I agree with this. I have struggled a bit with the "we never put a healthy dog to sleep" in the past as it is possibly a misleading statement if it's assumed that it's only physical health that is in question. But I also realise that what they generally do is assess each dog's quality of life & the options available for that dog. And of course mental/emotional health has to be a factor in making those decisions.

And yes, for the staff working in these rescues, it must be absolutely shattering to have to decide to end a dog's life, especially a dog that someone has got to know & has gained that dog's trust. From what I know, the staff are hugely supportive of each other but no-one finds it anything but heart-breaking when such decisions have to be made.

I think this thread has gone a bit off topic (my fault) but I'm happy to continue on another thread if anyone wants to?

Yes, when you've got finate resources

as, indeed, the dogs trust do.

But unfortunately when the DT turn a dog away it isn't usually the owner that has to make the decision about pts; the dogs will often just get dumped on the street, then picked up by dog warden and go to local pound who have to do something with them and in a fairly short space of time, because of lack of resource.

not really, when i worked in rescue we often got told by owners they will need to PTS their dog as they couldnt find a rescue place, including ours. we also had the strays contracts and never saw same dog come in.
which means the owner probably did PTS or passed the dog on privately.
im sure it occurs, but its not the norm.

DT are good at what they do, but their big play on 'we never put a healthy dog to sleep' makes it sound like they are more caring than the others who do have to pts, but that just isn't necessarily the case.

Apart from the RSPCA and (I think) Battersea the rescue associations all have a no healthy dog pts policy. They are all members of an overall organisation with that policy (KW may know more about it than I do.).

However defining 'healthy' is a let out. You can justlfy pts if the dog has bitten----lets face it you HAVE to. If not you would very soon fill all available spaces with un rehomable dogs (either legally or ethically).

IMO the Dogs Trust do a good job rehoming and their staff, along with staff at other rescue homes, suffer the emotional fall out. You can only try and imagine how c''p it can be unless you have been there.

rune

As for DT.
Yes they turn dogs away. Whenever I am up there they turn dogs away, but they turn them away to other reputable rescues or make suggestions about behaviourists etc.
They turn them away because they have no room and they also have an extensive waiting list.

I couldn't disagree more.
She cares about the dogs, is in it for the dogs and does more for dog care and welfare than most other people I know.

Sorry Ramble, but I have little respect for DT, they may have a no kill policy, but when the no kill policy, rehomes totally unsuitable dog to a totally unsuitable home, (so their figures remain intact) and when said home, asks for help repeatably, and receives none then one wonders what they are about, a nice feel good reputation , for the TV , or an organization that moves on dogs as soon as possible simply to keep said reputation.

All she has done is convince some of the general public that crossbreeds are healthier andf that pedigrees, especially KC Reg ones are mutants. There are now a few puppyfarmers quoting her words on their websites--Well Done Jemima so much for All for the Dogs

ps She has also admitted this on another forum