Dog adoption wtf

[vccake]

So we've been looking for a few months to adopt a dog. I had a dog for 15 years, a great dog, and 4 years after her passing -- we are ready.

We find a cute pooch (2 years old) at a local shelter and apply. The application process is long. Takes two weeks. We pass and we are excited. We put down a deposit.

The pressure is the take the dog NOW. Now now now. I can meet the dog for one day and I am expected to take her then -- or maybe the next day.

I have a five year old and I don't plan on bringing him with me for the first meeting because I want to be clear headed. I would like to meet him and then my DH and DS would meet him within the week (actually 10 days because we are going out of town...I would have come home early to be prepared, etc.) This, apparently, is not acceptable. Their reasoning is they need the room for other foster dogs. I get that they want to adopt the dog -- but why not do it right to make sure it's a good match?

I am serious about the adoption and was ready to take the dog. But I want the dog to be a good fit -- I get that he won't be perfect -- in fact, there might be lots of challenges I'm ready to meet and I would not shy away. But it's a commitment and I take it very seriously .

wtf I'm pissed. I'm nervous to post this on pets and get ripped a new one, but I'm being honest -- but totally willing to see another viewpoint. I don't think a week is unreasonable and if the dog wasn't a good fit we would have waited for another dog.

[redheadbaker]

If it's a shelter that euthanizes, I can see it from their side. Every night that dog spends in the shelter, another dog is euthanized in its place.

The shelter I volunteer for operates on a first-come, first-served basis (as opposed to rescues, which will take in many apps for one dog, then choose the best adopter from those), and try to spay/neuter as many animals as possible so that they can go straight home once an adopter chooses that animal.

[hobs209]

Honestly, that's a reality of most shelters. If you want more time to get to know a dog before deciding it's a good fit, try a rescue that has dogs in foster homes. That's generally a more drawn out process.

[frauschmindy]

I think it's odd that money was exchanged before meeting the dog. We went through some annoyances with very demanding rescues before finding our dog, but none required a deposit before we met the dog to make sure it was a good match.

[vccake]

I didn't meet the dog -- you have to apply first. Sorry -- I said shelter but they are an all breed, no kill rescue. I found the dog on Petfinder and then went directly to the website.

After we were accepted, we immediately put down our deposit -- I'm sure they are probably fed up with people who back out out but we've done nothing but respond/pay quickly/show excitement bc we truly are excited.

I just can't move THAT fast.

[Deleted]

I see where you are coming from, but I really understand the POV of the shelter. There is such a demand for animals needing a spot in the shelter. If their timeline does not work for you, then I would go with another shelter. I know it's not what you want, but asking them to wait 10+ days is pretty unrealistic.

[vccake]

Jun 7, 2012 21:33:00 GMT -5 @frauschmindy said:

I think it's odd that money was exchanged before meeting the dog. We went through some annoyances with very demanding rescues before finding our dog, but none required a deposit before we met the dog to make sure it was a good match.

I didn't think too much of it -- I guess they want to know you are serious and not just wasting time. It would have made perfect frigging sense to get thoroughly screened, do a deposit and then meet (or wait) for a dog. At least, that would have made sense to me.

[DorkFish]

For a rescue, that seems really odd to me! A shelter, I kind of expect that because as PP pointed out, the longer they're in there, they're taking a space from another dog. Most rescues I know want you to be sure it's a good fit for your family because if it's not they have to take the dog back. Is there anyway you can get your deposit back if you decided to work with another rescue? Are you looking for a specific breed? If you can get your deposit back, I'd look for a rescue that's more willing to work with you and your family.

[DorkFish]

Jun 7, 2012 21:43:34 GMT -5 vccake said:

Jun 7, 2012 21:33:00 GMT -5 @frauschmindy said:

I think it's odd that money was exchanged before meeting the dog. We went through some annoyances with very demanding rescues before finding our dog, but none required a deposit before we met the dog to make sure it was a good match.

I didn't think too much of it -- I guess they want to know you are serious and not just wasting time. It would have made perfect frigging sense to get thoroughly screened, do a deposit and then meet (or wait) for a dog. At least, that would have made sense to me.

This doesn't seem weird to me. The rescue is trying to find the best home therefore taking measures to make sure that happens. Putting down a deposit/application fee/whatever shows you're serious.

[darkling_glory]

So if there are other people interested in this dog, but you have put down a deposit and made him "unavailable," the rescue and foster might understandably think you are getting cold feet by wanting to wait 10 days to decide and they are missing out on other potential adopters for this dog.

Read more: pandce.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=pets&action=display&thread=16515#ixzz1xVAzy3bG

This is what it sounds like to me. The rescue assumed this dog was adopted and most folks are SO EXCITED to get their new pooch that they rush over to pick them up. When this wasn't the case, they worried you were going to flake.

Similarly, this foster home probably said, "Hey! My foster got adopted, give me a new one!" and when you didn't come and pick up your pooch right away this might have gotten messed up.

[vccake]

All without my meeting the dog even once? I am positive I gave zero evidence of flaking - just the opposite. If they take their screening seriously, then let me take my screening seriously as well - mine is the lifetime commitment. Imo, the rescue screwed up.

[Deleted]

I don't understand why you would paid for a dog that you never met. It might be a completely uncompatible match no matter what the bio says.

[darkling_glory]

Jun 11, 2012 14:40:31 GMT -5 doglove said:

I don't understand why you would paid for a dog that you never met. It might be a completely uncompatible match no matter what the bio says.

I don't know... this is a rescue organization, not a shelter. Many (most?) rescues adopt sight unseen. That's why they have such rigorous adoption procedures - applications, home visits, references.

Especially if this was a very large, national rescue. I am not at all hung-up on the sight unseen part of it. I drove 6 hours to pick up my rescue dog and had never met him before.

[darkling_glory]

OP's dog still has two more interviews to get through (with her and then her family) - she's not planning to take the dog home after she meets it.

Read more: pandce.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=pets&action=display&thread=16515#ixzz1xWBXksik

I guess the question is -- are two more interviews standard (for this rescue) procedure?

It sounds like the rescue DOESN'T usually do/expect multiple interviews while the OP thought they did.

It is a definitely mis-communication and it sucks for all involved, but I don't think the rescue is to blame in this instance.

[vccake]

Lol why is it never ok to blame a rescue. They required an immediate deposit upon approval of your paperwork, per her email. In fact, it appeared to me and DH they wouldn't answer an email question about appointment times until we paid. And we paid fast.

But I did not care that we had to pay in advance. I wanted to bring this dog home to our family. I wanted a few days to make sure this was a good match 'within reason' bc no animal is perfect, nor did I expect that.

I stick by that I feel it is poor practice to shove a dog out the door. They were adamant that it had to be right away and not very nice about it. I guess they have been burned before so I try to understand. I know their work is selfless and difficult but I wish they had been more understanding.

[SpicedApplePie]

I think both parties are equally at fault. Did they know prior to the deposit that you wanted to have 2 meetings with this dog 10 days apart? Wanting "a few days" is completely reasonable. I would expect a potential adopter who said that to maybe see the dog on a Friday, bring the family back on Sunday, and leave with the pup at that time if all was well.

I think the rescue has been put in a bad position. They found a great adopter who really wants a dog. But now, you want to meet the dog then wait 10 days for the family to meet the dog. What if when DH meets the dog, you decide you dont want her? They have just spent nearly 2 weeks "on-hold" when they could have found another adopter. I dont think they are trying to shove the dog out the door, I think they just dont expect most adopters to insist the rescue needs to foster the dog 10 extra days after an original meeting. With that said, if they had known the timeline beforehand, I think they would have been more accommodating.

[kellbell191]

If you really are interested, go meet the dog and see what you think. The day I met Molly I knew she was ours and it made me sad to leave her for another three days so she could be spayed. I think two meetings is totally reasonable but I wouldn't make them hold the dog for ten days. In rescue land that is a long time and if they're no kill there is still a list for dogs to get in and they're having to turn dogs down. Plus, even a no kill shelter isn't as good an environment as a real home. When we adopted our second I did apply to a rescue I later just had weird feelings about so we adopted Molly from a local shelter...after going to about five. I have no qualms about working with multiple organizations and I was happy with the shelter we got her from. So if you really don't feel like you click with this rescue, keep looking. But if you really like this dog, go meet it and try to do the second meeting ASAP.

[kellbell191]

We also adopted her and went out of town a week later, our pet sitter watched her. She was just too perfect a dog for me to pass by : )

[redheadbaker]

Jun 11, 2012 17:40:46 GMT -5 vccake said:

Lol why is it never ok to blame a rescue.

No one ever said it's never ok to blame a rescue. There are absolutely rescues out there with ridiculous and unreasonable policies. However, it doesn't sound like this is one of them.

[vccake]

Jun 11, 2012 18:00:44 GMT -5 SpicedApplePie said:

I think both parties are equally at fault. Did they know prior to the deposit that you wanted to have 2 meetings with this dog 10 days apart? Wanting "a few days" is completely reasonable. I would expect a potential adopter who said that to maybe see the dog on a Friday, bring the family back on Sunday, and leave with the pup at that time if all was well.

I think the rescue has been put in a bad position. They found a great adopter who really wants a dog. But now, you want to meet the dog then wait 10 days for the family to meet the dog. What if when DH meets the dog, you decide you dont want her? They have just spent nearly 2 weeks "on-hold" when they could have found another adopter. I dont think they are trying to shove the dog out the door, I think they just dont expect most adopters to insist the rescue needs to foster the dog 10 extra days after an original meeting. With that said, if they had known the timeline beforehand, I think they would have been more accommodating.

You bring up a good point that I will - in the future -- stress the need for more time before we get too deep.