Oops

I have small, very sweet dogs - until they're small and very wild. Animals are animals, people never know what may provoke them.

You have quite a disrespectful son in law and an oblivious daughter, it seems to me they are the problem. Perhaps don't have them stay at yours, hotels exist for reasons. Or send the dogs to a facility.

I'd be scared to bits if our GC, GGC acted out near our dogs. The solution is yours - who is allowed over, who is in charge.

Well the GC do need to be taught how to behave around and treat animals Luckygirl, treat the OP's dogs with kindness and respect and not be allowed to run riot.

The responsibility for keeping children (and adults) safe from dogs rests fairly and squarely with dog owners and no-one else.

From previous conversations on this forum it is clear that the responsible dog owners on this site accept that responsibility and act accordingly.

It is not up to others to learn how to act around dogs; it is up to owners to keep others safe.

In this situation I disagree Luckygirl. It's the children's parents to take responsibility which includes the father, especially when the father is behaving like a child encouraging his small children to behave inappropriately and deliberately giving them access to a room the dogs were placed in, to keep them away from the children.

Germanshepherdsmum

It seems to me that the sil is the brat who needs to be disciplined.

Spot on GSM I would be having words about that.

Smileless2012

In this situation I disagree Luckygirl. It's the children's parents to take responsibility which includes the father, especially when the father is behaving like a child encouraging his small children to behave inappropriately and deliberately giving them access to a room the dogs were placed in, to keep them away from the children.

I agree Smileless in this situation.

Clearly the parents do have a responsibility: to make sure that they do not take children to places where dogs are not under control (although they should not have to do that of course) and in this instance to abide by the rules that the OP had set for keeping the children safe - although I suspect that these were not clear and definitively stated to the parents.

It is not the responsibility of people to make themselves safe from dogs (unless of course they are wild dogs) - it is the responsibility of the owners to not allow their dogs to be a nuisance or a danger to others.

Lucky girl is correct

It is the responsibility of the dog owner and the dog owner who will be held officially accountable if a child is bitten in public or private. The dog itself will also be at risk.

Especially when you consider that as much as we can teach children how to be responsible around dogs, the following risks are still there:

Some children are too young to teach

Some children may hurt a dog by accident

Some dogs may have unknown behaviour issues until exhibited

Some dogs may hurt a child by accident

Which is why OP is absolutely responsible to ensure the safety of the dogs and the children and must make sure her boundaries are enforced with visitors

Also OP should never beblaming the children or calling them "brats" for not being aware of how to treat dogs and not having experience for dealing with something that is often seen as plaything

This is a problem between adults and needs resolving before future visits

it is the responsibility of the owners to not allow their dogs to be a nuisance or a danger to others

Which is why SIL should not have allowed the children into the LOCKED room where the dogs had been put or into the garden when the dogs were having a run, with the door shut!! A locked door is hardly "unclear" to anyone with an ounce of common sense

I do agree that:
* the dog owner would be held legally responsible
* there is a need for adult communication
* there is a need for absolute clarity about "rules" like not unlocking the door of the room the dogs have been put in and not letting the kids into the garden when the dogs are there having a run ...as clearly common sense appears to be lacking somewhere here!
* that the children are NOT to blame
*that children do not deserve to be called brats!

There is responsibility on ALL adults in this scenario, not just the dog owner!

I don’t agree that in the circumstances described the owner of the dogs would be liable had they attacked the children. She had done all she could reasonably be expected to have done to keep the dogs away from the children. It would have been the sil who, in the circumstances described, would have been directly responsible for any injury.

It is all adults responsibility (unless in public and dog is off lead)

But it is the Dog owner who has the most to lose.. ie the dog

I would have thought the parents of the child had most to lose.

You are right GSM

Adgm, my dog is small and gentle too - but any dog can react badly to a sudden shock or painful experience. Yes, children should be taught how to interact with animals (e.g. never disturb them when they're eating or sleeping).

Still, supervision is vitally important, even after the tuition/training. I aim to protect the children and also the pets, by restricting access. We can't all be vigilant all of the time.

A 2 year old is developmentally no where near learning boundaries. A 4 year old will have some boundaries, but needs supervision.

The dogs should have been behind a gate.

Neither the dogs or the children were unreasonable. The adults supervising them were.

The father is the one who is being unreasonable as is the mother for assuming that because she knows the dogs, they wont react unless provoked.

Clearly the OP has a more realistic view and approach by keeping them closed in a room and not wanting the children in the garden with them.

I agree GSM the parents and particularly the father would be responsible had there been an incident.

The story has changed quite a lot so its difficult

"Brats" though, not good at all, that's something that actually happened that OP is actually responsible for

Subsequent posts from the OP have provided more information but the story hasn't changed. She had boundaries in place for the safety of her GC and her dogs, and her s.i.l. chose to ignore them.

The OP accepts responsibility for and regrets referring to her GC as brats. Surely the main point and focus of this thread should be the stress and anxiety she suffered due to the juvenile and irresponsible behaviour of her s.i.l.?

Reread OP

I don't have to re read it VS but maybe you do.

meh

Can't be bothered with this nonsense today

No need to comment then is there.

One day Smileless I will say up and you won't say down lol

One day

Maybe VS.

Goodness, I've referenced my quite perfect grandchildren as brats - thought better of it and moved on. BTW they can be!

I bet you wouldn't if someone didn't like it Norah