I think it's a pretty good idea actually...

If we were to ever take on a rescue dog, for me, a couple of walks with Max and Murphy wouldn't be enough to see if they got on alright. My boys are completely different dogs when on a walk to how they are at home. Having another dog move into the house is an entirely different prospect than going for a walk with a new dog. (Plus, I'd have to be sure that a new dog wouldn't have issues with the other 16 animals I have)

If all prospective owners are interviewed and homechecked thoroughly; then a short trial period should be fine. It doesn't mean the dog will automatically come back, just that the new owner can assess their own dogs in the house with other dogs (or kids, other animals, etc). A trial period wouldn't have to be applied if the dog was going to a house with no other animals.

Let's face it, the majority of people who go through an interview, homecheck, several neutral meetings, and are willing to pay to adopt a rescue dog are probably quite sensible people really.

Couldn't agree more, this is what I have been trying to say but I haven't said it as well.

I have been thinking about this and I think - in certain cases- it should be allowed.

In the case of someone like me - a one dog at a time person, I wouldn't allow it.
In the case of a person who already has 2+ dogs, I probably would allow it, subject to the rehoming interview results.

Which means really, the rehomer would have to decide on each case's merit.

I think there is a lot of pros and cons, I think on the whole no, Im sure most rescues will take the dog back if things dont work out, so its not like taking the dog home means your stuck with it if it turns into a nighmare,
But there will always be the exception to the rule, so I wouldnt rule it out,

I would be worried about the holiday dog owners with a trial period, Im sure some sickos would see it as a way to have a dog for a week or so then give it back, so people would poss go into it knowing they dont have to dedicate themself fully

With all my rescue dogs I`ve had to sign a contract saying that the dog is the `property` of the Rescue and must be handed back if for any reason I can`t keep him or her. In addition the Rescue can come and take the dog back if they feel I am not looking after him or her properly.
So in effect we have a `trial period` do we not?

i agree with allowing it but its a very important factor that its a trial period for the DOG not the owners, ie:its not to determine whether its cool to have a dog, just to make sure that there are no issues with the dog that will result in any insurpassable problems.

We got Bruno on a 2 week trial which only meant that we didnt sign the adoption papers until 2 weeks after - after the first day I KNEW he wasnt going back but its to cover everyone really.

I think practically speaking it wont work for the larger rescues with kennel space etc but for ones that rehome directly from homes and foster homes then i dont see a huge problem with it, as said people will already have been homeschecked and checked out as to their suitability and if thats done right then it shouldnt really end too badly.

dani

the same rescue space practicality problem arises for foster rescues as well, as there is always the next foster to consider...

No because you will always get numptys with the attitude well we can try before we buy. Also I have been fostering Jimmy a greyhound and he has just gone to his new forever home so am taking a ex breeder in on Sunday, and would be a nightmare if he was say returned on Sunday as the new owners had a change of heart.

You dont get a ready made dog it takes time, patience and love so adopters need to show there dedication and commitment not a trial period.

The first question I would have to ask is why the trial was being requested. Secondly I would have to ask that if a trial was being requested, then perhaps the hopeful adopters are not commited to enough to take the dog on anyway?

It can take rescue dogs upto 6 months to fully settle in (ime) I can't see that having a dog for a few days would achieve much more than several outside visits at the rescue centre with a lot less stress for the dog to boot.

There are many, many rescue dogs out there that aren't broken and don't need to be fixed (I had two of them, oh alright, one and a half! ), but they will always need more commitment than a well bred 8 week old pup due to the circumstances they find themselves in. Unless you're willing to be flexibile then I think an older resuce dog is the wrong option tbh.

I have two questions on this:

1. How is it any different (on the dog) to fostering?

2. What's the difference between doing this and getting a "get out clause" and doing it and then giving it back after a few months because it hasn't worked out?

Shouldn't rescue centres be aiming at getting it right first time and doing everything possible to achieve that?

Sorry, that's a third question isn't it ;o)