Same thing could have happened to us, except we kept our 90 lbs GSD the fuck away from our newborn. "It could be any dog at any time" uh.. no shit? Genetically it's a fucking wolf. Use your fucking brains people.
If this sounds insensitive, well it is. A license should be required to possess both dogs and children.
Yeah I love dogs and I really miss having some, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't glad we didn't have one when the kid was born. Not only for the safety aspect and not having to deal with making sure the dog and baby were safe, but also one less layer of having to care for another being.
I have both and agree with your statement. I had a paragraph typed up but it's a lot to edit and it's late. Call me lazy. The tl;dr version is supporting evidence for the dogs portion, and outlines that people need to have access to abortion, and/or screening on if they're responsible enough to have kids. And now it's a paragraph again. Ugh.
It may seem like no reason to us, but the dog had some reason.
It could be something as easily overlooked as suddenly diverting your attention and energy from the dog to the new child. Dog doesn't understand, so the child becomes competition.
Huskies are smart. They certainly could understand that a new “pack member” is creating problems for them.
Huskies are also named in a list of dogs biting, harming, or even causing death. They’re down the list a ways below dogs like Pit Bulls, German Shepherds, and even chihuahuas (but those little dogs are often very poorly socialized and not trained).
Like 95% of these "studies" the results are completely useless.
Exactly like studies dealing with everything else, unless it is normalized "per 1000" etc. Comparing extremely popular dog breeds to rare ones needs to take that into account...
Kinda surprised Australian cattle dogs weren't in the list. Mine is great with our 5mo but we wouldn't leave him alone with her and we always pay close attention when she gets close to him. He ignores stuff she does that would cause him to warn us off.
...why the hell did the dog have unsupervised access to the baby
Most people don’t consider this to be a danger because it’s such a rare situation that it’s newsworthy when it happens.
It's not actually that rare. I mean, the death part is more unusual, but Dogs bite kids for no good reason all the damn time. Dogs should not be allowed around children unsupervised, period. It doesn't matter how many times "it's been fine" - all it takes is once.
Nothing with free will that isn’t another human is a potential danger to a baby. There are obviously tons of pets that don’t and having watched a lot of animals be interact with children under extremely strict supervision and controlled conditions I do think most pets do understand what the baby is and wouldn’t hurt it you can never know how they will react. Huskies are really smart and temperamental from what i understand, it’s insane to leave one near a baby
I have a husky, he's a giant lovable teddy bear made of fluff who is a giant coward in front of any sort of adversity. It's hard to imagine him hurting anything intentionally. He plays with my 2 cats and hasn't intentionally harmed them in any way.
But then, I've also seen him catch a squirrel and crush it's skull right in front of me, just because.
Dogs are still animals, and the bigger ones can still be dangerous even if they seem friendly and safe with the right conditions.
I wonder if it was an unfixed male. It's not uncommon in the animal world for other males to kill young they didn't sire.
“And to just bring awareness that it could be any dog at any time. Completely unprovoked, no matter what the history is,” Chloe said.
Reminds me of that Onion article that pops up every time there's a mass shooting in the US: "There's no possible way we could have prevented this, says only country where this routinely happens".
Dogs have co-existed with humans longer than just about any other domesticated animal. They don't do things for no reason. If the parents didn't see any signs, it's because they weren't looking hard enough.
Dogs can absolutely be dangerous. They're often bred and trained to be dangerous. They don't just spontaneously decide to be dangerous, especially after eight fucking years.
Even people sometimes just wake up day and snap for reasons beyond our control.
Now you’re generally right, most of these cases there’s some meaningful details missing and the “no history of attacks” is a lie.
We just can’t broadly apply that because we don’t know which one isn’t a lie.
Sometimes the thing that sets a dog off is just that they're older and confused. Dogs do sometimes just snap with no warnings, same as humans.
Yes they do. Any dog can have a trigger you simply have not seen yet. I literally had my rescue dog bite me after 7ish years because I startled him once. Absolutely zero signs of aggression prior to that. Every dog has a line and it is impossible to know what that like is or if it has changed.
I think this is actually a more dangerous mindset. Any animal can be unpredictable, can do something you've never seen them do before. Maybe there were signs, but maybe there weren't. Either way, it's dangerous to wait for a "sign" before you start to set boundaries on how your pet interacts with any person.
This one did.
Animals follow their instincts. If something sets them off, they are set off.
Dogs don't attack for no reason
This one did
Because it was following it's instincts
Mfw
Christ, my heart goes out to these parents. I cannot imagine the hell they're living right now, makes me sick thinking about my own 6 week old. I'll definitely be rethinking leaving him alone with our border collies from now on. It was so big of them to decide on organ donation; they're basically using their loss to save other families.
Yes, as much as I love dogs, unfortunately they can be unpredictable even if we've had them for years. Whether it's aggression (possibly around food or toys), prey drive, playing too rough, or just pure accident, they can cause a lot of harm to small bodies. I would not leave any dog unattended when an infant.
Yeah, dogs have a prey drive, and babies are unfortunately right in that “looks like prey” zone. Because, ya know, babies are prey. Your dog will fuck up a baby for the same reason that they’ll fuck up a squirrel or a cat.
Husky (the dog in this incident) prey drive is ridiculous too. I could imagine new parents might also be unable to give that sort of dog the stimulation it needs to be less likely to misbehave. * I am aware of how misbehaving is a massive understatement in this context. *
Some people put too much trust in animals. Even good animals can have "bad day".
Dogs are dangerous. Every goddamn time I got bit while working delivery the onwer would say "Oh he never bites! He is a good boy!" all the way up until a client dog attack required surgery, forever changed how I walk and keeps me in constant pain 24/7.
I fucking hate dogs, but I hate even more how dog owners make excuses for their dogs that put other people in danger.
I should not have read that. I need to go give someone a hug.
Well, have an internet one from me - I'm just gonna take this as the prompt to close the tab without clicking through and be done on the net for the night. Thanks, buddy.
I only keep dogs under 30lbs and I still wouldn't trust them near a child let alone a newborn. Jesus.
I am always fucking nervous when somebody leaves a child for a minute near me and my dog. And let me tell you: My dog is even more nervous. Just don't.
The kid was in the crib? That's confusing.
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.