Ellen is wrong

If you haven’t heard about it already, there’s a huge kerfuffle going on regarding Ellen Degeneres and a dog she adopted from a rescue group.  Ellen signed an adoption contract stating that if she couldn’t keep the dog for any reason, she’d return it to the rescue.  When she decided the dog wasn’t a good fit for her household, Ellen gave the dog to her hairdresser, instead of contacting the adoption agency and returning it to them.  The adoption agency removed the dog from the hairdresser’s home, and today Ellen was on TV and crying and complaining that the adoption agency wasn’t being fair.

The adoption contract Ellen signed wasn’t unusual, and I totally support the adoption group for wanting to keep track of the dogs they’ve rescued and rehabbed.  I’d be very angry if a cat I’d adopted out to someone ended up passed from household to household without my knowledge.  There was nothing to stop Ellen’s hairdresser from legally applying to adopt that particular dog herself, and just because Ellen spent money on the dog, it’s not her job to be ignoring the rules the dog adoption group had set.  The rules exist for a reason, even if not everyone agrees with them.  Our cat, Derek, was adopted from Best Friends (before we realized how easily stray cats would just fall into our laps), and we have a similar agreement with them.  Technically, Derek belongs to Best Friends, but we provide his care.  If we can’t keep him, he must be returned to Best Friends.  His microchip is registered to Best Friends, not to us, and we aren’t allowed to modify it.

The adoption group is being vilified by a lot of people today, and I really feel sorry for them.  They’re receiving death and arson threats, and have had to shut down the retail establishment which supports their rescue efforts.  They can’t adopt out any dogs for fear they’d be adopting to someone who was trying to get revenge.  Ellen has basically put this group out of business; no more dogs going out, means no more dogs coming in.  I would never adopt an animal out to Ellen, anyway; this is the third dog she’s given up in the past couple of years (that I’m aware of… maybe there were more), and she makes a lot of bad decisions.  She wants a dog which is good with her cats, but she keeps adopting puppies of breeds with strong prey drive, as opposed to looking for an older dog who’s been proven to like cats.  I’ve never really cared for her one way or another, but this pretty much seals the deal for me in the “dislike” column.

I’m not big on financial retribution, but Ellen needs to apologize publicly to get her minions off the backs of the rescue, and she needs to put up enough money to put the rescue back in business.  If she really loves animals, like she claims, she’ll want to ensure that people actively working to put dogs in good homes will be able to continue their mission.  As for the dog in this situation, perhaps there was a waiting list of people wanting to adopt it, and the dog can now fairly go to the next person on that list.  It’s a cute little thing, and I’m sure someone will be happy to get in line to adopt a coveted puppy of a popular breed.

---

We’re in the minority, but this Texas newspaper columnist agrees with me, as does this HuffPo blogger.

Posted by Leigh-Ann on 10/16 at 06:34 PM

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

  1. I agree with you - it’s not an unusual circumstance when it comes to good rescue programs, or breeders for that matter, that they want to keep track of the animals they’ve adopted out.  When you sign the contract to agree to this - it’s like any other contract, you should treat it both as binding and a reflection of the integrity of your word.

    Both my dogs and my cat were rescued, in their own way - and I keep in touch with the breeders they came from, even sending Christmas cards from the pets, so that they can see that the pets have a loving home and are still doing well.

    I would think that someone like Ellen who has participated in programs to help protect the environment and animals would have been better about the little ways we help and protect animals in our own homes.

    Posted by prajantr  on  10/17  at  04:31 AM

  2. Wow, I knew about the Ellen thing but did not realize the rescue was having such problems as a result. That’s really horrible.

    Reading about your agreement with Best Friends makes me realize I should check Salem’s adoption contract. Not because I would ever rehome him--that would never happen!--but because Matt and I have arranged that if something were to happen to both of us then my sister will take Salem. She’s the only member of our families that I trust to give him the same level of care we would *and* not declaw him. I’m pretty sure that’s kosher with the rescue, as it would save them having to take him back and find him another home, but I need to make sure.

    Posted by Helena  on  10/17  at  07:22 AM

  3. This is difficult for me, but I have to respectfully disagree.  Ellen made a mistake, and she admits it and has apologized. She admits she did not read the adoption papers thoroughly. The rescue group rep seems to have over reacted. The poor dog did not have to be removed from the home the way that it was. The family should have been given the opportunity to go through the adoption approval process.  The situation should have been handled calmly with diplomacy and much more sensitivity to the family and the animal. After all, we are not talking about the animal being neglected, abused, or put in danger.

    I do understand wanting to keep track of the animals they adopt out, but it seems this could have been rectified much more simply and easily by allowing the family to fill out adoption papers and updating the agencies records.  Why didn’t they interview the family for potential adoption? Records do show they had adopted to families with children before. Were they just “grandstanding” against the celebrity to teach her a “lesson”?

    I’m sure there will be more details in the media in the near future, so I will reserve the right to change my opinion if further details come to light.  In the mean time, this is JMHO

    Posted by Brenda  on  10/17  at  02:22 PM

  4. None of us know if the dog was in “danger” in the home situation it was in, however.  And to go through the adoption process, it would be normal to remove the dog from the home first.  I have to assume that the family refused to return the dog to the agency, hence its forceable removal from the home.

    When I adopt to a family, I want to know if they’ve had other pets, and what happened to them.  Are they the sort of people who get rid of an animal if it ruins a sofa?  Do they dump animals when they move or go on vacation?  Do they euthanize rather than treat curable conditions?  The answers to those questions could easily disqualify a person from adopting from me, as well as Best Friends, North Shore Animal League, and multitudes of others.  Just because kids in the home liked the cute little puppy doesn’t mean the home was suitable.  It’s just not a question which can be answered at a glance.

    When it comes right down to it, the adoption agency is a private group raising their own funds, and they can choose to adopt to, or refuse to adopt to, anyone they wish.  They aren’t supported by tax dollars.  There are tens of thousands of similar groups across the country, each with their own mission statement, goals, and intentions.  Unless they’re actually breaking the law in some way, it’s no one’s place to second-guess them.  I’d like to see some of the Ellen-supporters in this situation start their own adoption group, see what sort of horrifying situations they have to deal with, and then decide if they’d feel comfortable giving away a puppy to a stranger.  It’s a big mean world for animals, and rescue groups have to err on the side of caution.

    Posted by Leigh-Ann  on  10/17  at  04:39 PM

  5. In response to what Brenda, above, says:

    I’ve read varying accounts, but one says that the family *was* given the opportunity to come in and legally adopt the puppy from the rescue, but they refused, at which time the rescue reclaimed the dog. Another account said that the rescue has a policy of not adopting puppies to families with children under age 14, so even if the family had completed the paperwork, they would not have been able to adopt that particular dog. I’m not sure which is true, but in either case the rescue is not in the wrong.

    My problem with the way Ellen handled this is not that she made a mistake--hey, everyone’s human, it happens. It’s the fact that her staff, as well as many others, have harassed the rescue to the point where they have had to shut down and seek police protection because of the death threats, all because they did something well within their rights.

    Posted by Helena  on  10/18  at  06:49 AM
    6. Page 1 of 1 pages

Name:

Email (required, but will not be made public):

Location:

URL:

Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

What is the sum of 3 and 2?

Next entry: History Book Club

Previous entry: Carlo is doing well

<< Back to main