A Discussion on Oreo's Law

[logosh]

For those that are unaware of Oreo's Law or it's backstory, it happened after a dog named Oreo was thrown off a six floor Brooklyn roof top and rescued by the ASPCA, who nursed her back to health. After recovery the ASPCA deemed Oreo aggressive after temperament tests and the decision was made to euthanize her despite another rescue group offering

Comments

[jesskathand]

1) I think abused animals deserve a chance at rehabilitation so yes I support it.

2) As long as the rescue groups that are rehabilitating them are responsible. If they do irresponsible things like adopt an abused animal to an unsuitable home, but that can still happen now regardless of this law.

3) I would only adopt an aggressive dog if there were no children living in the house. We did adopt a cat that was aggressive to certain people (mostly men). The cat has some issues and did bite my husband once. My husband was trying to break up a cat fight. Otherwise, Buster has been nonaggressive towards humans. (Other cats are his problem.)

Here's a picture of our aggressive cat:

[logosh]

Oooh, such a scary kitty :)

[jesskathand]

We live in fear everyday. hehe

[jesskathand]

and he's rubbing his head on my head right now! OMG what do I do? lol

[thexphial]

I don't know very much about how reliable rehabilitation is with aggressive animals. But, sans research, it seems like something I would support just on the surface of it. I'm sure it's a complicated issue, but if an animal can have a good life, then they should have a chance at that.

[logosh]

How reliable rehab is depends on both the animal and the people attempting to rehabilitate, IMO. Some people are good at it, some people suck. Likewise, some animals just need a little TLC and some are just plain crazy

[lareinadeluz]

This exactly.

[freakshownia]

I absolutely support it. Afaik Oreo had never actually attacked anyone at the shelter, there was no reason not to give her second chance.
No.
Sure. I'd adopt an aggressive cat if their only other option was euthanasia and I had means to care for them.

[madra_liath]

I think shelters would have to be very very open about the animal's history if allowing people to adopt rehabilitated animals, especially the larger "dangerous" dog breeds/crosses. I'd want to know why the dog was deemed dangerous/aggressive in the first place. I'd want a few visits with the dog and maybe even bring it for a walk to see how it behaves around people and other dogs before I'd consider taking it on.

Aggressive cats don't bother me - my parents' big tom is a grumpy old man who scrabs you when he's sick of your cuddles. Plus when you own a large dog, a cat's tiny little mouth doesn't hold any fear for you.

[tatjna]

Yes, but the organisation would have to check out thoroughly against whatever codes of practice you have over there, and there would still have to be a point of aggression at which a dog could be euthanised - for example where the aggression was reducing the dog's quality of life, causing it injury etc.

Also, yes I would adopt an aggressive dog. My bitch would probably be deemed aggressive (to dogs, not people) by those shelter tests. Doesn't mean she's not a great dog, or that she has actually ever damaged another dog.