My Dog Rosie Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13...-life-paws.html They may be the cutest things on six legs. And these 10-week-old Chihuahua triplets are ready for a good home. Foster careworkers are currently working with the Methuen, Massachusetts MSPCA who are looking after the puppies that were born without front legs. Kensi, Hetty and G were not only born disabled, but soon after their birth their owner died, leaving them homeless. Staff have confirmed that the puppies are adapting to life without front legs and are potential candidates for wheeled carts. The Boston Herald reported that keeping up with the other dogs has been no easy feat for the tiny pups as they work to strengthen their abs and graduate to the use of wheeled carts. MSPCA spokesman Brian Adams said: 'This is a condition that we rarely see. Even more rare is to see it occur in so many puppies from the same litter. 'These animals have amazed us with how much they can accomplish on their own. 'They don’t know they’re missing those front legs, so they have adapted and overcome the hurdles in front of them. 'They learn behaviours but also to interact and socialize with other young animals of the same mindset. 'Many animals do fantastic with front or rear wheel carts. They have fantastic outlooks, remain consistently upbeat, and basically we are ensuring they’ll have a bright future ahead of them, but they’re the ones doing all the work. 'The puppies astounded us with their upbeat and resilient nature. They immediately showed us that they could overcome their physical obstacle as they hopped and ran after each other.' The three Chihuahuas are currently in the care of experienced foster parents, Linda and Marty Jones, who have provided care to the MSPCA's homeless animals. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13...l#ixzz1GKJZJJPL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Oh man!! So wrong... but too darned cute for words! T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Pathetic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fifi Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 (edited) Sorry, PTS would be my response. Enough healthy dogs looking for homes without putting some out there that are going to need expensive equipment and ongoing assistance just to have mobility. If I as a registered breeder had a litter like that, I would do the heartbreaking but responible thing and Euthenase them. Of course if I tried to sell them to people, I would be condemned as a cruel and irresponsible breeder !!! two sets of rules :-( fifi Edited March 12, 2011 by fifi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Age Outlaw Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Sorry, PTS would be my response. Enough healthy dogs looking for homes without putting some out there that are going to need expensive equipment and ongoing assistance just to have mobility.If I as a registered breeder had a litter like that, I would do the heartbreaking but responible thing and Euthenase them. Of course if I tried to sell them to people, I would be condemned as a cruel and irresponsible breeder !!! two sets of rules :-( fifi I totally agree! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fifi Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 I'd love to see how fast the arspca would have my guts for garters, there'd be no nice media...awwww....look at those cute poor puppy stuff, it would be go for the throat have that breeder charged. fifi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
persephone Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Poor little things should never have seen the light of day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Gifts Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 I can see where you are coming from Fifi. People expect perfect specimens of the breed coming from a breeder but would still be horrified to think of a breeder pts'ing a deformed dog. But in reality what else can you do with it? Like you say, if you tried to sell them or passed them on to a shelter then you'd be damned for not taking responsibility for what you created. But if you personally bred and decided to keep and raise these pups (or sourced suitable forever homes for them yourself) then I doubt rescue would have a problem with it. Don't know enough breeders to say how they would feel though. The main difference here is that rescue willingly takes on many dogs with less than perfect bodies when they have no other option. To rescue, these pups are already alive and if there is someone out there willing to make the necessary adjustments in their lives to raise these otherwise healthy dogs then they deserve the same chance as any other dog. These pups don't necessarily know there is anything wrong with them and if they have the strength to get around with 2 legs or can successfully be fitted for a cart then some would say why not. Rather than a different set of rules I think it is a different set of circumstances responded to under different sets of values. Breeders breed with a specific purpose while rescue rescue in a response to a need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fifi Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 puppy sniffer, I can see what you are saying. But I work as a vet nurse and see these cases as their lives progress, I have no trouble seeing deaf dogs go to well prepared homes who understand their needs, but I see the burden of disabled dogs on their owners - both financially and emotionally, so while my heart and soul may weep, I still stand by what I said. I have been in rescue for a long time too, not large scale like many here, but enough to be realisitc. The ranger brings us many perfectly healthy dogs to euth each month, we try very hard to find homes for what we can. And yes - I have had a malformed pup born and made the decision to euth on the spot. I cried for days. fifi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
persephone Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 The trouble is tho.... all the publicity, and that other legless dog "faith" may now encourage folks to keep pups like this, and with other deformities , for the cuteness and the 'wow' factor Not necessary when there are millions of 4 legged ones around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fifi Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 yeah, the little handbag dog that never needs walking or real dog stuff. :D fifi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crisovar Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 I can only wonder at the strain on a body that is designed to walk on four legs not upright, and a breed not known for its hind end soundness to start with. What happens when the novelty factor wears off. I agree Fifi what a different tale it would be if a Breeder was responsible for these pups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greytmate Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 The main difference here is that rescue willingly takes on many dogs with less than perfect bodies when they have no other option. To rescue, these pups are already alive and if there is someone out there willing to make the necessary adjustments in their lives to raise these otherwise healthy dogs then they deserve the same chance as any other dog. These pups don't necessarily know there is anything wrong with them and if they have the strength to get around with 2 legs or can successfully be fitted for a cart then some would say why not.Rather than a different set of rules I think it is a different set of circumstances responded to under different sets of values. Breeders breed with a specific purpose while rescue rescue in a response to a need. You had better qualify that to 'some rescues'. In some areas of Australia it would be illegal for a rescue group to rehome these pups, and many rescues would never rehome pups like that in other states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Well all that demonstrates to me is that there are people in rescue with no brains and bleeding hearts which should be roped in. Why on earth would any one allow those puppies to live? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
persephone Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Well all that demonstrates to me is that there are people in rescue with no brains and bleeding hearts which should be roped in. Why on earth would any one allow those puppies to live? *nods* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 3 pups with the same deformity from the same litter is a worry. If I'd "bred" them, I probably would have culled them - I've seen less deformed pups culled from a litter. The novelty value would quickly wear off for any prospective owner, I agree... but right now I bet those 3 pups are bringing in loads of donations for the organisation that has them... All that said - I have a foster failure here who has a disability that many wouldn't want to take on - but I love her to death and she copes very well. It's true that when one is born with a disablility one doesn't know one is "broken"... *grin* T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paptacular! Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Poor pups, and poor owners who will eventually take them on. Who knows what other defects may be present and may lead to decreased life span? As well as the expense of the 'wheels', I'm sure there will be various other huge expenses throughout their lives. I would have PTS at birth as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 I'm pretty sure any ethical breeder would not only have culled this litter, but they would also have not bred from the bitch/male again either... I'm just flabbergasted at the fact that there were 3 (THREE) pups in this litter with the same deformity... T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jed Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 What a hoot, all those registered breeders, line breeding purebreds, being castigated by the RSPCA - someone outcrosses, the dogs are deformed, the RSPCA is strangely silent. Apparently it's ok to have deformed pups as long as you aren't a cruel purebred breeder?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liath Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 (edited) We can PTS a puppy with a birth defect because it will cause financial strain on the family and its bad for business but we cannot PTS a deformed human baby even tho it will cause financial and emotional hardship for more years then the animal would have. We can PTS an animal that is suffering becuase its the humane thing to do but we cannot PTS a human that is suffering because that is murder. A human has the right to live regardless of the circumstances. An animal doesnt, they are at our mercy. Just my 2 cents. Edited March 13, 2011 by Liath Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now