loveseverydog

:D Little tearies. Has anyone found any media updates about this story? Check the Stonnington Leader local paper. 2 weeks in a row.

A split lip from a fall is very common in toddlers, happens quite a lot actually they fall on their face and a tooth goes through the lip, cheek or gum. I've seen that many toddlers do it I'd put it at higher odds of causing that sort of injury than a dog bite, dog bites generally result in puncture wounds rather than cuts. sure, I understand what you are saying... I have seen that too. I guess my comment is out of frustration. Thanks for explaining that. My child hasn't done that yet but I've seen other children that have cut thier mouths by falling.

AND the owners of the dogs can also use their brains and prevent these situations occurring! The owner of the dog in this case has a duty of care towards the customers who come into the salon and has taken a risk by having a dog in the salon, a risk that can have a very high cost for the dog, for the customers or for the owner. This risk to all would not have been there if the dog had not been there. That my friend is the bottom line. Souff Depends if you want your child exposed to a biting possibility. You can only trust your own judgement, not that of a dog owner and hope for the best???. :D *big weary sigh* Diablo, you cannot be serious .... but then again, you probably think you are.... sigh Diablo, if I went into a hairdressing salon with children I would NOT expect a dog to be there. If I did I might for a moment think that I had gone to the dog grooming salon by mistake. If I was sitting in the chair and the dog wandered into the salon from the back area, I would be first to tell the owner that the dog should not be in a hairdressing salon, for more than one reason. Dont get me wrong, I love dogs. But unlike you and a few others around here, I KNOW that not all places are appropriate places for dogs to be and that danger is not far away, not only for the children and others, but for the dog itself. Souff Once again, I repeat: "The dog in this scenario" was not in the salon part of the premises. I go in this salon often. And they have another level separated by steps that does not service hair. This is where we normally see the husky. I'm not blaming the parents BUT letting your kid play on steps seems hazardous to me, with or without dog present. And the dog did not wander into the salon area. Even the father said that in his comment to the media.

Yes, the duty of care extends to all who enter premises that are open to the public. Souff I understand "Duty of Care". It was a rhetorical question.

I'm not sure what "entire" means, yes he is roughly 16months old male. I've visited him at the pound where he is kept, and the Pound carers comment on how placid and beautiful he is. They would know how to handle dogs from their own experiences.

AND the owners of the dogs can also use their brains and prevent these situations occurring! The owner of the dog in this case has a duty of care towards the customers who come into the salon and has taken a risk by having a dog in the salon, a risk that can have a very high cost for the dog, for the customers or for the owner. This risk to all would not have been there if the dog had not been there. That my friend is the bottom line. Souff "Duty of Care"? Does every owner of every business (any industry) has to look after other parents' children as well? Did you know that they had a 4 yo there at teh salon at the same time that was running a muck? Jumping up and down stairs, and generally trying to get attention from everyone? Her parents didn't even tell her to behave or sit down. The dog on the other was sitting down in the back part of the premises away from these people. Dog or not, the mother should've been more careful. Given you were not there please have some respect for the situation and not mouth off. All you have is what your friend is telling you and that is all. The owner, your friend, remember was not even there. This is a very sad situation for all and does not need someone like yourself coming onto a forum and mouthing off, making allegations. The child's family are not on here bad mouthing the owner/ hairdresser or dog so please have some respect. I respect what you're saying here, but the Parents friend "lisah" did come on board doing her own thing and making allegations of their own. One of the staff that was there is a very good friend of mine and she saw a lot more than you and I did. I AM giving this situation some respect! I have gone down there and tried to learn as much as I possibly can. What have you done? You just assumed.

Have you? Or are you relying entirely on one side of the story. The truth is out there LED but most of us can't access it. Seems to me that the child was bitten. We're only arguing about how that occured and who was responsible. Because in the absence of personal knowledge of the event, that's all that's available. Seems to me that ignorance (not lack of intelligence) was the culprit here. Anyone who knows a damn thing about dogs would NEVER put dog, food and a child into a scenario and not take into account the chance of resource guarding. Strange dog + food + toddler = recipe for disaster. That's what played out. Dogs described by their owners as loving family pets kill children. Any dog will bite if sufficiently provoked. Our duty as adults is to protect dogs and children by preventing accidents such as these. A dog unused to children (if that was the case here) is even more reason for preventative action. Your average member of the public knows sweet FA about dog behaviour or body language. A quick browse of bite statistics makes that glaringly obvious. This incident is now one of those cases reported. He won't be charged.. ever. If anyone is charged it will be his owner. Does that mean the child wasn't bitten? Of course not. Its not her fault. Its not the dogs fault. That only leaves the adults who were there. Those of us who like our dogs to remain out of the clutches of the authorities act in their best interests by keeping them safe. That means never exposing them to situations where they may be provoked to bite. Its up to dog owners to protect their pets from the unwanted attention of children, other dogs and fools. Kids are quick - they can be somewhere before you turn around. Foresight is a wonderful thing. I see you're not one of the "ignorant" ones around this forum. How can we know for sure this child was bitten? Would a hospital report satisfy you? Well, one came back sayng that the child was treated for a cut to the side of her mouth. she might've even fallen over and bit her own self. This is where we can't rely on the media. They blow everything out of proportion. A bite and attack would be extremely obvious on day 1 if it were the case, but 4 weeks already and still no sign of that. BTW: the parents have two dogs of their own at home.

AND the owners of the dogs can also use their brains and prevent these situations occurring! The owner of the dog in this case has a duty of care towards the customers who come into the salon and has taken a risk by having a dog in the salon, a risk that can have a very high cost for the dog, for the customers or for the owner. This risk to all would not have been there if the dog had not been there. That my friend is the bottom line. Souff "Duty of Care"? Does every owner of every business (any industry) has to look after other parents' children as well? Did you know that they had a 4 yo there at teh salon at the same time that was running a muck? Jumping up and down stairs, and generally trying to get attention from everyone? Her parents didn't even tell her to behave or sit down. The dog on the other was sitting down in the back part of the premises away from these people. Dog or not, the mother should've been more careful.

I don't think what happened to your child in the coffee shop Slk, is what happened in the hair salon where the dog approached the child to bite her???. A dog biting an innocent child doesn't automatically deem the dog's at fault. It's up to the parents to teach a child how to behave around other peoples dogs like I was taught to leave them alone. The dog did not approach the child. Three witnesses claims that the dog was in its' same poition when they saw the child crying - minding its own business. What we are overlooking in this discussion is this: It doesn't matter who is at fault, but what does matter is that dogs have teeth and they can use them. Fine's, dogs PTS or a jail term doesn't bring back an eye for example, and correct scarring and trauma that a child can suffer from a bite........the deed's done, nothing can turn back the clock and undo it. However, there are people who can prevent these situations occurring with children if they use their brains and that's the parents........that's really the bottom line in the true light of day. Yes, dogs do have teeth, but the fact remains that the toddler who was "allegedly" bitten at the salon, didn't look like she was attacked or mauled. If the dog did bite the little girl, it would've been plain to see on the news. I think therefore, it's only heresay what actually happened there. Almost 5 weeks and still no evidence of a bite.

I don't think what happened to your child in the coffee shop Slk, is what happened in the hair salon where the dog approached the child to bite her???. A dog biting an innocent child doesn't automatically deem the dog's at fault. It's up to the parents to teach a child how to behave around other peoples dogs like I was taught to leave them alone. The dog did not approach the child. Three witnesses claims that the dog was in its' same poition when they saw the child crying - minding its own business.

I really don't think so. Children also regularly taken to shopping centres, carparks, supermarkets, parks etc etc etc it is NOT up to the supermarket owners, car park users, shopping centre employees nor park employees to be responsible for everyones children. It is up to the PARENTS. That is half the reason we have so many uncontrolable, ratbag, no mannered children today,,because the parents don't take any responsibily for them. What ever happened to the parent being responsible for their own children?? Why isn't the parent watching the child?? So business owners now not only have to run a business, deal with customers and accounts but offer FREE babysitting for customers as well??? So that would mean IF the child was about to touch something dangerous, the business owner, (who by your thinking is responsible for the child) has FULL right to walk up and SMACK the child?? Most businesses have things kept up or away and it ISN'T because they are volunteering to take responsibilty for your children it is due to OH&S laws. +1 Parents need to take responsibility for looking after their own children and not expect staff of businesses they use to do it on their behalf. If I ran a hairdressing salon and a customer let their child run rampant I'd be telling them to get their child under control or ask them to not return unless they can find a babysitter. I know I would lose customers this way but it is not my job to look after someone else's kids. ETA: Other patrons shouldn't have to put up with it either. Agree! Just because a business is "Public Access" doesn't mean that it's open to be a playground. And the dog in this matter (salon) was away from the salon minding his own business. Provoked? No sign of actual bite. Fell? Most likely!!!!!!

I really don't think so. Children also regularly taken to shopping centres, carparks, supermarkets, parks etc etc etc it is NOT up to the supermarket owners, car park users, shopping centre employees nor park employees to be responsible for everyones children. It is up to the PARENTS. That is half the reason we have so many uncontrolable, ratbag, no mannered children today,,because the parents don't take any responsibily for them. What ever happened to the parent being responsible for their own children?? Why isn't the parent watching the child?? So business owners now not only have to run a business, deal with customers and accounts but offer FREE babysitting for customers as well??? So that would mean IF the child was about to touch something dangerous, the business owner, (who by your thinking is responsible for the child) has FULL right to walk up and SMACK the child?? Most businesses have things kept up or away and it ISN'T because they are volunteering to take responsibilty for your children it is due to OH&S laws. I agree with you here. The dog in the salon (once again I repeat) was NOT in the vicinity of the SALON area itself. It was sitting in the back section of the premises which you would jhave to go up few steps to get to. this area is not used to service clients for hair at all. So why would the parent, in this case, wander to the steps away from the salon, for her toddler to play when the salon part is big enoug and flat to be in? Mother was not thinking right.

Just when are you (and others) going to GET IT? A hairdressing salon is open for business to cut the hair of adult and junior humans - i.e., CHILDREN! Having children there to have their hair cut is how they make their money to open the doors and stay in business! THAT IS THEIR CORE BUSINESS AND CHILDREN HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE THERE IN SAFETY. A hairdressing salon is not the local DOGGY DAY CARE CENTRE - nor is it the DOGGY LUNCH ROOM! :cool: (steam is now coming off this keyboard!) Souff edited for grammar yes because hairdressers are all about safety with their scissors, spiky objects, hot presses, crimpers, bleach etc.. Sorry but a child shouldnt be allowed to roam around a hairdressers period because it isnt a safe area.. What if the kid decided that cup of bleach next to an old lady getting her hair done might be yoghurt.. A person has every right to take their pets to work if they wish, its their workplace, possibly even their home, the same rights as a mother has to taking her own kids to work to her own business. Pets in the workplace has been a slowly growing fad as it lowers stress levels, many high end companies like google allow and promote people on bringing their pets to work (so long as they behave) to increase working abilities. There is no black and white in a business, you cant say something doesnt belong in the workplace just because you think it doesn't, there is actually a day celebrated overseas which is take your pet to work day in june annually. i love what you've said here. You sound like a smart reasonable person.

I agree

You have no idea what the owners are going through right now. No one seems to care. They are my best friends. I too have a child and she is 3yo. I love that husky. But I know what my little girl is like. She rough and falls down a lot, I wouldn't even put her near the dog unless I was there to supervise. Did you see the father on the news as well? He was talking to a reporter while the ambulance was still there! Was that absolutely necessary? I even heard him chuckle a couple of times. That doesn't look like a distressed dad. While the owner was in tears. Of course, He had to keep himself composed. He has a business to run as well. Is he supposed to act like a carzy lunatic?