Jump to content
IGNORED

Remember that puppy Erika Shupe got?


ViolaSebastian

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 165
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I wonder how things are going? Has she given it up yet because it shat on her carpet?

Well, she seems to be posting more pictures of Happy than she did of the other dogs. When she had Mocha, the only time she posted about him after she'd acquired him was to enquire about what to do about his separation anxiety. Then, with Muffin, she never posted apart from the "Meet Muffin!" album. With Happy, though, she's posted a few pictures with him, including one that says "Puppy Love!" on it, with the caption about how much she was enjoying the puppy. They also seem to walk around with him in a bag... although of course it's usually Karen or Melanie holding him. On the Facebook page, she announced when she reblogged her "Motherhood with Vitality" post, and the accompanying picture was of Erika and all the kids. Melanie's wearing a patterned bag that contains Happy (he's in the exact same bag in the "Puppy Love!" photo). It looks a little weird to be carrying him around in a bag- shouldn't he be able to see people and his surroundings? I get wanting to keep him safe but surely being able to see around him is the whole point of taking him out. But, even with the 7-year-old Mocha, Karen was carrying him when they went on walks. Surely Mocha would have been used to a leash? Even if they were getting him used to new surroundings, he was old enough to be walking on a leash, not having to be carried. I have actually seen a picture of Happy on a leash, so this adds to the in-bag weirdness.

Edited to add: they now no longer have carpets; they put in hardwood flooring. People have theorized that it may be something to do with Muffin. Exactly what, I don't know. She posted about the flooring on 14th February, and it was on 19th February that she mentioned about Muffin being rehomed (not directly on the page but replying to a comment on the photo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She also posted a video of Happy making the motions for swimming when he's put under the faucet for a bath. That in and of itself is cute, but Erika posted some comment about how they were bathing him because he "didn't quite wipe well enough," which made my eyes roll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She also posted a video of Happy making the motions for swimming when he's put under the faucet for a bath. That in and of itself is cute, but Erika posted some comment about how they were bathing him because he "didn't quite wipe well enough," which made my eyes roll.

It's eyeroll-worthy all right. My family got a cockapoo puppy around a week or so before they acquired Mocha (and because we're normal, non-neat-freaks we haven't ditched him, nor would we ever do so). They are really hairy- our puppy's been booked in for a hair cut because he has a long "fringe" that's hanging over his eyes. When our cockapoo shits my mum just scoops it up and chucks it out. What does "wiping" mean? Does Erika expect Happy to wipe his butt on the training pad or something? Because I cannot imagine Erika wiping a dog's ass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Small dogs are still DOGS. I hate it when people baby them and put up with poor behavior just because they're little. They need to learn to walk on a leash, basic obedience, interact politely with other dogs and people, not guard food/toys, etc. I have met SO many nasty little ankle biters. Their owners refuse to correct them and laugh when they growl, snap, or invade someone's personal space.

On the other hand, SENSIBLE small dog owners have wonderful little companions. They're happy, eager, well-behaved and wonderful to cuddle. They don't put up with bad behavior with small dogs any more than they would with large dogs.

I can SO easily see Happy becoming one of those dogs who doesn't like anyone except their family. Poor dog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Small dogs are still DOGS. I hate it when people baby them and put up with poor behavior just because they're little. They need to learn to walk on a leash, basic obedience, interact politely with other dogs and people, not guard food/toys, etc. I have met SO many nasty little ankle biters. Their owners refuse to correct them and laugh when they growl, snap, or invade someone's personal space.

On the other hand, SENSIBLE small dog owners have wonderful little companions. They're happy, eager, well-behaved and wonderful to cuddle. They don't put up with bad behavior with small dogs any more than they would with large dogs.

I can SO easily see Happy becoming one of those dogs who doesn't like anyone except their family. Poor dog.

Or doesn't like one or more people in the family...and then gets tossed out. Because it's all the dog's fault, of course :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do I keep reading this thread. Every time it gives me the sadz. :|

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can get seeing if a particular dog will fit in with the family, like if you're a family that goes on hikes a lot, and wanting to make sure a pup or older dog would be happy going on those hikes (I've known lazy retrievers), or if you're a home-bound family, and that lap dog ends up being highly energetic.

I will openly admit I sent a cat back to her rescue when it became clear that what she and I wanted were different things. She wanted to be left alone all the time, and I wanted a kitty who loves pettings. She did end up in a home with someone who wants a cat around and is okay without pettings. She's with a friend of mine! And I ended up with the lap cat I wanted. That's all about compatibility. I wouldn't send a cat back FOR BEING A CAT and occasionally scratching furniture instead of the catnip-infused scratching post.

But she's getting rid of puppies FOR BEING PUPPIES. It has nothing to do with lifestyle/needs incompatibility, and everything to do with things that literally every puppy will do, like have potty accidents, and almost every animal in the world, even fish, need a chance to adapt to a new home. She is incompatible with animals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can get seeing if a particular dog will fit in with the family, like if you're a family that goes on hikes a lot, and wanting to make sure a pup or older dog would be happy going on those hikes (I've known lazy retrievers), or if you're a home-bound family, and that lap dog ends up being highly energetic.

I will openly admit I sent a cat back to her rescue when it became clear that what she and I wanted were different things. She wanted to be left alone all the time, and I wanted a kitty who loves pettings. She did end up in a home with someone who wants a cat around and is okay without pettings. She's with a friend of mine! And I ended up with the lap cat I wanted. That's all about compatibility. I wouldn't send a cat back FOR BEING A CAT and occasionally scratching furniture instead of the catnip-infused scratching post.

But she's getting rid of puppies FOR BEING PUPPIES. It has nothing to do with lifestyle/needs incompatibility, and everything to do with things that literally every puppy will do, like have potty accidents, and almost every animal in the world, even fish, need a chance to adapt to a new home. She is incompatible with animals.

The biggest difference between you and her is- you sent ONE pet back she has sent THREE. You would think she would learn her lesson by now and perhaps "borrow" an animal for a week to see if she can actually handle one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the biggest difference is WHY. She sends animals back for being animals rather than trying to make sure that animal and family are compatible, which will benefit the animal as well as the family. An animal that ends up being lower energy won't be so happy being dragged out on the trails, or left behind all the time, and a family wouldn't be happy staying home on the weekends for an animal. Unhappiness all around. The first kitty wouldn't have been happy in our home. The shelter thought she'd come out of her shell, which didn't happen, and still hasn't. I should really say "we" since it was this whole family. For have kids who want to pet, you have me who loves to pet, and a husband who loves to pet, and a cat who would rather stay alone is just not going to be happy. Not fair to anyone, especially the cat.

Erika doesn't like animals being animals. She doesn't like that animals have accidents, that they need to adjust, and she's going to freak when she encounters shedding. She's sending animals back because she wants a toy that happens to breathe, a toy that requires no actual care. Even if she keeps Lucky, it'll be for now. That dog won't remain in that home for years. The dog will show her that he's still a dog, and out the dog he'll go.

I wanted a pet whose personality is compatible with my family so we can ALL be happy, and Erika wants a toy. I'm willing to deal with potty accidents, scratched furniture, etc. Erika will kick animals out for that stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the biggest difference is WHY. She sends animals back for being animals rather than trying to make sure that animal and family are compatible, which will benefit the animal as well as the family. An animal that ends up being lower energy won't be so happy being dragged out on the trails, or left behind all the time, and a family wouldn't be happy staying home on the weekends for an animal. Unhappiness all around. The first kitty wouldn't have been happy in our home. The shelter thought she'd come out of her shell, which didn't happen, and still hasn't. I should really say "we" since it was this whole family. For have kids who want to pet, you have me who loves to pet, and a husband who loves to pet, and a cat who would rather stay alone is just not going to be happy. Not fair to anyone, especially the cat.

Yes, this. I know someone who is considering re-homing a puppy. The puppy is wild and crazy. The trainer she hired said this dog was a work dog that can't turn it off and would probably need to be taken on several intense runs a day. The woman's lifestyle does not fit with that at all. She works full-time and isn't into athletics. It's better for the puppy to end up in a home that can cater to its individual needs. She wouldn't be getting rid of the puppy for peeing on something or for chewing up shoes but rather because it's better for the dog to be somewhere else. HUGE difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel for your friend, Firiel. It's not an easy thing to do, and sometimes these energy levels and personalities aren't clear until the animal is in the home. It hurts sending animals to new homes when we realize we aren't what they need.

I doubt Erika bats a lash when she sends puppies away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's eyeroll-worthy all right. My family got a cockapoo puppy around a week or so before they acquired Mocha (and because we're normal, non-neat-freaks we haven't ditched him, nor would we ever do so). They are really hairy- our puppy's been booked in for a hair cut because he has a long "fringe" that's hanging over his eyes. When our cockapoo shits my mum just scoops it up and chucks it out. What does "wiping" mean? Does Erika expect Happy to wipe his butt on the training pad or something? Because I cannot imagine Erika wiping a dog's ass.

Not to be graphic, but long haired dogs are prone to "cling-ons" and need a little help to remedy the situation. When I notice the problem with mine, it is often right around the time of their next grooming.

However, mine often need a bath every few days due to their outdoor adventures (puddle jumping, rolling in the dirt, etc) - something I'm almost certain this puppy is not allowed to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It should be obvious to Erika that a shih tzu, even one who conforms to breed characteristics (which you can never be sure of), would be a bad fit for her family. A dog who needs frequent grooming and is prone to medical issues is not ideal for parents already overwhelmed by childcare. A puppy who needs frequent and consistent training is not ideal for a family with so many young children.

Really, any dog would be a poor fit for Erika, but a more easygoing breed might have a better chance. Yet she keeps insisting that they must find a "perfect" shih tzu because that is the right dog for their family :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It should be obvious to Erika that a shih tzu, even one who conforms to breed characteristics (which you can never be sure of), would be a bad fit for her family. A dog who needs frequent grooming and is prone to medical issues is not ideal for parents already overwhelmed by childcare. A puppy who needs frequent and consistent training is not ideal for a family with so many young children.

Really, any dog would be a poor fit for Erika, but a more easygoing breed might have a better chance. Yet she keeps insisting that they must find a "perfect" shih tzu because that is the right dog for their family :roll:

Erika seems to have had more dogs than I've had socks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everytime I see this post pop back up , I fear that she has gotten rid of Happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.