I'd say
Kids have been outsmarting dogs for eons, really.

Dear Amber,
I agree with what you said in your post and you make alot of commen sense. One thing you mentioned in your post about pac members , that is where everything derives from.
I believe expecting parents that want to get rid of their dog only want to do so because they know they do not have control of their dog. So that is why they believe their dog will pose a threat to their baby. If your dog accepts you like the alpha leader, and it is up to you to become the alpha leader and that includes the training part too , you should have no problem to introduce a new member to your pack. It should apply to either a new dog or a new baby. I train my dogs from when they are puppies in different situations sometimes with alot of stress for them to deal with.
What I mean I start training obedience with the presence of a cat in the field or I use another dog putting the puppy under alot of stress, when I know the puppy wants to chase the cat or play with the other dog so I already start to make the puppy understand what he is allowed to do and what he is not allowed to do. And I keep with the time the same principle so I come to the point that my dog understands I am the alpha and I tell him what he could do and what he can't do. I have several adult males sometimes they want to fight with each other to establish who is the alpha between them, you can read their body language that they are ready to fight but they will not fight because they know the alpha leader of the pack (myself) will not allow this behavior so they avoid each other and it doesn't matter if I am there or not there.
In conclusion it is you the alpha of the pack to control your dog in any situation. So if new parents think they want to get rid of their dog they failed to be the alpha and they failed with their training, so it is much easier to get rid of their dog than to do something about it and sometimes it is too late at that point anyway because the dog is already the alpha of the pack.

Regards, Francesco Carotenuto

http://www.K9Nation1.com

I agree Francesco, it's usually the owners that need the training and not the dogs.

It's a sad fact that people who aren't already the pack leader probably won't have the time learn how to be one by the time the baby arrives. This is something that should have already been done, and if it wasn't before then it probably won't ever be...especially once they're busy with an infant and sleep deprivation. Even strong pack leaders can sometimes accidentally neglect their dog's training during the fuss that a baby brings.

In these cases, yes, it would be great if the owners decided to really devote some hard core time to fixing the problem. But if they won't...then it can be an accident waiting to happen with the victims being both the child AND the dogs. The truth, IMO, is that these people weren't that great of dog owners in the first place. These are the people that I think SHOULD rehome their dogs before the baby comes.

However (there's always a "however" with me )some people really love their dogs and just haven't been taught how to act correctly around them. They just assume that "that's just the way the dog is" and feel helpless about it, and feel forced into choosing between their dogs and their baby. If these people love their dogs and are shown a way that it CAN work, they should be given the chance. People have let me down...but man, sometimes they really surprise me and do the right thing, people I would have originally thought were hopeless.

There are some people who just naturally "get it" with dogs.

There are some people who will never, ever get it.

Most people, I think, fall into the middle...people who CAN learn, if they're given the proper information and if they're really willing to work.

my aunt and uncle put their dog to sleep because it "bit" their kid. i was angered to find out later that the dog had been laying there asleep and the kid jumped off the coffee table and landed on the dog's abdomen.

i'd have bit the kid too.

btw, the "bite" didn't even require stitches.

 Quote: alice oliver

if people think they need to get rid of their pets because they are having a baby, then they are the kind of people who do not deserve to own pets, and their dog would be better off with a different family.

While I agree with you to some degree, expecting a first child often makes people do a lot of unusual things "for the sake of the baby." For example, I know many people who got rid of two-door cars because "a baby is on the way." Granted, it is a little bit of a hassle taking the extra step to fold the seat and slide it forward. But why do these people invariable trade in their cars months and months before the baby is even born?? I've even known guys who give up *cherished* sports cars just because a baby is on the way! It's as if these people get into an odd baby-centric mind-set, yet they don't even have the baby yet so they don't really even know what's good and what's bad for the baby.

While an animal and a car is apples and oranges, I think it is a similar mindset that causes people to get rid of stuff that was once prized to them, including pets. In my household, we got rid of a perfectly good SUV (again months before the baby was born) just so we could get another one with a 3rd row of seats in anticipation of when we would be shuttling kids around to baseball and soccer games. The amazing thing is that everyone around us thought it was a great idea too. "Oh yes, you'll definitely need those extra seats." We ended up getting rid of that behemoth before our baby even hit toddlerhood! What do we have now in its place? A MINI Cooper! I'm sure, like us, they people get a lot of support for their decisions from friends and family. "Oh no, you don't want to have a dog and a newborn together." "Great idea. I remember hearing about some cat somewhere that suffocated a baby someplace. You don't want to take any chances." Ludicrous!

I want to believe that these people who think they need to get rid of their pets because they are having a baby aren't undeserving (assuming they were already responsible pet owner beforehand). It's just that impending parenthood often makes perfectly sane and rational people do weird things "for the sake of the baby" and their extended social network often buys-in and helps them rationalize the decisions.

 Quote:

It's just that impending parenthood often makes perfectly sane and rational people do weird things "for the sake of the baby" and their extended social network often buys-in and helps them rationalize the decisions.

thanks for bolstering the evidence that having dogs is more sensible than having babies.

someone who thinks dogs and babies don't or can't mix is someone who is either ignorant--if so, then, yes, educate them--or is someone for who a dog is disposable, and if not a baby, then some other excuse--in which case, they have no business owning a dog and i hope they never do again.

which is it?

well, if you READ my post i said quite plainly that if it's a case of people being misinformed and WANTING the dog, then yes, educate them.

but far, far, far too often, this is symptomatic of their general attitude towards pets, which is that they are disposable, and not a commitment for the life of the pet.

when that is the case, it is a mistake to even try to persuade them. it's better for the dog if it is rehomed. the evidence is plain: the dog isn't important to them.

i don't think my parents were any better educated about dogs than the average person. my mother didn't even have a dog growing up. yet, it would have been unthinkable to them to get rid of their dogs just because they were having a baby. i and my siblings were all born into a household with dogs.

it reveals a person's attitudes and values about dogs, that they would think they have to get rid of it. and most of the time, the vast majority of the time, it reveals that they don't value them. the baby is an excuse.

Wow, all the replies were great and I really think everyone hit the nail on the head. Perhaps in some cases it would be best for the animal himself to be removed from home as one posted stated the owners just don't know what they're doing.
And the thought of the owners not having control of the dog or being the pack leader crossed my mind - I've tried to explain to this a couple people and they just look at me like I'm crazy. =0I
I sat here and re-read my post, your posts and kind of laughed and shook my head thinking to myself...

If these people can't handle a dog... or a cat for that matter... how the life of god are they are going to handle a human child?

It was just a spontaneous thought..

I think it makes me feel better mainly to know that even though so many people have told my devotion to my GSD is hilarious.. I know it's not. I've actually even had someone approach me at the park and tell me "You're too hard on your dog" - I think he see's me there alot with Romeo...when we were working on retrieving. I just blantly stared at this person because what's to say? My dog was sitting right beside me.. NOT moving while his St Bernard was running wildly amongst the crowd jumping all over people. Enough to see let alone say.

I just feel sad and obviously hormonal from being pregnant LOL... that these poor animals are being put out by those they trust and love. I just sit here and look at my GSD who has been my best companion and pat him on the head... at least I know there's not a chance in hades I'll get rid of him ever.. I Mean it would have to be beyond extreme (such as an attack, ect). But other than that - I'm proud that I'm a mom of two young boys and expecting one.. I have a 50 lb GSD who's well behaved because I've established that relationship (Leader/member) with my dog, I train him, work with him, ect. ANyone can make the time and make the committment it's just whether or not it's worth it to them.

To me... my GSD is worth it.. he's a part of our family. And by my doing all this stuff with him keeps him part of our family. And what will be great is... 10 years from now.. when Romeo has left us and passed on.. I'll hear my children recalling GREAT memories of him. Might I note my 5 year old LOVES Romeo SO MUCH that he absolutely insists to make sure he has top notch everything. LOL.

 Quote: alice oliver

someone who thinks dogs and babies don't or can't mix is someone who is either ignorant--if so, then, yes, educate them--or is someone for who a dog is disposable, and if not a baby, then some other excuse--in which case, they have no business owning a dog and i hope they never do again.

which is it?

well, if you READ my post i said quite plainly that if it's a case of people being misinformed and WANTING the dog, then yes, educate them.

but far, far, far too often, this is symptomatic of their general attitude towards pets, which is that they are disposable, and not a commitment for the life of the pet.

I read your post, but I just wanted to elaborate on that sub-group who would benefit from being re-educated and how quirky newly-expecting parents can be. It unfortunate that people often lump pets in the group of things they need to get rid of or change before a new baby arrives.

I wonder to what degree a person's attitudes and values about dogs spill over into the way this person runs his or her life. How many times have you seen a family with well-behaved children but an out of control dog? And the converse? Rarely ever. I question whether or not these people who view dogs as disposable should even be having kids in the first place, but that opens up a whole new can of moral and ethical worms. Thank goodness that God/Mother Nature designed kids such that parents can make a multitude of mistakes raising them and the kids still grow up relatively well-adjusted. (At least that's what I am hoping for the sake of my own!)

Back to the topic of re-homing dogs, though, is that there are a finite number of resposible owners. In a perfect world, the dogs would be re-homed. I'm afraid, though, more often than not that these dogs that are sent back the shelter end up getting put down. It's tragic. I wonder if the dog would better off living with less-than-perfect non-deserving owners (as long as the owners are not abusive) than facing certain death. Is a dog's life that is only 50% fulfilling better than not living at all? If so, where do we draw the line? I definitely don't have an answer.

I better quit writing before I get all cynical. Thanksgiving, after all, is tomorrow!

Wow, I didn't know you were pregnant. Congrats!

 Quote: Amanda Chase

If these people can't handle a dog... or a cat for that matter... how the life of god are they are going to handle a human child?

I think the pack leader concept should apply to children, too! I've been the victim of children who ran the show and it 'ain't pretty!

I agree that rehoming the dog when a baby's expected is sometimes the best thing to do for the dog. But, if the people are willing to learn and do what's necessary for the wellbeing and safety of both the baby and dog, there's nothing like growing up with dogs. Of course some dogs are totally temperamentally unsuited for a home with children but most are fine with proper training and supervision.

My sister and her husband announced the coming birth of their first child by showing up at my parent's house with an Old English Sheepdog (yes it was all planned and not a impulse buy). All three of her kids learned to walk hanging on to Charley.