Toddler Attacked By Dog In Hair Salon

[Ashanali]

Ditto to Gretel's post. I really HATE dogs in places like that. Dogs belong at home OR if they have to be there, they should be confined. Why was the dog being fed while a small child was around? It makes me really angry.

You might hate dogs in places like that (I don't necessarily agree with it either) BUT why did the parent think it was okay to leave the child to run around unsupervised? It's not the job of the staff to watch children and a person sitting in a salon chair can't really do much.

Owner of shop is at fault

Parent of child is at fault

They are both morons.

And who suffers the consequences of their idiocy? the poor dog and the poor child.

Ashanali,

I disagree that the parent is at fault.

The very last thing I would expect to see in a hairdressing salon, which services all sorts and sizes of the public, would be a dog.

Children go with parents to barbers and hairdressers all over Australia every day of the week. A hairdressing salon is an appropriate place for a child to be and I never tied any of mine up while I was in the chair. They were told to stay in the salon and not go outside. They were free to do whatever in the salon, except be a nuisance to other people (or to me). Most parents in a barbers chair would not have been able to quickly intervene in this situation and any warning growls were probably drowned out by hairdryers.

A hairdressing salon is not an appropriate place for a dog to be and is fraught with risks.

Those risks will now almost definitely take this dogs life.

Souff

I respectfully agree and disagree.

Agree the dog shouldn't be there

Disagree about the parent not being responsible.

You are looking at it from the point of view of a consumer with a child. Yep, children need to go here, there and everywhere. I totally understand that.

However at 20 months (the same age as my twins), there is NO WAY that they should be left to wander around a hair salon without supervision. With proper supervision OR if they understand to sit down and behave, that's perfectly fine, but at 20 months many children are still too young to totally understand direction.

A salon has dangerous chemicals that can sometimes smell nice (tasty even), it also has many sharp implements. It is not the job of the staff to follow a child around.

I was practially raised in a hair salon. There was always someone in charge of us when we were little and as we got older we knew to keep out of the way (or else we were made to sweep floors). I was attending clients and washing hair by the age of eleven. The amount of people that come in with small children, plonk themselves in a chair and expect the staff to run around looking after them is unbelievable and incredibly rude.

This is why I say the parent is partially at fault. He knew he was going in there for a haircut. He knew he'd have to sit in the chair and not be able to watch his daughter. Sound like he expected that he could let her run around the salon.

I still don't agree with that. I think the parent should have had someone to look after the child. Dog or no dog.

(ETA: for the record I think there is accountability on both sides... moreso the salon owner than the parent)

Edited November 22, 2009 by Ashanali

[mr.mister]

I have to agree with Ashanali. Perhaps the dog shouldn't have been there, loose, but when you walk into a salon and see a big dog sitting there, wouldn't you feel inclined to keep your child close? I can understand older children being able to sit in a salon without constant adult supervision, but really, letting your toddler wander up to a big dog that was eating?? Young children in this case should always be kept close and constantly supervised - it is certainly not the job of the salon staff to constantly chase after your kids.

The salon owner was an idiot for allowing his dog loose in the salon.

The parents IMO were irresponsible allowng their very young child near such an animal without adult guidance particularly when it was eating!

Now very sadly that girl will probably have a permanent scar, and the husky will probably be pts all due to irresponsible idiocy on both sides.

[Miss B]

However at 20 months (the same age as my twins), there is NO WAY that they should be left to wander around a hair salon without supervision. With proper supervision OR if they understand to sit down and behave, that's perfectly fine, but at 20 months many children are still too young to totally understand direction.

I agree. A 20-month-old child needs constant supervision (the likes of which can't really be provided by a parent who is busy having their hair cut). I don't have children but if I did, I most certainly would not let them run loose round a hair salon! Nor would I allow them to approach a strange dog, particularly one that was eating.

I think the parent and the salon owner are both to blame.

[Souff]

I am sorry, but dog attacks can happen with LIGHTNING SPEED (it can be like a bomb going off)

A parent would need to be bloody superhuman to get out of the barbers chair and get to the child and dog before it happened.

Kids are very quick.

Dogs are very quick.

I am sorry for the dog, and for the owner, but the dog should NOT have been in the hairdressing salon imo

I hope this little girl is not permanently turned off dogs by this incident.

Souff

[mr.mister]

And that is why the child should have been next to the parent or being looked after by someone. Wouldn't have happened if the child had been restrained from walking to the dog in the first place.

If you know your child is a runner (I was) then keep them on a kiddie leash! I was always on a lead and it kept me safe from things like this.

I agree the dog shouldn't have been in the salon, but it was, and both parties should have acted accordingly to prevent this.

[Ashanali]

I am sorry, but dog attacks can happen with LIGHTNING SPEED (it can be like a bomb going off)

A parent would need to be bloody superhuman to get out of the barbers chair and get to the child and dog before it happened.

Kids are very quick.

Dogs are very quick.

You are highlighting my point. Unless the parent can effectively supervise the child then the child shouldn't be there allowed to wander around.

I hate what ifs but, what if it wasn't the dog? A 20 month old could just as easily pick up something and shove it in a power socket, they could get into a chemical, they could cut themselves on a razor, they could pull stuff down on top of them (all things I would expect to happen if my 20 month old sons were poorly supervised in my dad's salon.)

A parent simply can't move fast enough to stop any of these events. The child needed to be left with someone else or should have had someone else there to supervise.

I have an appointment at my dad's salon next week. You can bet that it's written in the diary so my husband doesn't book any work in - I need him home to look after the kids. The is NO WAY I will have a 20 month old anywhere near a salon when I know I can't watch them constantly.

[Zhou Xuanyao]

The parent is at fault because its clearly obvious there is a dog in the salon. This guy had his haircut and not to worry. Who is looking after the 20 month old ? Who would let a baby run around a salon Dog or no dog, let alone with a dog there. I cant imagine how the parents ISN'T at fault.

Facts re the dog eating at the time are not clear at this time, however ofcourse the owner of the dog takes a large portion of blame here aswell they both do.

[Souff]

And that is why the child should have been next to the parent or being looked after by someone. Wouldn't have happened if the child had been restrained from walking to the dog in the first place.

If you know your child is a runner (I was) then keep them on a kiddie leash! I was always on a lead and it kept me safe from things like this.

I agree the dog shouldn't have been in the salon, but it was, and both parties should have acted accordingly to prevent this.

Do you know that this little girl was a runner?

One of mine was a runner and she would have been strapped into her stroller if I had to have her with me.

Yes, there was a dog there, and so the parent should have taken preventative measures, it could be said.

But, my point is, the bloody dog should not have been there in the first place.

It was not a dog grooming salon.

There is a place for dogs and a hairdressing salon is not an appropriate place.

If there was not a dog there, this incident wouldn't have happened.

No way would I have taken my kids to a salon where there was a dog because I know the risks when kids meet dogs.

Souff

[GeckoTree]

Another dog will be added to the Victorian Dangerous Dog register, because of 2 idiots.

I hope the little tot wasnt too shook up over it.

[Ashanali]

One of mine was a runner and she would have been strapped into her stroller if I had to have her with me.

I know this was to someone else but this just proves that you had some sort of control over your child. You wouldn't have left them wandering around like many parents do.

but still agree the dog shouldn't have been there.

[mita]

The parent & the salon owner.....as two adults with responsibilities in the situation....are both at fault, thanks to ignorance.

The parent has responsibility for what a 2 yr old child is doing... & the salon owner has responsibility for what their dog is doing.

Their ignorance consists of:

Not knowing that a 2 yr old child is in the highest risk group for being bitten by dogs. For a host of reasons. Close supervision is necessary.

Not realising that a 2 yr old child's face is close to a dog's level & has delicate skin. So even a warning snap will cause severe damage.

Not knowing the Golden Rule to keep children away from dogs that have food.

If this situation were an equally 'at risk' one.....where 2 adults permitted a 2 yr old child free movement beside a busy highway & the child was struck by a car....then their fault would've been obvious.

Ignorance, followed by lack of responsibility, caused the problem with the toddler & the dog. If the adults involved argue that their ignorance means they were innocent of culpability. Then stupidity will do.

When will the general public have beaten into their heads.....& habits....the well- researched facts about toddlers/preschoolers & dogs?

The dog world's not making much of a fist of it.

I think there should be a Task Force on Dog Bites/Attacks....with a base somewhere medical. Like the National Health & Medical Research Council.

To work at basic info to flood the public with... like the basic Slip Slap Slop did for skin cancer. With medical, veterinary, dog behaviorists, parent group & media representatives.

Edited November 22, 2009 by mita

[Souff]

Another dog will be added to the Victorian Dangerous Dog register, because of 2 idiots.

I hope the little tot wasnt too shook up over it.

Look, I cant even call either of them idiots. They are just very typical of a lot of contemporary dog owners and parents.

There are a whole bunch of people out there who are dog owners and they really do not think that the worst can happen.

They don't see their dog as an animal and they dont factor in that the dog can react like an animal.

How their dogs behaves with them, their devoted owner, is how they think the dog will always behave. They truly do. Their dog can go to work with them every day, without incident. Or so they think. They either dont know, or dont want to know, that a dog does NOT think and does not consistently behave like a human.

There are a whole bunch of parents out there who see their children interact well with one dog and think that every other dog is OK.

As parents, they are naive and too trusting, but this does not make them idiots.

Every day we see the results of people NOT thinking of their dog as an animal, and very often the dog is placed in a situation that is NOT APPROPRIATE for an animal. Every day there are incidents and often the dog is a "trusted" pet. But often in reality, the dog was placed in a situation without appropriate limits, or had been taught wrong behaviours, and sadly an attack was waiting to happen.

When people get back to respecting their dog as an ANIMAL, and not just as their adored pet, then some commonsense might come back into the picture and dogs like this one WONT be getting PTS simply because they reacted in an instinctive manner when they were in an inappropriate place.

Souff

[Souff]

When will the general public have beaten into their heads.....& habits....the well- researched facts about toddlers/preschoolers & dogs?

Mita, this is a question I ask myself all the time.

But whilever it is easy to give a dog the name of "dangerous dog" and give the offending dog a needle to get rid of the immediate problem, I dont see governments throwing money at serious study or education programs. And it is really not going to happen if we wait for the dog world to educate people against dogs, because that is how many in the dog world will see it.

The emotion of loving animals seems to undermine the thinking of even the most logical of parents at times.

I never cease to be amazed at the risks that some intelligent, well educated people take with small children and dogs.

Souff

[Souff]

That doesn't mean that it was ok that the parent let their child approach a strange dog when it was eating.

Since when is a hairdressing salon an appropriate place for a dog to eat?

[Ashanali]

That doesn't mean that it was ok that the parent let their child approach a strange dog when it was eating.

Since when is a hairdressing salon an appropriate place for a dog to eat?

Agreed

But also, since when is a hairdressing salon an appropirate place for a child to wander around?

[Ashanali]

When people get back to respecting their dog as an ANIMAL, and not just as their adored pet, then some commonsense might come back into the picture and dogs like this one WONT be getting PTS simply because they reacted in an instinctive manner when they were in an inappropriate place.

Souff

[huski]

That doesn't mean that it was ok that the parent let their child approach a strange dog when it was eating.

Since when is a hairdressing salon an appropriate place for a dog to eat?

It's not. But at the end of the day, the dog was in the salon, it was eating, and the parent still allowed his child to wander around and approach the dog.

Does the dog being in the salon mean the parent doesn't have to remain responsible for his child, because the dog shouldn't have been there in the first place?

[Zhou Xuanyao]

Its not appropriate, however that does not absolve the parent of any responsibility, not a fraction. If the parent was supervising his baby properly it wouldnt have happened.

The baby could have pulled stuff down in the shop ontop of herself, scissors, displays, ect, slipped on cut hair and cracked her skull, run out of the store onto the road, you name it. Or does he expect the hair dressers to keep one eye on the client and the other on the kid running loose. All while the doofus sits there and gets his hair cut, the baby does whatever it wants. And in this case ofcourse there was the added danger of a loose dog.

Edited November 22, 2009 by Lo Pan

[Souff]

But also, since when is a hairdressing salon an appropirate place for a child to wander around?

I can walk past a salon in the suburbs any day of the week and see small children in their with parents, and they are not all in the barbers chairs.

It may not be appropriate in your view, but in some places it is the norm.

Souff

[Ashanali]

Its not appropriate, however that does not absolve the parent of any responsibility, not a fraction. If the parent was supervising his baby properly it wouldnt have happened.

The baby could have pulled stuff down in the shop ontop of herself, scissors, displays, ect, slipped on cut hair and cracked her skull, run out of the store onto the road, you name it. Or does he expect the hair dressers to keep one eye on the client and the other on the kid running loose. All while the doofus sits there and gets his hair cut, the baby does whatever it wants. And in this case ofcourse there was the added danger of a loose dog.

This thread is a rarity for me.

Agreeing with LoPan and disagreeing with Souff.

Hmm... I think I need a break.