Poll about what might be considered common knowledge in pet rescue

[unsinkable]

If a pet is adopted/rescued and the adoption doesn't work out, do you consider it common knowledge that the pet should be returned to the rescue organization?

[Katy]

Every rescue I've been to makes you sign a paper that you will do exactly that.

[BeachGal]

Our pets have always been rescues and not only was it made clear to return the pet if it wasn’t working out, some of the places also made multiple follow-up calls. We are looking for another Russian Blue cat at rescues, where they often end up, and the process to adopt at one of the shelters takes about a month.

Off on a tangent here, but the other night as my husband and I were leaving our condo, we noticed a distraught young resident behind the receptionist’s desk. She was kneeling down, crying and screaming. We went over to see if she needed help and it turned out her dog was choking and had stopped breathing. The owner was trying to remove what was in the throat but couldn’t. So I gave the dog the Heimlich Maneuver and thankfully he chucked up the thing that was stuck! So if you have a pet, might want to learn what to do and do what you can to possibly prevent it from happening.

Edited February 15, 2019 by BeachGal

[G5052]

I didn't know this until we rescued a dog. They really emphasized that though when we were filling out the paperwork and when we had the home visit. The lady that did the home visit said that they've had dogs who were picked up as strays who eventually found their way back to their shelter because they are the alternate on the microchip. The original owners didn't want them any longer.

If I had to give up our dog because of health or if we were moving, I would either find someone to take her (she has a bit of a fan club among our friends), or I would take her back to that shelter. They are really good to the dogs there. Our vet also speaks very highly of them.

Edited February 15, 2019 by G5052

[unsinkable]

7 minutes ago, BeachGal said:

Our pets have always been rescues and not only was it made clear to return the pet if it wasn’t working out, some of the places also made multiple follow-up calls. We are looking for another Russian Blue cat at rescues, where they often end up, and the process to adopt at one of the shelters takes about a month.

Off on a tangent here, but the other night as my husband and I were leaving our condo, we noticed a distraught young resident behind the receptionist’s desk. She was kneeling down, crying and screaming. We went over to see if she needed help and it turned out her dog was choking and had stopped breathing. The owner was trying to remove what was in the throat but couldn’t. So I gave the dog the Heimlich Maneuver and thankfully he chucked up the thing that was stuck! So if you have a pet, might want to learn what to do and do what you can to possibly prevent it from happening.

You are a HERO!

I am so impressed! 

Way to go!!!

[BeachGal]

9 minutes ago, unsinkable said:

You are a HERO!

I am so impressed! 

Way to go!!!

 

Not really! One of my kids started choking on green beans at dinner so I had some practice. 😬 It’s very scary though.

[Tanaqui]

I can see how you might want to sidestep this if it's been several years and something came up so it's easier to pass the dog to Grandma rather than go through the rescue again... but "new home" sort of precludes that specific scenario. What else would you do with the dog!?

[TheReader]

I voted no, but...I think it's very clearly spelled out when you do adopt from a rescue; they make it pretty dang clear. 

But in general pop, someone who's not yet adopted from a rescue, I don't think it's common knowledge. I know many people surprised to learn that when they look into adopting from a rescue organization. 

So.....spelled out and should not be news to the new animal owner? Yes.  Commonly/widely known amongst non-animal/non-rescue pet owners? Not so much. 

[SKL]

I voted yes, because that would be my first thought in the situation - I would at least call the shelter and find out what my next step should be.

But honestly, I have never given this any thought before.  I have not adopted a pet from a rescue.

I might make an exception if I suspected the rescue organization would put the animal down if the adoption didn't work out.  I'm not sure what I'd do then.

[Pen]

I put yes because I know that. And within pet rescue circles which the question implied is the arena in question , I think it’s common knowledge.    But I don’t think it’s common knowledge to the general public.

[Pawz4me]

No. I've worked in rescue a long time, and it is very much not common knowledge. And even when it's stressed during the adoption process people often won't return the pet.

[Chris in VA]

I put yes but maybe I should have said no. I only know because I rescued our cats. 

[Catwoman]

1 hour ago, BeachGal said:

Our pets have always been rescues and not only was it made clear to return the pet if it wasn’t working out, some of the places also made multiple follow-up calls. We are looking for another Russian Blue cat at rescues, where they often end up, and the process to adopt at one of the shelters takes about a month.

Off on a tangent here, but the other night as my husband and I were leaving our condo, we noticed a distraught young resident behind the receptionist’s desk. She was kneeling down, crying and screaming. We went over to see if she needed help and it turned out her dog was choking and had stopped breathing. The owner was trying to remove what was in the throat but couldn’t. So I gave the dog the Heimlich Maneuver and thankfully he chucked up the thing that was stuck! So if you have a pet, might want to learn what to do and do what you can to possibly prevent it from happening.

 

Wow! Thank goodness you were there to help!!!

[Alice]

I voted No becuase I don’t think it’s common knowledge unless you have adopted from a rescue. When we adopted our dog, they made that really clear and I was somewhat surprised. Not upset, just surprised. I thought it would have been something like “if you can’t find another home for her than return her to the rescue” but not that it was return her even if you had another home in mind. It made sense to me when I thought about it, but it wasn’t what I expected. 

[Catwoman]

1 hour ago, Tanaqui said:

I can see how you might want to sidestep this if it's been several years and something came up so it's easier to pass the dog to Grandma rather than go through the rescue again... but "new home" sort of precludes that specific scenario. What else would you do with the dog!?

 

Certainly they should return the dogs to the rescue organizations, but many people don’t do that.

Some people drop unwanted dogs off at the pound, abandon them on the side of the road somewhere, or advertise them for free on Craigslist. Some people are embarrassed to admit that the placement didn’t work out, or they are too lazy to return the dogs to the rescue organizations, or they find out that there is a small fee to return the dogs and they don’t want to pay it. Many pet owners are kind and responsible, but many adopt pets thinking it will be fun and easy, only to come to the realization that pets cost money and they demand a lot of time. I actually knew a family who told me they had gotten rid of their dog because they wanted to go on vacation but it would be expensive to leave their dog in a kennel for two weeks. I was so disgusted to hear that they could be so heartless!

There are a lot of irresponsible jerks out there.

[Selkie]

I think it is common knowledge among people who have adopted from shelters here, or at least it should be because they really stress it during the adoption process.

Among the general population, I would say no.

[alisoncooks]

3 hours ago, BeachGal said:

Off on a tangent here, but the other night as my husband and I were leaving our condo, we noticed a distraught young resident behind the receptionist’s desk. She was kneeling down, crying and screaming. We went over to see if she needed help and it turned out her dog was choking and had stopped breathing. The owner was trying to remove what was in the throat but couldn’t. So I gave the dog the Heimlich Maneuver and thankfully he chucked up the thing that was stuck! So if you have a pet, might want to learn what to do and do what you can to possibly prevent it from happening.

When DH and I were dating, we brought some steak dinner leftovers home for his dog. The dog choked on a hunk of meat and passed right out on his side.  DH pumped on the dog's chest a bit until it dislodged whatever it was. The dog stood up and started sniffing around for the (already eaten) steak. It scared the bejeezus out of dh!

As far as the poll: I don't think it's common knowledge UNLESS you are familiar with rescues or have been looking into adopting a pet. It's always been made very clear to us from rescues we've had contact with. 

Edited February 15, 2019 by alisoncooks

[Bluegoat]

I think most peopledon't know this, but are tld when they adopt.

Though I suspect that as was mentioned above, a lot of people would not consider it the rather than to give it to a close friend or family member, or find it a new home years later.  For that matter, I don't know that I would really consider that the first or best option years later, I certainly would not consider that the rescue had any say in anything to do with the dog at that point.

 

[Bluegoat]

1 minute ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

I voted yes, it's common knowlege, but I've actually seen what rescues say versus what rescues do, not always work out as they should.

One big area rescue will blacklist you if you return an animal. You don't get a second chance with a second animal, which to me, sort of defeats the purpose of requesting this. If people are honest that an animal is not working out in their household as a good match, having a blanket policy that prohibits someone from adopted another pet period if they return one- even for behavior problems- seems poor form. 

I had a bad experience with a state breed rescue that has made me more cautious of dealing with private rescues overall ever again. We adopted a Great Pyrenees years back, and were totally taken advantage of. The dog was a disaster behaviorally. They actually lied about everything with this dog, who ended up being extremely aggressive and turns out they never vetted her personally - just took former owners word for it-  and when we called after she tried to attack me and ended up attacking our other dog,  they wouldn't take her back! They told us they didn't have any foster homes available and we were just going to have to deal in the meantime. They stopped returning calls and emails. It finally blew up and we demanded they take her back or we were going to have her put down as I am not going to tolerate an aggressive 135 lb dog. What did they do? They rehomed her with someone else without warning about her behavior, and she attacked them too.  It was just horrible and left a bad taste about breed rescues for me. I know there are good ones, but we've dealt with two now who are patently dishonest and just care about getting dogs out, but don't really care about the animals after the fact. It's sad, because it only takes a couple of bad ones to taint the reputations of the sterling places. 

 

I don't generally have great feelings about rescues either.  But in a totally different direction, around here they all try and put so many conditions on adoption, many of them really quite narrow.  It's almost impossible to adopt a dog if you have kids under 10 for example.

[Farrar]

I know this now... but I honestly only learned it within the last few weeks because someone I know got a dog that turned out to have been a rescue dog that was not returned and instead was passed to her.

[Crimson Wife]

We had two rescue dogs that we ended up giving away to a different rescue organization several years later when we had a change in personal circumstances & could no longer keep them. We couldn't take them back to the original organization because it was on the opposite coast. That may have violated some clause in the adoption agreement but I don't feel any guilt over it.

[wendyroo]

18 minutes ago, Crimson Wife said:

That may have violated some clause in the adoption agreement but I don't feel any guilt over it.

We ended up putting down a rescue dog, and I'm sure that violated the contract, and I don't feel guilty. 

We adopted a beagle-mix puppy about 15 years ago.  He turned out to have some pretty severe bone and health issues, and he needed two knee operations in his first 18 months.  We did our very best for him, and things went well for a while, but after a few years the vet started suspecting that the dog was in pain much of the time.  We muddled along trying different things for a few more years, but then we had our first child.  I supervised their interactions 100%, and yet as soon as our oldest started becoming mobile, the dog would snap at him anytime he came near, even if I didn't let the baby touch the dog at all. 

By that point we had moved half-way across the country from the rescue group, and even if they had wanted to take the dog back and try to get him adopted into a child-free home, we were not convinced that was in his best interest.  We consulted our vet and a local rescue group and decided that putting him down was the best option.  

[Melissa B]

I would not consider it common knowledge. But I do think it is the job of the rescue to make it clear that the animal should be returned to the same adoption location rather than to another shelter (or abandonment.) We have signed agreement papers to that effect each time.

[MercyA]

Didn't Ellen (talk show host Ellen) get in trouble once for rehoming a dog rather than returning him/her to a rescue?

ETA: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-other-side-of-the-ell_n_69554

Edited February 15, 2019 by MercyA

[PrincessMommy]

Yes, I consider that common knowledge.  It was spelled out in every rescue we went to when looking for a dog.

[stephanier.1765]

We've never had to re-home an adopted animal but like it was mentioned by a PP, I would be worried about my standing for future adoptions. Even the local shelters have that as a stipulation and being blacklisted would make you pet free for life. 😞

 

[ktgrok]

4 hours ago, Bluegoat said:

 

I don't generally have great feelings about rescues either.  But in a totally different direction, around here they all try and put so many conditions on adoption, many of them really quite narrow.  It's almost impossible to adopt a dog if you have kids under 10 for example.

This is truth. I get their reasoning, sort of, but also think that trying to find a PERFECT home for every dog, rather than a good enough home, means a lot of dogs languish with no home at all or are euthanized for lack of space. Very much an example of letting perfect be the enemy of the good. 

Edited February 16, 2019 by Ktgrok

[alisoncooks]

2 hours ago, MercyA said:

Didn't Ellen (talk show host Ellen) get in trouble once for rehoming a dog rather than returning him/her to a rescue?

ETA: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-other-side-of-the-ell_n_69554

So did Anna Faris: https://www.google.com/amp/s/people.com/movies/anna-faris-deeply-thankful-her-former-chihuahua-has-been-rescued/amp/

[Reefgazer]

In all the rescues I have worked with and adopted animals from, returning a pet to the rescue is written into the adoption contract.

[HS Mom in NC]

No, not common knowledge.  People like me are often the person the animal was rehomed to when great Aunt Nellie had to move in with her daughter who is allergic or took in the stray that was hanging around the backyard for a couple of weeks or took one of the kittens born to the stray under the friend's shed.  There are a lot of people like me who aren't going through a rescue who would have no idea about that policy.  Also, there are people who would worry about getting any future pets if they had returned one.

[goldenecho]

Not having done a rescue (or any pets save fish for years, cause my husband is allergic), I would say that it's common sense it would go either back to the rescue or to another good home (ie., not to the pound, and especially not out on the street).  I would have thought though if the person could find another family to take the pet, though,  that that would be preferred to bringing it back.

Edited February 17, 2019 by goldenecho

[kiwik]

Ok I said yes but I didn't mean what it seems to mean. I meant within the first 6 months or so it became obvious that it simply wasn't a good fit you would go back to the rescue.  I didn't mean that the rescue still basically owned the dog and you couldn't regime them with someone who loved them if you could no longer care for the dog.

[itsheresomewhere]

Yes. Common here. 

A little OT-  We work with one that two of our dogs are from.  I like how they made each dog live with them first and they tested each dog personally.  Unlike quite a few rescues around here that openly lie to people.  A neighbor adopted a dog that is not a good fit for them or the dog.  That dog has definitely has some major issues and I highly suspect it was very abused. And guess what- it is the pup’s second re-home that we know of. Yet this rescue blacklists people for returning.  

[mom@shiloh]

If you've never rescued an animal before, I wouldn't think that it is common knowledge. It sounds like it is made clear in the paperwork though. We "rescued" our dog from a private party and if it hadn't worked out, it would never occur to me to bring him back. 

[mom@shiloh]

My experience with organizations that place dogs with new owners hasn't been the greatest though. We live in the country and said we wanted a dog who would mostly be outdoors. Oh no! Absolutely not. They didn't allow their dogs to be outdoor dogs. Never mind that we spend the majority of our time outdoors, have an invisible fence, the very happy dog gets free run of over two acres, sleeps indoors every night and is brought inside whenever he wants when the weather is below freezing. No. They had an absolute policy and couldn't be flexible to our situation.

My ds and his wife were living with my dd for a few months while they were waiting to buy a house. They wanted to get a dog during that time, so they all had to go to the shelter together with my dd's dog and because her dog didn't seem very "interested" in the new dog, they wouldn't allow them to bring one home. Ummm, her dog had just walked into a place full of dogs with lots of smells to investigate. It's really not surprising that he wasn't interested in interacting with just the one dog. 

[Pippen]

3 hours ago, mom@shiloh said:

If you've never rescued an animal before, I wouldn't think that it is common knowledge. It sounds like it is made clear in the paperwork though. We "rescued" our dog from a private party and if it hadn't worked out, it would never occur to me to bring him back. 

When I adopted from our local Humane Society, I filled out some advance paperwork for preapproval, but they didn't have me fill out the actual adoption papers where the rules were spelled out until after the cat was in my crate and in the lobby.

It was then that I learned of the no outdoors, no transfer of ownership, etc. rules.  Even if I was preapproved, that should have been made clear up front in the application process.  I did take the cat because by then I knew he was my cat, but I wasn't happy with how they handled it.  And from everything I've heard this is a reputable shelter.

[Bluegoat]

I kind of wonder about the legality/ethics of this.  Can the group really claim that kind of hold over the animal after giving it to someone?

I had a cat who was from a shelter, and we had intended him to be an indoor cat.  Now, that shelter did not require that, it was a very rural area and it would never have flown back then. But in any case, there were a number of things that lead to that decision, the main one being that he turned out to be an irredeemable indoor pisser.  A nice cat, but a male who had been left for a number of months in an abandoned house.  And after we tried all the things you are supposed to we decided that it made sense to let him live in the barn, and we arranged it so it would have a comfortable place for him to sleep.

I just don't see how any shelter or rescue would have any real ethical leg to stand on to tell us that was an illegitimate decision and they had the right to claim the cat we'd bought back - and I do't really feel all that confident that they had a clear legal right either.  Or for any other decision we made about rehoming him.

[moonflower]

I feel like once you sell something to someone, they own it and can do what they like with it (within the bounds of legality).  I know that you can't restrict people from reselling something you sell them.  But maybe a rescue dog is different and the contract reads more like leasing than purchasing.

[Bluegoat]

45 minutes ago, moonflower said:

I feel like once you sell something to someone, they own it and can do what they like with it (within the bounds of legality).  I know that you can't restrict people from reselling something you sell them.  But maybe a rescue dog is different and the contract reads more like leasing than purchasing.

 

Yeah, that's my feeling too.

I mean, it's one thing if the homing doesn't work out.

It's another if you've cared for an animal for 10 years.  It seems like a way of trying to continue to control the situation and apply your own standards of care, even when those are beyond what most people would consider normal.

[Bluegoat]

On 2/15/2019 at 9:23 PM, Ktgrok said:

This is truth. I get their reasoning, sort of, but also think that trying to find a PERFECT home for every dog, rather than a good enough home, means a lot of dogs languish with no home at all or are euthanized for lack of space. Very much an example of letting perfect be the enemy of the good. 

 

That, and often I wonder about the judgement even in regards to what is perfect.  It seems that they think any dog who might be rambunctious, because it is young and a large dog, and might therefore knock a kid over needs to be in a childless family.  I don't think that's true.

My sister adopted a couple of kittens from a rescue yesterday, and the woman who ran it was kind of a nutter.  She was very concerned that there was no vestibule so the door went directly to the outside, and that they heat with wood, and that children visit the house, and they might bother the cats who might scratch them.

[moonflower]

That lady would not have approved of the daily life of our cats when I was a kid, hah!  We chased ours around the backyard throwing snowballs at him and then he turned around and chased us.  He had the Very Sharp Claws so we knew only to piss him off so far Or Else.

A stray came and had him and his siblings in our closet, nursed them, then went off on her merry way.  We gave away the other 2 but kept him.

[RootAnn]

On 2/15/2019 at 10:52 AM, BeachGal said:

Our pets have always been rescues and not only was it made clear to return the pet if it wasn’t working out, some of the places also made multiple follow-up calls. We are looking for another Russian Blue cat at rescues, where they often end up, and the process to adopt at one of the shelters takes about a month.

@BeachGal We were lucky enough to find a Russian Blue about a month ago. Why do they often end up in rescues?

(She is still shy/skittish, but she's settling in better than we thought she would judging from her first several days hiding under DD's bed. She's very talkative, especially at night.)

And, to answer the poll, I know to return rescue pets back to the rescue if they don't work out. There is an exchange policy at the one we got her from- some 60 day trial- or something. I didn't pay too much attention because we didn't want to disappoint her by saying she could stay & then taking her back. (Once we were filling out the paperwork to adopt her, the guy told us no one else had taken her out of the cage to visit with her since she's gotten there. Poor darling!)

[BeachGal]

10 hours ago, RootAnn said:

@BeachGal We were lucky enough to find a Russian Blue about a month ago. Why do they often end up in rescues?

(She is still shy/skittish, but she's settling in better than we thought she would judging from her first several days hiding under DD's bed. She's very talkative, especially at night.)

 

I don't know for sure but maybe because they produce less of the allergens that bother humans? Breeders might breed them just for that. Around here, the breeders begin selling when the Russian Blue queen is pregnant. However, people could still be too allergic to even Russian Blues, so that might be why they go back to the breeder or to a shelter. Or, maybe the breeder can't find buyers so they give the kittens to shelters.

My son's Russian Blue was an older kitten and was given to the shelter by a breeder along with 4-5 siblings. The shelter told us that Russian Blues often get adopted quickly. We would have taken one of his siblings, because he definitely needs a buddy, but didn't know how ds's allergies would act. It turns out he's not very allergic to him at all and they can even sleep together. This was not the case with our orange tabby.

Now we're on the lookout for a buddy but not until my son, who's in college, is back from Spring Break so he can watch over them as they get to know one another. Russian Blues do tend to be super adorable!