I was cruising through social media this morning before getting ready for work and came across a post about ‘consent’ in dog training/management/husbandry. The poster wrote about her perceptions regarding her fearful dog’s experience with a groomer. The poster wasn’t there, they could not possibly have known what actually happened, but that didn’t stop her from postulating on why they thought her dog was acting… fearful. I would have laughed out loud, but it was so early, I didn’t want to wake up the rest of the house.
Could it be perhaps, that you never prepared your fearful dog for physical handling? Could it be because instead of working through the hard parts, where the dog protested, probably with its mouth, and you blithely concluded that “he didn’t like [treatment/grooming/handling/whatever]” was justification enough to exonerate yourself from the process and ‘live’ with that behavior? Could it be that it is always easier to blame someone else for your shortcomings?
The dog in question is a senior. The poster writes that the dog is blind and deaf. Based on the advanced age of the dog, I would have suggested a veterinary sedation, but for whatever reason, this person decided that dropping this ancient, frail dog off to a groomer that they alleged to have trusted (indicating a prior relationship), who ended up breaching that trust in ways the owner admits they did not witness.
The statement implies a previous relationship. The poster doesn’t suggest that there were issues at any previous time. What changed? Or, more likely, is this just a fabrication to drive an agenda?
The ‘boundaries’ the poster listed are the typical things dogs object to, because they are never adequately conditioned to tolerate physical restraint or anatomical manipulation. The dog didn’t like his paws being touched, have his nails done, or his face, or his genitals. All areas that need attention because most of the grooming issues start there! Coated dogs, especially small breed dogs (poster gave no indication of size, but I’m thinking this animal is a pocket-pet type with hair.
I’m sorry, this isn’t child abuse or the advances of a sexual predator. This is a groomer, handling a dog, where every area the dog resists are generally problem areas, where there are mats, skin issues and of course, nail overgrowth, which does impact natural gait and overall foot health.
But the dog didn’t give consent for the groomer to ‘touch’ it in this way, in these places, and the groomer did these things, anyway. For shame.
The poster alleges that the groomer “[To do this]…the groomer would have HAD to restrain [the dog], to force [the dog], to subjugate [the dog] to a process that would have petrified [the dog].”
You don’t know that. You weren’t there.
The poster goes on to write “This wasn’t an accident. This wasn’t a miscommunication. This was a choice.”
Allowing your dog to go through life, having never learned to tolerate the physical handling to make his, and your lives easier, was a choice, too. But you chose to make it about the other person instead of owning your responsibility to your animal and the general public to train it how to accommodate human touch.
I guarantee you are not kidnapped off the street, thrown in the back of a van and trundled off to the OB-GYN for your annual exam. I’m pretty sure it’s not something you joyously jump out of bed and race to the doctor’s office for, either.
But you do it anyway.
To state that “This wasn’t an accident. This wasn’t a miscommunication. This was a choice” isn’t the flex you think it is, because when you point that finger, all the other ones are pointing back at you. This is your fault, and belongs squarely at your feet.
As this dog’s owner for as many years as you allege, you had ample opportunity to help it overcome that fearful behavior. You chose not to. That wasn’t an accident either. There are plenty of options available to help the dog overcome his fear. Nor was this a ‘miscommunication’. You alleged that you informed the groomer what the dogs’ ‘no-no’ spots were. Having been a groomer for a thousand years vocationally as well as recreationally, it is quite likely that the groomer was able to manage these things because your overly emotional nonsense was far enough away from the dog it was relieved and able to be managed without issue.
There’s a reason that vets prefer to remove dogs from the exam room and take them in the back. Know why?
Because owners trigger dog behavior.
Your dog was returned to you shaking and acting fearful because you reinforce that behavior with your ‘It’s OKAAAAAYYYYY’ lullabies as you coax, comfort and cajole it into catatonia.
Your acceptance of the necessity of things you dislike wrestles with your ‘consent’ at some point. You don’t like it, but it’s gonna have to happen anyway. Your health and your future rely on the general understanding (including self care) of how even uncomfortable things are occasionally necessary.
The poster waxes philosophical at this point, suggesting that the dog was traumatized (because it was shaking when the poster picked it up from the groomer) and that the groomer was thoughtless and only concerned about a ‘result’ instead of the dog’s comfort.
No, none of that happened. The story reads like every other hit piece written by emotionally weak people that cannot grok the duplicity in their statements. The narcissism is astounding, as is the utter incomprehension of what boundaries are.
As far as I can tell, if this event actually did transpire, that groomer dodged a bullet in losing this person as a client in the future.
“Consent isn’t optional.” In my book, it isn’t even an option. We teach tolerance. Maybe this poster needs to learn how to train her dog.
We’re not suggesting that the dog is going to be brutalized in order to accomplish a grooming goal, but at some point, the dog will need it’s ears cleaned, nails trimmed, beard hair stripped, and anal sacs expressed, maybe even a sanitary strip to keep the rectal area free from poop balls that accumulate on hairy dogs. I am not going to drug a dog in order to do that. I guarantee the reader who thinks giving their dog a roofie is ok, but wants their caregiver to ask the dog if they can touch it, doesn’t understand what ‘consent’ actually means.
You’d be surprised how some folks feel that way.
Overcoming deficits is pretty easy, once you put your mind to it. Train the dog. It’s easy if you start young, and stay with it throughout the dog’s life, instead of holding other people accountable for something you are more than capable of preventing instead of blaming others for.
Or, groom the dog yourself.
Problem solved.
When you’re ready for common sense, give us a call, or shoot us an email
We offer outstanding training that offer real-world results, in person, or online
