Video: Bizarre, petty, yet oddly compelling celebrity drama of the day; Update: Iggy placed in a new home?
posted at 2:12 pm on October 17, 2007 by Allahpundit
What’s more unsettling: this speech, the fact that some of her fans are phoning in death threats to the rescue group, or the rescue group refusing to give the dog to the two little girls as a matter of pride?
“It’s never gonna happen,” attorney Keith A. Fink, who is representing the owners of the Mutts and Moms agency, told FOXNews.com. “There is more of a chance that the Yankees are going to win the World Series this year.”…
“They are not going to be bullied by the Ellen DeGeneres camp,” Fink said. “It’s Hollywood culture — she thinks she’s above the contract and the law.”…
Fink told FOXNews.com that Mutts and Moms has a rule that families with children under 14 are not allowed to adopt small dogs — but they might have made an exception had DeGeneres gone through the proper channels.
“If she would have told the agency ‘I have a great friend, she’s seen the dog and loves it, can you consider her?’ I know my clients would have.”
Exit question: How much of a “donation” to Mutts and Moms is she going to have to make before they hand over the puppy?
Update: “Leave Iggy alone!”
Update: Heart-ache: “The attorney for Mutts & Moms tells ‘The Insider’ that ELLEN DeGENERES’ formerly adopted dog has been placed in a new home.” Follow the link, though, and see for yourself the shenanigans Mutts & Moms is allegedly up to with their contract claim.
Update: Ellen gets the news about Iggy: “Yeah, that’s what I just heard, too. The statement was, ‘Finally, it’s in a safe home.’ Which is an unbelievable statement. I mean, the whole situation is surreal. I can’t even begin to tell you the disbelief.”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Maybe she should get John Edwards to send an unpaid intern to get the mutt, seeing as how the whole PS3 craze has passed and there’s no need to send interns to WAL*MART to cut in line and get a PS3 for Snob Jr.
Neo on October 17, 2007 at 2:17 PM
Typical hollywierd elitist, Ellen DeGeneres obviously thinks things like contracts and laws dont apply to her because she is a big celebrity. Boo, frikin hoo.
doriangrey on October 17, 2007 at 2:17 PM
Yah, they should just euthanize the puppy, that will show her.
Sheesh there are no good guys in this story.
JayHaw Phrenzie on October 17, 2007 at 2:19 PM
I blame Bush. (JK)
I’m torn. The dog would probably do well with the family and I think M&M’s policy is silly, but a contract is a contract and can’t simply be violated ’cause you think it should.
amerpundit on October 17, 2007 at 2:19 PM
Then why not just let the kids have their dog back?
I have no sympathy for celebrities using their status to get things others wouldn’t be able to do, but this is stupid.
But come on, this is a stupid contract. For one, all Ellen had to do was lie about having given the dog away. For two, they’re saying they don’t actually have a problem with the kids having the dog.
She may have gone over the top here with the crying, but the rescue agency is being incredibly stupid.
Esthier on October 17, 2007 at 2:23 PM
Bullying by tears. What a spectacle.
RushBaby on October 17, 2007 at 2:24 PM
Personally, if I were the hairdresser, I wouldn’t have let that place take away my dog.
Esthier on October 17, 2007 at 2:26 PM
is there any truth to the rumor (that i have just started )
that M&M is nothing more then a front group for the vast right wing conspiracy to infiltrate leftist homes and trip up the owners later causing the lose of teeth ???
Mojack420 on October 17, 2007 at 2:27 PM
:-O
WTF?
This shiz is weirder than Chris Crocker’s video about Britney. Celebrities must live in a completely different universe to to make such a big deal and so bitterly over a freakin puppy.
AlexB on October 17, 2007 at 2:27 PM
Why does she see her hairdresser every single day? Is she cheating on Portia or is she another silky phoney?
RushBaby on October 17, 2007 at 2:29 PM
This is off-point, but much more important:
IF YOU’RE GOING TO GET A DOG – ADOPT IT FROM THE SHELTER!
Several years ago, I adopted a sheltie/border collie mix; and that mutt is the most loving, wonderful dog. Every day, she makes me laugh. She is a Godsend. So, please, ADOPT THE MUTTS FROM THE SHELTERS! You won’t be sorry.
OhEssYouCowboys on October 17, 2007 at 2:30 PM
I continue to have a deep admiration for people who can tear up on cue. I wish I could do that.
greggish on October 17, 2007 at 2:30 PM
Good to see celebrities finally getting upset over the real problems of our day. Burqa’d women getting caned for showing an ankle when the wind blows? No big deal. Tiny dog getting taken away? Catastrophe!
NTWR on October 17, 2007 at 2:32 PM
Her hair dresser probably styles her hair everyday before the show. I doubt that’s uncommon.
Esthier on October 17, 2007 at 2:33 PM
I’m sure Ellen is genuinely upset about the whole situation, but my hysterical laughter is telling me something here…
This is arguably the most pathetic waste-of-airtime celebrity-dunce dishwater drivel I have seen in a long time.
I don’t know what’s funnier – that Ellen thought this was worthy material, that the TV channel kept the camera rolling, that nobody in the audience laughed, little girls crying coz some meanie took their doggy, the dog in bed with the fvcking vet…
Ochlan on October 17, 2007 at 2:33 PM
Wow! She does come across as a bully, used to getting everything she wants on demand.
CrimsonFisted on October 17, 2007 at 2:33 PM
We’re talking about a dog, right? When did dogs become so spectacularly picky about who they live with? Food, walks and some petting is about all that we are talking about here, not exactly rocket science.
Jebus, how did dogs ever become domesticated in the first place without the detailed rules and regulations of who could own them?
Grow up people and give the kids their dog back.
Drew on October 17, 2007 at 2:34 PM
Or, that Allahpundit thinks this is oddly compelling?
nailinmyeye on October 17, 2007 at 2:35 PM
More likely, it is hyperbole. Just like this entire performance.
RushBaby on October 17, 2007 at 2:35 PM
Sorry, it’s only a dog.
pb5000 on October 17, 2007 at 2:35 PM
Leave Iggy alone!!
I heard tell this morning Ellen may start her own doggie adoption agency. I don’t know if that’s true or not…But in this, I side with Ellen. She admitted fault, and very nicely swapped blame in a way to the shelter for being the bad guys in this.
Shelters are notoriously stringent with this kinda stuff.
JetBoy on October 17, 2007 at 2:35 PM
For good reason IMHO…far too many innocent animals being discarded once the kiddie-novelty wears off
Ochlan on October 17, 2007 at 2:36 PM
Um…how is this a story about a liberal??
It must be very upsetting to the children. And a good home for a dog, is a good home for a dog. Is the puppy better off in the agency??
This could have happened to ANYONE, not just a hollyweird’er. A contract is a contract, but that agency should have gone to check to see if it was a good home and then transfered the contract to the new family.
Let’s pull back on the hollyweird’er lib hatred here a sec.
tickleddragon on October 17, 2007 at 2:37 PM
Doesn’t matter how stupid the contract is, nobody forced Ellen to sign it. The simple fact is she did sign it and now she believe that she isn’t under any obligation to adhere to the terms of the contract. That in itself is justification for M&M to refuse to negotiate with her.
doriangrey on October 17, 2007 at 2:37 PM
I’m not convinced she remembered the contract and willfully disregarded it. Were that the case, I’m sure she would have just lied when asked if she still had the dog.
Then where’s the justification for them not working with the hairdresser and the two kids?
Esthier on October 17, 2007 at 2:40 PM
Not on your life. I worked with to many hollywierd elitists back in the day to see this as anything other than what it it. They don’t think the rules apply to them but by god if you just happen to be under contract to them they will hold you to the frikin letter of the contract or sue the living cr@p out of you.
doriangrey on October 17, 2007 at 2:41 PM
Wow, you guys are harsh! Did Ellen go over the top, absolutely, but, did you also see the interview with the Shelter’s owner? She was rude and spiteful.
It’s a dog, come on, let the little girls have their dog back. Is the dog better off in a shelter or with this family?
Puhleeze.
heatherrc77 on October 17, 2007 at 2:41 PM
ack…I meant to add:
What are the chances that Ellen puts the family in question on her show…sobbing kids and all…
And honestly, I never knew Ellen had a “camp”…
JetBoy on October 17, 2007 at 2:43 PM
And you’re right. It doesn’t matter how stupid it is. She still signed it. The only reason I mentioned that is because it’s entirely possible she didn’t realize that was one of the things she’s signed. It’s possible that because it’s so stupid, she didn’t realize it was a rule she had signed.
I wouldn’t assume a rescue agency would be so stupid. It’s possible the thought didn’t occur to Ellen either.
Esthier on October 17, 2007 at 2:43 PM
And how many people actually read an entire contract to adopt a dog?
Buying a car or house, that is different…but a dog???
heatherrc77 on October 17, 2007 at 2:44 PM
Sorry I guess you don’t know much about the entertainment industry. Nobody in the entertainment industry ever forgets a contract they sign. They read every single contract they sign, even the ones for their dry cleaning and they know every single clause in the contract before they sign.
doriangrey on October 17, 2007 at 2:46 PM
Homosexuals can adopt humans, but the whole dog thing is too unsettling.
Hening on October 17, 2007 at 2:46 PM
Boy, what a heartless bunch you guys are. Look, I’m not a dog person but I know that people can get pretty attached to the smelly things. I have no doubt her anguish is real, and I agree with her that this fascistic animal “rescue” group should just let the dog have a good home. I know from our animal rescue wackos in Durham-Chapel Hill that they’d rather kill a dog than give it to a kid who might be a year or two younger than the minimum, or leave with a family that doesn’t fit their strange view of perfection for animals. 14 years old as a minimum? By those rules Tommy Kirk should never have been able to own Ole Yeller. It’s the animal-rescue nazis you guys need to be angry at, not Ellen.
rivlax on October 17, 2007 at 2:47 PM
There are reasons that these contracts exist. It’s because many people are idiots, and don’t take care of the dogs they adopt. I know the rules sound stringent, but they have to be.
I am actually sympathetic to Ellen and the family that she found to take Iggy, but her making this emotional appeal on national television is in very bad taste.
JannyMae on October 17, 2007 at 2:49 PM
I adopted a cat that had been in a fire from an adoption agency. I read the frickin contract. I have no sympathy for ANYONE that never reads an agreement or contract, anyone. No sympathy for Ellen at all. What a whiny little baby.
MNDavenotPC on October 17, 2007 at 2:49 PM
As I told Esthier thats SOP for the entertainment industry. Once you get used to the idea that everybody is always trying to slip something sneaky and nasty into any contract you are offered you learn real fast to read all contracts offered to you very carefully.
doriangrey on October 17, 2007 at 2:49 PM
I totally agree with you. The shelter says, “in the best interest of the dog” they took it back, why is living in a shelter better than being in a loving home with 2 kids to play with??
heatherrc77 on October 17, 2007 at 2:49 PM
ok who names their doggy iggy ???????
Is it short for iggy stardust ????
NO ellen you screwed up Mow deal with it .
you signed a contract. perhaps you should have read it before placing your mark on it .
Now the dog is back in a home {my ex use to do boxer rescue and take in boxers as they waited for a new home} So its not like this dog was given to peta to be killed.
Mojack420 on October 17, 2007 at 2:49 PM
I wouldn’t.
You’re right, I don’t, but from your descriptions, it doesn’t sound like I’m missing out on anything enjoyable.
I’ll take your word for it, but I still think it’s stupid.
At the very least, they could talk to the hairdresser and work out something there.
Esthier on October 17, 2007 at 2:51 PM
I understand that, but come on, it’s a dog. The shelter is just trying to ‘stick it’ to Ellen because they are prob upset that the dog is no longer owned by a celeb and they can’t use her as an example for their advertising.
heatherrc77 on October 17, 2007 at 2:52 PM
You know what’ll probably happen…the shelter is going to be inundated with requests for the “Ellen” dog…so it won’t be long before someone adopts it.
Funny to think if an Ellen fan gets the dog, and offers to return it to the kids.
JetBoy on October 17, 2007 at 2:53 PM
I wonder if we can get more comments for this than a religion thread.
nailinmyeye on October 17, 2007 at 2:53 PM
The over-the-top emotionalism says one thing to me: menopause (Ellen’s 49).
baldilocks on October 17, 2007 at 2:53 PM
So I watched the whole thing, and here’s what I’m thinking: Ellen’s had a tragic death in the family, right? Or she’s been shown horrific pictures of the genocide in Darfur, right? Someone has just told her about the abuse of little girls in Somalia, right? Perhaps she witnessed a horrible car accident on the way into work. There was great loss of life. Human brutality. What? She was talking about a dog? Oh, the dog was killed in some horrible accident? No? The dog was…removed from her hair dresser’s home? Those tears and that angst are because a dog she dumped on someone else has now had to change its address? Well, I can only say: STFU you self-important blow-hard. You need medication. And, please, don’t anyone else give this miserably unstable woman a pet, unless it’s a pet rock.
Rational Thought on October 17, 2007 at 2:53 PM
So long as they sign a contract stating they hate Ellen first!
heatherrc77 on October 17, 2007 at 2:54 PM
From the perspective of the rescue group, it’s not a stupid contract. These people scrape and scratch to fund their operations. Many of the animals they take in must receive extensive rehabilitation from neglect or abuse. To get an animal to an adoptable condition and temperament takes time, patience, and money. After an investment like that, don’t you think they are entitled to have some interest in the outcome of the animal?
Since the topic began with an emotive performance, let’s imagine an emotive alternative scenario, from a shelter’s point of view.
Some customer (I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT ELLEN DEGENERES) comes in and pays $3,000 for Iggy. The shelter calls to check on Iggy, only to be told that Iggy is in a new home. Only in this scenario, the customer won’t reveal the name of the new owner.
Two weeks later, PETA raids a scientific laboratory to set some lab animals free. Film of their rescue shows up on their website. And lo and behold, it turns out that poor Iggy was sold for a profit to the laboratory, who was seeking a special breed for some experiment.
Or maybe Iggy’s new owners (after the first customer) were friends of Michael Vick.
The shelter is completely entitled to insist that the home they place them in is their forever home.
RushBaby on October 17, 2007 at 2:56 PM
JIHAD!!!!!!!
Agrippa2k on October 17, 2007 at 2:59 PM
I’ve got a solution, saw this in the Bible once…okay, I’m gonna need a chainsaw and a pair of goggles.
…relax, you know how the story ends!
Bad Candy on October 17, 2007 at 3:00 PM
How about a compromise? Kill Iggy and stuff it.
Ochlan on October 17, 2007 at 3:01 PM
You got that right. “Give me puppy, or give me death!”
Can’t wait to hear what Mark Levin has to say about this.
Agrippa2k on October 17, 2007 at 3:03 PM
Na, you’re not missing a thing. Moreover what M&M might have been willing to do before Ellen pulled this I’m a celebrity cr@p and what they will be will to do now, well they are probably worlds apart.
See thats just it, it isn’t about a dog, its about a contract. It’s about a person who believes that her status as a celebrity entitles them to disregard the terms of a contract because if the other party to the contract doesn’t cave she (Ellen) will go on national television and emotionally blackmail them.
Furthermore its about an individual who were this a case of someone violation the terms of a contract they had with her she would have in court so fast the speed of light would be receiving a ticket for obstruction traffic.
doriangrey on October 17, 2007 at 3:04 PM
Taking a break from eating her triple decker chocolate cake with spam gelatin frosting, Rosie O’fatpiggo announces that this was the first time in history that lesbian tears have melted a conservatives heart.
csdeven on October 17, 2007 at 3:08 PM
Why is she on national TV crying about this? We are turning into a nation of feeling without thought.
dougless on October 17, 2007 at 3:08 PM
In theory, that is a good idea, but, in practice, there are problems with this. One is that, as with Mutts and Moms, there are restrictions that someone buying from a private breeder would not have. Could someone who found out they were a poor match turn around and give the dog to a friend? If they bought it from a breeder, certainly. From a shelter? I’m not so sure. Some owners find neutering cruel and/or want to breed their pet, which, again, isn’t an option with adoption from most shelters. Finally, if you know that a certain breed has a certain temperament that you desire, better to get the pet you want (and donate to the shelter) than to take your chances with an unknown.
It would be nice if shelter adoption were always the best option, so no dog would have to die (or spend much time at the shelter). However, those who don’t adopt from shelters often have valid reasons for not doing so. I only hope that Ellen’s story won’t dissuade those who should adopt from adopting.
I do feel sorry for Ellen. She realized she messed up, endangering a loved animal, and she messed up again by pleading in public rather than private. Some people just never learn propriety and decent manners. I’m not so sure she’s trying to be a bully, but she’s certainly not winning any a new fans.
calbear on October 17, 2007 at 3:09 PM
Exactly.
angryoldfatman on October 17, 2007 at 3:10 PM
I’ll give her credit for admitting she’s the one who made the mistake.
On the other hand, doing it on her show to try to force the Mutts and Moms people to do what she wants them to do -that’s bad form and bullying. It kind of negates the “apology” and admission of guilt.
Personally, unless there’s something else going on we don’t know about it, it sounds like the dog should go to the girls. But then its not my decision to make (or live with).
taznar on October 17, 2007 at 3:12 PM
I’ve had run-ins with these rescue shelters myself–some of them are pickier and more invasive than human adoption agencies. It’s really ridiculous. I had one tell me that if I wasn’t prepared to treat a pet as well as or better than my children, I would not be allowed to even look at the animals they had for adoption. I wasn’t able to honestly say that, if the dog and one of my kids were drowning, that I’d choose to save the dog. So they wouldn’t let me even pet a puppy. I’m totally serious. I don’t know how they ever got any of their animals adopted out at all.
aero on October 17, 2007 at 3:12 PM
Some animal adoption agencies occasionally act in a way that is impossible to differentiate them from the behavior of the Waffen SS at Auschwitz.
No, I’m not exaggerating, not one bit.
They Dog&CatNazis reserve the right to, at any time and for any reason, RECLAIM the dog or cat, AND keep the adoption fee as well. That is what is in the contract of most of these organizations.
In their defense, there have been occasions of critters being adopted into abusive home, or being fronts for medical experimentation or worse. And most rational and reasonable people understand how some of these circumstances could force the original adoption agency to act in the animal’s interest. That doesn’t seem to be the issue here.
I don’t consider giving a dog away to a third party (a family with children), for any reason, to be ordinarily “abusive” to the dog. Ellen, due to her dollar investment, has a financial interest in the dog, and has property rights as a result.
My wife has represented dog owners whose dogs have been “reclaimed” by adoption agencies for the most trivial reasons. While their contracts are written to be one-sided, in favor of the adoption agencies in every detail, the contracts can be set aside, as some of the provisions are unenforcible, if not illegal.
I have personal experience with adopting from a shelter. I once adopted a kitten from a shelter, that my daughter (then 10 years old) fell in love with. I signed the contract, otherwise no pet, but informed the lady running the shelter, that regardless of any contract, I was putting them on formal notice that comming on my property, for any reason, without my formal written consent, would result in charges of criminal trespass, and that any court action to reclaim the cat, irrespective of their “reasons” would be strongly resisted in court. I reiterated that I considered that cat “MINE” the instant I walked out the door.
The people running Mutts and Moms and their attorney Fink (an appropriate name, IMHO), have shot themselves in the foot, as the saying goes, now that Ellen has gone public with that tearful appeal.
Given her “clout” with the public via her TV show, Mutts and Moms gave the entire animal shelter industry a black eye, expecially with a large number of Ellen’s celebrity friends.
Personally, I think Ellen should sue for the vet and training bills and return of the adoption fee.
georgej on October 17, 2007 at 3:15 PM
It’s called emotional blackmail.
doriangrey on October 17, 2007 at 3:16 PM
Even though it is annoying and elitist, I don’t blame her for trying. There aren’t a lot of things I wouldn’t do for my cat. Granted, I’ve had her for a little over 4 years, but when I first found her, she was very ill and the process of nursing her back to health made us bond within a week.
I agree with the poster who talked about wanting to make sure the animal they cared for is properly taken care of, but the same could be said of the person who shelled out the 3 grand.
Plus, does this happen with any other industry? Painters spend days and even months of their work, but do they get a say if the buyer wants to put it to a use the artist disapproves of?
It seems a little weird in my opinion.
Esthier on October 17, 2007 at 3:23 PM
What a pissy little agency. I understand that Ellen signed the contract, but do you really think she read it close enough to remember that little tidbit? She admitted she was at fault. Now, she feels bad cause she unintentionally got two little girls hearts crushed. If the agency had any decency, they would stop trying to prove a point with Ellen & go check out the home & see if it’s fit for the dog. I suspect their stubborness has a bit to do with all the publicity their little shop is getting by hanging onto this. Like a dog with a bone. Sorry, couldn’t resist. Anyway, I love Ellen!
BeachBaby on October 17, 2007 at 3:24 PM
Funny to think if an Ellen fan gets the dog, and offers to return it to the kids.
Just another breach of contract.
To all the “animal rescuers are Nazis” folks: contracts are legal agreements between free parties. Don’t like it? Don’t sign it.
Cuffy Meigs on October 17, 2007 at 3:25 PM
Why can some not stick to the issue/s of the contract, or to what RushBaby so nicely iterated? Invariably some dog, animal, or gay bashing had to be projected.
Regardless of all legal or other aspects, Ellen is a narcissistic one person melodrama and improves her ratings. Hollywood in its glory, again.
Entelechy on October 17, 2007 at 3:29 PM
Substitute an adopted child for the adopted dog. Review entire thread.
RushBaby on October 17, 2007 at 3:30 PM
RushBaby, thanks for being so informed about, good/kind to, and supportive of animals. You’re a wonderful person.
Entelechy on October 17, 2007 at 3:33 PM
calbear on October 17, 2007 at 3:09 PM
There is no “theory” behind my statement. I don’t know what kind of adoption, freak-shows some of the other posters have had to deal with. I can only post about my experience. Before I adopted my dog, I asked if I could take her out on a leash – so that I could get an idea of whether or not she’d been abused, disliked people or disliked other animals. The shelter people couldn’t have been more agreeable, or understanding. I took my dog out of her cage for an hour; and during that time she was able to interact with scores of other people and dogs. Thereafter, I adopted the most wonderful dog in the world. Had that dog not been adopted, she would’ve been exterminated. The shelter knew it, and so did I. They wanted their dogs to be adopted by loving owners. And, because of them, and their love for animals, and their understanding that potential adopters might just want to interact with their dogs, before they adopted them – a wonderful dog was, in fact, adopted – by me.
It was my way of taking just one dog off the extermination table. And that dog has repaid me, in kind, with love and affection – a thousand-fold.
I stand by my statement about adopting animals from the shelter.
OhEssYouCowboys on October 17, 2007 at 3:33 PM
See what the elitist mentality in Hollywood can do? Hurt little kids and puppies!
Drtuddle on October 17, 2007 at 3:33 PM
Are adopted parents not allowed to let someone else raise their adopted child if they find they are unable to provide for their child?
Esthier on October 17, 2007 at 3:39 PM
Actually, most reputable breeders require similar contracts from those buying a dog from them as well.
I adopted my Doberman from a shelter, and haven’t regretted it for a moment. I read the contract, and had no problems with signing it.
However restrictive the agency’s contract might seem, Ellen signed it and didn’t keep her side of the bargain. End of story.
Hollowpoint on October 17, 2007 at 3:40 PM
Thanks, Entelechy. It’s definitely my hot-button issue.
I feel compassion for those two little girls, and Ellen’s appeal rings true and sincere. BUT, she used her show to punish a rescue group because she didn’t like the outcome.
SHE DID WRONG, and seeks to make herself and those children the victim. I am sick of people clubbing us over the head with their feeeeeelings and using children as the cudgel to wield the blow.
RushBaby on October 17, 2007 at 3:40 PM
But what happens if the kid doesn’t get along with the cats?
calbear, you’re right on many points, but I wanted to add another point. If you want a specific breed, let the shelters know! They often know about a lot more animals than come through their shelter and will call if they find a “match”. The last time were looking for a dog, that’s what we did. We told them what breed/size dog we wanted (specific breed wasn’t that important), the temperment, sex… told them it would be in a house with several children (not a quiet environment)… and everything else we wanted. They called us a couple times letting us know about dogs that were available and the third time we found the “right” dog. He’s a black lab/springer spaniel mix and he’s been great (we’ve had him over 6 years now).
And another point, the shelter had a “return” policy if we decided he wasn’t fitting in. They wanted to make sure everthing worked well for everyone’s benefit -family and dog.
taznar on October 17, 2007 at 3:40 PM
That’s what happens when lesbians adopt.
km on October 17, 2007 at 3:41 PM
Just have the damn kids adopt the dog and let’s worry about something that matters for a change.
jcrue on October 17, 2007 at 3:44 PM
Contracts and the rule of law matter. Kinda sorta the foundation of Western civ.
Cuffy Meigs on October 17, 2007 at 3:47 PM
You’re bringing up a legal issue; I really don’t know. I am addressing the moral issues raised on the thread.
Are adoptive parents allowed to shuffle the adopted child off to some other family because it turns out they don’t get along with their other kids?
Then go on national TV and bash the adoption agency for legally regaining custody?
Sue the adoption agency for their fees once they’ve GIVEN the child away?
RushBaby on October 17, 2007 at 3:50 PM
Right you are, taznar. It’s remarkable how many pure-breed dogs end up in shelters.
RushBaby on October 17, 2007 at 3:52 PM
I’m sorry, I’m riled up here. But WTF does someone’s sexual orientation have to do with this story.
RushBaby on October 17, 2007 at 3:53 PM
If all the parties agreed to attend an 8 hour PETA workshop, maybe this thing could be worked out…
d1carter on October 17, 2007 at 3:59 PM
Alright, let’s make the correlation.
When you say “get along” do you mean fighting and causing serious damage to each other? Because that happens with pets and with families who’ve adopted.
At that point is it worth it to keep the kid that’s causing the serious damage when clearly you don’t know crap about helping the situation?
Look, I’m not a fan of shuffling pets around or using talk shows as a bully pulpit, but I’m not convinced that there are no good reasons for moving a pet from one family to another.
I love my cat dearly, but if I had a job that required me to travel a lot, I wouldn’t put her through that. I’d try to find someone to care for her. She’s weird in that she actually loves people and hates to be left alone. Physically she’s alright if I leave her with enough food and water, but she hates it. I hate doing it to her and rarely do so.
Esthier on October 17, 2007 at 4:00 PM
Oh my! But, that would be a compromise.
CrimsonFisted on October 17, 2007 at 4:01 PM
Hmmmmm, I see a trend developing here. First it’s “Leave Brittany Alone!”, now it’s Ellen with “Give be doggie back!” Stand by for Harry Reid with “Give the kids their SCHIP!”, Gore with “Leave the Planet alone!” or AP with “Where’s my iPhone?”
mugged on October 17, 2007 at 4:07 PM
I used the phrase “get along” because that’s what Ellen said. I assume that, since she has 3 dogs and 3 cats already, according to wiki, that fighting was indeed involved.
I would surely contact the adoption agency and arrange for the child to be re-adopted to a better equipped family. Certainly not give him or her to some other family just because their kids did get along.
And furthermore, if the adoption agency balked at arranging an adoption with the family I recommended (since their kids get along so well), then I *might* consider my TV show an appropriate forum to advocate for the new family.
Nah, scratch that last bit. These are private matters.
RushBaby on October 17, 2007 at 4:10 PM
Wow! Look at this thread grow!
JayHaw Phrenzie on October 17, 2007 at 4:11 PM
Please don’t think for a minute that I am suggest there are no good reasons for giving away a pet. In my case, it’s a one way street — me being lucky new parent of the fuzzy castoff — several times over!
RushBaby on October 17, 2007 at 4:13 PM
Dildos and choking hazards?
Ochlan on October 17, 2007 at 4:14 PM
My miniature bulldog, Mr. Bo Jangles, came from an adoption agency.
bosteed on October 17, 2007 at 4:23 PM
This woman needs to get some perspective. What drug(s) is she on?
This is a dog we’re talking about. She can take mine (please) if she just stops carrying on.
Have a baby, and put all that emotional brain juice where it belongs.
Hening on October 17, 2007 at 4:29 PM
On that I agree. I don’t fault her for trying a venue she thought might work. Were I in her shoes, I’d probably try anything to fix a situation I’d broken. I just think it’s in poor taste that she took the issue to her shoe.
Then I guess we agree. I don’t understand why she adopted the dog in the first place if she wasn’t able to keep the dog.
Esthier on October 17, 2007 at 4:34 PM
I’m sorry, I’m riled up here. But WTF does someone’s sexual orientation have to do with this story.
Bwahahahah ! !
I know I terrible for laughing . . .But sometimes
the jabbs just hit the funny bone. Sorry
Texyank on October 17, 2007 at 4:36 PM
It sounds like a bunch of shenanigans all around, but in the end I’m guessing the dog is far better off with neither Ellen nor her hairdresser. I volunteer at a Humane Society shelter, and while the adoption staff certainly does a lot of work to match the right dogs with the right people, the handful of dogs who don’t work out in their new homes are usually just returned. Some follow-up is done with the other adoptions (particularly ones known to be somewhat sensitive due to the temperaments of the dogs), but if the dog doesn’t roll back through the door (or show up at another shelter) that’s usually good enough. Most dogs aren’t vicious and most people aren’t animal abusers (though I can think of a few of the latter who deserve a special place in hell).
Private rescue orgs can sometimes afford to be more picky, but in general I’d only expect this kind of contractual obsession to be associated with AKC breeders and their “champion” offspring, not rescue organizations. But what do you expect from LA?
Blacklake on October 17, 2007 at 4:38 PM
Esthier:
We agree! I am noting this date on my calendar!
*Extends hand of friendship*
RushBaby on October 17, 2007 at 4:39 PM
If I had to guess, it was intended as a cute accessory, and it didn’t work out.
RushBaby on October 17, 2007 at 4:42 PM
I hope not. I find that completely disgusting.
Awesome. My virtual hand is extended as well.
Esthier on October 17, 2007 at 4:44 PM
*shakes*
RushBaby on October 17, 2007 at 4:45 PM
One thing I definitely don’t get is how the rescue organization, if it’s so picky, managed to place the dog in an environment with cats in the first place. Reactivity to other animals is one of the easiest things to test for: At the shelter I volunteer at “No other animals” is easily the most common adoption restriction after “No kids” (can’t have some spastic adolescent lab mix bouncing around the toddler, after all).
Blacklake on October 17, 2007 at 4:46 PM
That just seems too strict to me. I mean pet owners are more likely to adopt others pets.
I even knew one person who got other pets so her pets wouldn’t get lonely. Somehow it never occurred to her to just spend more time with her pets.
Esthier on October 17, 2007 at 4:52 PM
If true, that’s really messed up.
Esthier on October 17, 2007 at 4:58 PM
Since AP went with a Fox News link, it should be noted that its sister publication, the NY Post, had a different story:
Ellen weeps after starting with threats.
Karl on October 17, 2007 at 5:17 PM
Which handily explains why the police were called to be on hand.
RushBaby on October 17, 2007 at 5:22 PM
Holy Moses!!! When AP starts quoting “The Insider” as a reputable news source, I know he’s jumped the shark. “The Insider”?!?!?!? Really?!?!?!? Unbelieveable.
Andy in Agoura Hills on October 17, 2007 at 5:25 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »