loving homes or homes at all, and here is one for Iggy.  Now such ill thought out maneuveringis preventing him from being in a loving home. 

Sure Ellen made a mistake, and one that could have put Iggy at risk if the home was not a good one, but the shelter seems to be making a bigger mistake, and continues to compound it. 

Isn't the goal for the shelter to find loving homes for their animals?  It seems to me they have lost sight of the big picture in order to "be right"  They are wrong. 

Things are not black and white.  There are many shades of gray and that requires keeping in mind the spirit of the shelter's goals...to find loving, permanate homes for the pets in their temporary care.  Why are they insisting on putting their organization in such bad light?  Someone in their organization needs to see the bigger picture, be the voice of reason and make a more effective decision. 

My question about that is- the rescue had a contract with Ellen, not the new dog owners. So how did the rescue have any right to take the dog from the new family? They had no contract with them, right?
I could understand the rescue suing Ellen for failing her contract. But do they have the right to take the dog from someone else? Maybe there are special rules for rescues in that state?

It made me sad when I heard that they removed the dog from a good home, when that's the whole point of their mission anyway--to place animals in good homes.  I think they should just do new paperwork with the new family and return the Dog. 

The latest is they already gave Iggy to a third home. Their policy does not allow dogs in homes with children under 14..

Is that insane???? 

Anyway watch OReilly on Fox tomorrow night, he said he is on the case!

Ginger

I have read about this today. I think the only way out now may be for Ellen to buy that hairdresser's girls another dog. It's time to let it go. I hate it but what else is there to do? Sad tale for sure.

I heard, too, that the doggie went to a third party.  I love Ellen - I think she is hilarious.  But she made a mistake in not returning the dog to the agency as agreed (which she has admitted to).  Stupid rule but it is what it is. It all seems so ridiculous with so many unwanted animals in shelters, doesn't it?  The agency could have bent the rules in this case. Isn't the point to place these critters with loving owners?

It seems that the NEW owners that ELLEN gave the dog to REFUSED to come in and fill out an application. This little fact changes everything.

That being said, I would have NEVER allowed ANYONE to come in my yard and take my pet without a court order and the SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT there to enforce the court order.  Shame on the new owners for not trying hard enough.

Without knowing the history of this dog, it is impossible to say whether or not the rescue organization was justified in taking the dog back. I work with a rescue group, and believe me, dogs do not go to just anyone. They are placed with the most appropriate homes based on numerous criteria. There are times when dogs cannot be placed in homes with children. This is usually based on past history with the dog.  

Additionally, rescue organizations usually retain some kind "ownership" of the dog being adopted out. This gives them the authority to take a dog back in the event of abuse, neglect or, in this case, breech of contract.

Keep in mind, Ellen only had this dog less than 30 days. If there were problems with it not getting along with her cat, did she take the time to work on these behavior issues? No. Believe me, I work with dogs on a daily basis, and it takes much longer than 30 days to deal with behavioral issues. Did she contact the rescue group for help? No. Although this was expressly stated in the contract. She simply took the "easy" way out and gave the dog away.

As usual, the media does a fine job of publishing ONLY one side of a story and when a celebrity is involved, the story most often reflects that person's side/feelings. Ellen abused her celebrity position and her show to "air" her side of the story. Sadly, she is not even the one that adopted the dog. Her partner, Portia, adopted the dog and signed the contract.

Apparantly, in 2003, Ellen gave away another dog she had adopted for the same reason; it didn't get along with her cat.

IMHO

That is so idiotic.  Never underestimate the power of bureaucracy.  Those people running the shelter can aspire to jobs in government next.

Aloha - The Hunter

According to the lawyer tonight on OReilly he made a big deal that the truth was not being told, that Ellen wanted things her way and that the little girls family refused to come in and file an application.  OReilly missed the question he should have asked "WAS THE APPLICATION A FORMALITY OR MIGHT YOU HAVE DENIED THE DOG TO THE FAMILY once they applied ANYWAY???" Well DUH, ..I AM SURE THAT IS WHY THEY DID NOT FOLLOW PROTOCOL.

Another woman had some nasty things to say about t hos rescue group...Seems she wnt on vacation and left her pup with her best friend. They came and took the dog from the firend! The owner got the dog back but come on.. How are these rescue people... The pet Nazis???

I've not been able to find confirmation of the allegation that the family refused to fill out the application.  My question is, if this is true, was the dog removed before they were asked to do this or after?  Given the fact that there were girls 11 and 12 in the house, is the policy of no children under the arbitrary age of 14 across the board or for this particular dog?  (Evidently it got along famously with the 11 and 12 year olds - guess it couldn't read a birth certificate or calendar?)  If the dog was in a home where it was happy and doing well, is the failure to fill out the form or the lack of notification of the rescue the only justification for removing the dog?   Who showed more clearly that their priority was the dog and not their ego?  What was the priority here?  Clearly not the dog, at least for the rescue. 

 

 Yikes, Who the heck is telling the truth here?  will we ever knwow?? Watch this

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid353549946/bctid1250621489

 

I believe that video was shot right after they took the dog away and Ellen and her girlfriend went to the house.

You are right this incident might give some pause to deal with rescue groups. In our area go to the local county shelters and you will find wonderful well cared for pets to adopt.

 

Wow... when I sent the link to Sarah it was sent with this comment... "This one is right up your alley... not sure if it's real, but thought you'd want to see it."  At the time, I had no idea what kind of crazy firestorm this would become and certainly no idea where the truth would lie. I wasn't convinced at the time that it was even real. But I just read through this string of comments and "wow" is the only word that comes to mind. 

Whoa, look at the comments this has generated!  This is certainly a sizzling topic!  Here's my take: I think the rescue organization should have just checked on the situation and let it be.  It's one thing to intervene when there's a need to protect the dog, but their level of interference goes beyond the spirit of love and assistance to the animal and becomes just mean-spirited control freakishness.  Don't they have better things to do than have conniption fits about stuff like this?  And really, the age requirements for the kids in the household is just a cr*p technicality so they could exercise their "power".   The dog clearly didn't need re-rescuing.  What it comes down to is this;  we as a culture are too celebrity obsessed.  There's bigger stuff in the real world to worry about.

Sarah, great post. Here is what I want to know. Why does it matter what home it is in if the home is loving and caring for the pet. What do they want? More money? I believe that Ellen did nothing wrong and they should return the dog to the family. I wonder if there is a petition out there yet.

Sarah - How do you feel about the situation now knowing these previously unknown facts that Ellen omitted when bawling on the air....?  Do you think her viewers feel betrayed or manipulated? I'm sorry I doubted the story in the first place, and I'm sorry it appears I turned out to be right... but I'm not surprised at this "Hollywood Arrogance" that permeates our society.

Ralph, what are you talking about?  Ellen's made no secret of the fact that she rescues dogs and finds them good homes and has for a long time now.  Is there something else that you're referring to? 

 

There is a reason for the rules at adoption centers and are there to protect the adopted animal.  Ellen just needed to follow the rules.  Just because she is well known  doesn't mean she can make up her own rules.  I do work with our local shelter and people sell dogs here to go the U of MN for research , abandon animals, abuse & neglect animals.  When a dog comes back in from a home where they haven't worked out they get adjustment time, lots of love and maybe addition training on their "Problem area". If the new family (in Ellen's case) had agreed to go by the rules, were qualified to adopt this dog and signed papers they would have been the new adopters.

Ellen is a good actress but not a good role model . 

This is the whole reason I do not support the majority of these places anyways. You have people that think they have more power than they do. The dog was in a good family and the kids loved it. Now, they rip it out of that house and take it to another family. It is an awful experience for all involved. Take a step back and look at it from the dogs point of view. If he was happy, then why not leave it.