Access Blogs
Ellen's dilemma: The Great Doggie Debate
What happened to Ellen DeGeneres is a truly sad situation for all parties involved. Watching her breakdown on national television talking about Iggy the dog, whom she adopted and then gave away to her hairdresser and his family, is hard to watch. The organization, "Mutts and Moms," is basically being maligned by the media [based on Ellen's side of the story]. For their sake, I hope someone is smart enough to come forward and defend themselves.
All in all, it comes down to a situation handled poorly. It angers me when I see pet message boards filled with rantings from animal lovers about people who have to give up their pets. It's not something I agree with, but of course, there are so many situations where it is the only option. You don't know anyone's situation until you walk a mile in their shoes.
Ellen's situation was that even after spending around $3,000 to properly train Iggy, the dog could not get along with her cats because it was too hyper. Could she have come up with a better solution? Possibly. She could have isolated the dog to a certain portion of her house [but any dog lover would find this to be unfair]. Rather than do what many cruel pet owners do and drop the dog off at a shelter and let others deal with it, Ellen went ahead and found a new home for the puppy. She not only found them a home, she found them a loving home with a great family who were taking great care of Iggy. To top it off, she constantly checked with the family to make sure the dog was doing well. Her biggest mistake was not alerting the rescue agency.
When "Mutts and Moms" found out that Ellen had given the dog away, they came and removed the dog from its new home. It's a move that's understandable as this violates rescue agency rules. Instead of doing the smart thing, going to the new home and doing an assessment of the family, they went and just took it away with the help of a police officer. I'm sure they will claim they believe it’s in the best interest of the dog, but isn't the best interest of the dog for it to be with people who will love and care for it? It doesn't make sense that the rescue organization would remove the dog only to spend time and resources trying to re-place it. I'd love to hear their side of the story, but as I said, right now they are not coming forward.
I hope for their sake it’s not a money issue. Their Web site basically says that in order to adopt one of their dogs you have to make a $250 "donation" to the organization. Could they be forcing this family to re-adopt Iggy to get their proper "donation"? Let's hope that isn’t the case.
I can completely understand Ellen's breakdown as I have my own decision to make on this topic. I had my own doggie drama last night with my dog that I rescued, Paris (the dog on the left in the photo). She was at the dog sitter in Burbank and twenty minutes before I arrived, someone had unlocked the houses front gate and Paris ran out. You can imagine my horror when I arrived at her house to hear that my dog had run away. Within minutes, a neighbor pointed out to us that a dog was trapped underneath her house. Paris had run underneath the house next door and was poking her head out of a small opening blocked by a gas line pipe. She was yelping as if she was injured, which put me into a panic. I tried to get her to come back the way she got in there but she wasn't budging and I was convinced she was injured. Panicked, I decided I would call the fire department to come rescue her. If they can get a cat out of a tree they can get a dog out of a crawlspace. That's when my boyfriend showed me what true love is. He found an opening into the area and crawled underneath the house on his stomach, ignoring the scurrying rats and went in and got her for me.
Right at that moment I thought, ‘This is the man I’m going to marry.’ The whole ordeal really shook me because he has asthma and is allergic to both my dogs. We've been trying to figure out our solution on how to deal with this for the past year. Our first idea was to compromise and have the dogs be outdoors when he is home, rather than letting them have free reign of the house -- but he’s still wheezing and sneezing.
After he rescued my dog, I came to the cold realization that it's not fair to him to always be sick and miserable and now I have to make the gut-wrenching decision whether or not to try and find my dogs a new home. I don't want to do it as I adore these animals more than anything in the world, but I also love this man and can’t watch him constantly be sick. It's a heartbreaking choice, but it’s one I know many people have to make.
So, please, animal lovers… give us a break from your rants.
We should absolutely trust Ellen's judgement and allow the family to keep the dog. We are lucky she found a loving family for the dog and we should trust Ellen's decision. Ellen loves dogs and would never place an animal in harms way. However, it sounds as though this company is trying to get more money by taking the dog back and charging another paying customer. Shame on them.
I saw the interview this Marina gave to Access Hollywood. She claims she lives hand to mouth and has no money. Take a closer look at this "Poor" woman. She is wearing Chanel perscription glasses. I make a decent living and I still couldn't afford those glasses, so if she as destitute as she claims, then maybe she shouldn't live beyond her means. I don't believe her fake tears. She is not thinking of this puppy. She makes up the rules as the situation fits. I don't want to hear about her sob story. She is a bully and unhappy with her own life. Misery loves company. She is also waiting for the big payoff. I'm sure then she will bend her "rules" and give the dog back.
Although I fell bad for the dog and the child. Ellen was wrong. Who do these people think they are? She knew what she signed and knew she had cats. Now boohoo on national tv! Theirs more important things to cry about in this country!
Personally I think they want the money more than a good home for the dog.You don't charge someone $3000 for a non pure bred dog. If Ellen had found that dog on the street corner and trained her herself I seriously doubt it would take $3000 to do so. I think their thought on not giving small dogs to families with children under the age of 14 is absolutely silly. Children from 7 to 14 are good pet owners. Especially if thier parents are their to help them. Children older than 14 are more likely to ignore the dog and go out with friends. Teenagers really don't take better care of thier dog because now they can go out with friends and they don't necessarily want to have the animals. I wonder if people weren't threatening these adoption agency owners would they have reconsidered. I think they might have especially if they the family had given them more money. I can't imagine any pet lover would believe it is better to keep an animal locked up in a cage a better option than giving it to children who would play with it and be as active as the dog. It is better to give a playful dog to a family who would be more likely to play with the dog as opposed to limiting the age group. Adults have less time to play with their animals so they would probably prefer an animal who was less active. Children as we all know are more active than adults and have a little more time to spend with the dog especially if they aren't involved in numerous activities themselves. Furthermore we all learned to love and take care of animals when we were children so it is better to teach them this now than wait till they are older and less likely to appreciate animals. It also teaches children responsibility and is the most effective way to teach children.
I've noticed that PETA or for that matter most activist groups carry things too far.
I believe Ellen when she says the dog was well loved.It's too bad people don't care as much about children as they do animals and themselves.They say republicans are cold but it's the liberals who have a "do as I say not as I do" attitude.
Yes, Ellen should have informed the agency that the dog moved to a new home, but that does not give the agency the right to show up witha police officer and remove the dog. They should have done a home inspection to make sure the pet was in a loving enviroment and moved on. Now the pet agency is coming out saying Ellens friends "are not the type of family that should have the dog". How do they know that unless they did a home check? This whole case saddens me. Now the pet is placed back in the animal shelter when it could be with a loving family. There are so many pets on the street why dont we take case of those instead of removing pets already with families.
Laura- I hope you find a solution for your situation as well. I am sure it must be difficult to decide and I bet you will find a loving home for your dogs if you do decide thats what it needed.
Laura, If your boyfriend is truly the man to marry, then he will do his best to live with your dogs. Have him see a doctor! You should really think twice before giving your babies away. With that said, I hope your future husband isn't allergic to your future children.
I think that the agency is way to strict and the whole point is to find a good home for the dog and now the poor dog has to go back and who knows if it will be adopted I've heard of dogs that are never adopted and get put to sleep I can assure that lady that not every dog that is adopted from that agency is with it's original owner and all an adopted puppy or dog needs is lots of love it's wrong and can be very unhealthy for the dog to be taken out of it's environment shame on them and I feel sorry for those little girls who bonded with the dog I have a 3 year old and I bought her a dog and she cries everytime the dog leaves the home to get groomed I can't imagine what those children are feeling and I can understand the way ellen feels they are making it seem like she threw the dog out in the street and abandoned the dog it's to sad that there has to be more than love to adopt a dog
I strongly believe the pet should be given back to the family. This Batkis women is so out of line. GIVE BACK IGGY to those little girls!
Ok if Ellen paid the money and adopted the dog what is any of the other peoples business. Ellen seems to have very good judgement and the people that took the dog from those sweet little kids are just mean. The only reason they did that is because they weren't getting the $250 from the new adoption. Who cares why Ellen had to give the dog up. The point is that she gave it to someone who is responsible and she kept a check up on Iggy. The poor woman caught herself doing something good and now them people have turned their back on kindness. GIVW IGGY BACK and APOLOGIZE TO BOTH THE CHILDREN AND ELLEN!!!!!!
Hello every one WAKE UP!!!
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT ELLEN HERE!! SHE HAS HER OWN TV SHOW AND LOADS OF MONEY. I WOULD SAY THAT THIS WOMAN IS RESPONSIBLE ENOUGH TO HAVE A NATINAL TV SHOW AND NOT GO BROKE, YOU PEOPLE THOUGHT SHE WAS RESPONSIBLE ENOUGH TO HAVE THE DAMN DOG IN THE FIRST PLACE SO THERE FOR SHE IS SMART AND RESPNCIBLE ENOUGH TO KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH THE DOG. SHE GAVE IT TO A LOVING HOME. NOT IN A SHELTER(WHITCH YOU ALL JUST DID) NOT ON THE STREET. IN A HOUSE WITH A FAMILY!!!!!!! AND SHE KNOWS THIS FAMILY!!! HELL ITS HER HAIR DRESSER SO YOU KNOW THEY GETTING PAID!! DUH WAKE UP. YOU JUST MAY HAVE RUINED THOSE KIDS IMMAGE OF YOU PEOPLE COMMING TO TAKE THE DOG AWAY. AND WITH THE POLICE GET A GRIP MEAN PEOPLE
i feel sorry for the little girl wanting iggy back. ellen did the right thing.her cats didnt get alon with iggy. ellen made the right decission by givin it to a loving home.so the women got her fifteen minutes of fame.. ellen did the right thing shame on that women for takeing the police officers time. besides the women is not even licensed to keep an animal shelter. llen made the right descision