What do you think about the Ellen Degeneres drama?

Just curious, what do you think about the dog Ellen got and gave to her hairdressers family being taken away and rehomed?

At first, I was angry they took the dog away but then I heard that she signed a contract saying she would return the dog to the rescue place. She knew what she was supposed to do and broke the rules. I felt sorry for the rescue org since they are doing what they think is best for the dog. I don't agree with the org for automatically ruling out homes with small children but I dont' think Ellen should have done it without going through the proper channels.

The rescue peoples lawyer said they even offered to let them keep the dog if they came in and filled out paperwork and had a home visit! If that is true then all of this could have been avoided.

I do feel bad for Ellen and the family but I had to go through the system and so should everone else. But I do wonder if they had explained to her the procedure if she could't keep the dog. I would think if she knew the rules, she would have abided by them.

Unfortunately, mistakes seem to have been made by all. The rescue org. did not make the proper arrangements also from what I understand. They did not do the home inspection that was required-by their organizations standards-paperwork was not totally filled out, Ellen did not follow protocol. We also don't know what went on behind the scenes as well-only what we are being informed of. Just a mess all around IMO.

From what I have been reading, this rescue group is not well thought of by other folks who do rescue.
I am sad that this type of press makes folks think ALL rescue groups operate like this, and its just easier to get a dog off the net or a pet shop.
Its a shame that the group didn't check out the "new" home and if it was a good one, leave the dog. If they didn't like the home after a home visit, they could have done this removal a lot more kindly, imo.
All this could have been avoided.
Just sad all the way around.

@dash:

At first, I was angry they took the dog away but then I heard that she signed a contract saying she would return the dog to the rescue place. She knew what she was supposed to do and broke the rules. I felt sorry for the rescue org since they are doing what they think is best for the dog. I don't agree with the org for automatically ruling out homes with small children but I dont' think Ellen should have done it without going through the proper channels.

I have to agree with Dash. The fact that Ellen signed a contract with the orginization ment that she should of read the policy. Rather than notifying the rescue orginization that the dog was not a good fit in their home, she decided to just give the dog to someone else. She broke her contract. That rescue is now ruined. The fact that she went on national television and stirred up such a frenzy destroyed them. They now get hate mail and death threats. That fumes me! :mad:
Maybe the rescue orginization is good or maybe bad. Who knows. But the fact that Ellen made such a spectical of herself on TV and turned all of her viewers against the rescue isn't right. Communication people…that would of resolved this issue on a much better level.

Ellen needs to understand the rescue group can not change their policies for just her. We are all familiar with rescue groups and the fact that most of them want their dogs back if you decide not to keep it. I think Ellen should take the higher road and admit it was her fault, and just because she is a celebrity no special allowances can be or will be made.

I have always like Ellen, but I was surprised that she used her tv program to essentially "bully" the rescue organization. And did you hear the threatening message her lawyer left on the rescue's voice mail?? I'm sure she didn't expect them to get death threats or anything like that. Isn't it really up to the individual rescue organization as to how/with whom they will place their rescues (i.e., no small dogs to homes with young children?) Several years ago, I was upset with a local rescue group that placed a dog that I wanted to take with a retired couple who were home all the time (I work full time). But–I understood that they did what they thought was best for that dog.

I think in all of this, the dog is the one forgotten.
Yes, Ellen signed a contact…BUT if the home was a good one, should the dog be pulled just to make a point???
Not in my world...
I didn't hear the message re the lawyer, so can't respond to that.

The impression I got was the resue org pulled the dog because they did not think it was an appropriate home for him. And it does sound like Ellen's home (I believe with two mature adults) was quite a bit different from her hairdresser's home (with young children).

I guess the thoughts I have is the press has hurt ALL rescue groups, and Ellen should have check the contract before she moved the dog.
Seems a shame the family that loved the dog now will probably go to the pet store or the net to get a dog with no "strings" attached.

Really, the fault lies entirely with Ellen for not reading her contract {which she said she did not} and therefore not abiding by it.

That said, the rescue handled the whole thing very poorly. They also did not stick to their usual mode of operation – that is, they did not home visit on Ellen's place {probably too caught up in the thrill of having a celebrity on their list of adopters}, etc. If they had done that, they may have realized that the cats would be a problem and never have placed the dog with her to begin with.

The company should have visited the new home and evaluated it on its merits, not simply remove the dog because their policy precludes homes with children under 14. They were willing to overlook their policy for Ellen's home, so it's not as if they've never bent their own rules.

Anyway, the whole thing is a mess that could have been avoided had Ellen read her contract, and NOT taken it to a national forum.

I did see that the dog has supposedly been placed in a new home already. So he gets a happy ending.

I feel badly for the kids involved

Very well said…wish I had written as well.
Your right...

I haven't been keeping up on the whole situation, but from what I have seen-

If Ellen didn't follow the contract, she's at fault.

The Rescue should have at least given the other family a chance. Seen how the dog was doing rather than just taking it.

The Shelter/Rescue I work for has a clause in our contract that says that if it doesn't work out, we'll take the dog back. BUT if you can find it a good loving home on your own- we're not going to come take the dog back. BUT we would appreciate if people would let us know. Even a simple phone call works.

The Rescue should have checked out the home situation before adopting out any dog. We have dogs that don't do well with kids, or cats, or other dogs- so we ask before we adopt a dog to someone. Or we offer them to take the dog for the day/week as a trial run.

I think both sides failed in this situation.

I was in a similar situation with a rescue place. Before I adopted Lillie, I had adopted a puppy (2 months old) from a local rescue shelter and signed a contract. After 14 months, I had to give up the dog because he bit everyone in my family (numerous times). I had tried everything to no avail. When I got in touch with the rescue shelter, they demanded the dog back and said it was theirs. I understood that they didn't want me to just "give the dog away" to anyone or another shelter, but I felt they were a little harsh in their words. After 14 months, was it really their dog? I would never have given this dog to just any shelter. I felt hurt that in the 14 months they never called, checked up on this puppy. This was after we had made many several calls to them when we were having physical problems with the puppy. Turned out it was hip dysplasia. We did the surgery and rehab ($ 4000) and truly expected to have this dog for many, many years. I understand the contract…I just felt there should have been more follow-ups on their part.
Jodie:)

I do believe that follow up is the keep to rehoming.
Give the new homes the good and BAD info and then check and offer to help NO MATTER HOW SMALL THE ISSUE.
The thing I see happen, is that they say all is well, then at 11pm at night they call and say the can't "live" with the dog…
After keeping the lines of communication open, that is a real blow.
I am happy to report that doesn't happen often.

@sharronhurlbut:

The thing I see happen, is that they say all is well, then at 11pm at night they call and say the can't "live" with the dog…
After keeping the lines of communication open, that is a real blow.
I am happy to report that doesn't happen often.

This is OT,but still… I must admit that during Keoki's night SCREAMING months -- 6 long months -- dh did more than once say, in the middle of the night, "Just give him back to Bryan." :eek: AS IF!!!!!

In the light of day, dh'd be back to loving the puppy again, so all is/was well. 😉

When I got Gypsy 12 yrs ago from a rescue, I had to agree to give her back if I ever couldn't keep her. But to be perfectly honest, I would have found her a good home elsewhere. The shelter I got her from was based in a vet's garage; it was dark and noisy w/cats crated on one side and dogs on the other. There's no way I'd have given the dog back to that place; not after she'd been in a house and yard. No way.

Of course, I'd also agreed to keep her name unchanged. Broke that rule. Her name was Cinnamon, and they called her Cindy. Sorry. Don't like it. We re-named her Gypsy because it fit her personality better, is a better name, IMO, and sounded somewhat similar.

The woman there also insisted that I make my own dog food. That wasn't in the contract, but even if it had been I'd have broken that one too.
Geez, I sound like a scofflaw.

The woman reserved the right to visit our home at any time in the two weeks following, which I didn't like. So, I just made sure I called her every couple of days w/updates as to how Gypsy was adjusting, etc. She was satisfied with that and never did come to visit. I was glad about that, even though I understood the reasoning behind the home visits. But I knew that the home we had was WAY better than that shelter, and better than what I knew Gypsy had come from.

I hope that my situation was not the "norm". I agree that communication is one of the most important parts of a happy adoption. We wanted this to work, we tried everything. We needed their help. They did not make themselves available. Now, after giving him up almost 10 months ago, he is always in my thoughts. I love, love, love Lillie dearly. I'm thrilled that she is a part of our lives. I'm still deeply hurt that I had to give up Ricky. Through all the biting and rehab with him…we bonded. That doesn't go away so quickly. Obviously. Maybe there was a reason that I went through that. I know the good aspect is that I adopted Lillie. I know I wouldn't have done that because 1 is enough for me. Would love to have more..not possible with my life. Anyway, Ricky affected me mentally and physically. That's not something you can forget. The shelter should have been there for us. Maybe it could have worked out?
Jodie

BTW, I forgot to mention that before I adopted Ricky, I adopted his mom. A home visit was done. They saw my husband and son (special needs). It was never mentioned to me at that time that she was a biter to males only. Only after she bit my husband 4 times did I find out she was abused by a male(s). I was so desperate and didn't do my homework, that I went back to them and adopted her puppy. Didn't think it would happen twice! My fault. I learned from that experience!
Jodie:)

Looks like your connection to Basenji Forums was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.