Ellen Sobs For The Return Of Confiscated Pet

Talk show host Ellen DeGeneres broke down while taping her show yesterday, in an episode that airs today, over a dog named Iggy that she rescued from a shelter in September. After she spent thousands to get Iggy neutered and to try and train him to get along with her cats, it wasn't working. Meanwhile, Ellen's hairdresser has two daughters and looking for a puppy. Ellen gave them Iggy, got daily reports of how the girls loved and had bonded to Iggy, and she thought she'd done a good thing by finding the dog a loving home.

But the rescue shelter claims Ellen violated a deal by giving the animal away, and they took Iggy from the kids. "I guess I signed a piece of paper that says if I can't keep Iggy, it goes back to the rescue organization, which is not someone's home, which is not a family," Ellen told the audience.

When the shelter called Ellen to check on Iggy, she was honest and told them she'd found the dog a new home. The shelter took Iggy from the hairdresser's home.

Here is Ellen sobbing on her show for the shelter to return the dog to the kids:

From NBC 10/16

Comments

[deckard70]

Their contract doesn't say anything about transferring ownership:

http://web.archive.org/web/20070401032435/http://www.muttsandmoms.org/

[deckard70]

You'll have to cut & paste that -- the blog automatically broke the line when it saw the second http.

[ScorchedEarth]

So friggin pathetic. America is doomed. People sit on their fat, lard asses all day long, watching this drivel and living off the state.

[DMSmith]

What does watching this, or even reading about it have to do with 'living off the state"...who here has been revealed to be living off the state? Not anyone.

You stupid bias is flyin' high and wide, here. Get a clue!!

[randimoid]

So friggin pathetic. America is doomed. Stoopid republitards sit on their fat, lard asses all day long, reading and bitching on sites they'd never agree with and living off their trust funds and Scaife.

[Meah]

Pigface, it would appear that you are expert at projection. Yes, peavey, you are good at something!

[N678]

Top marks Meah, that must be pervy peavey. It's harder for him to create sockpuppets these days. He has to sign up for a new email address each time. Poor little peavy; he's such a twisted, lonely little fucker. He probably only had imaginary playmates when he was a child.

[Tiny Demon]

and you scortched earth types.. have their heads right the way up thier fat lard asses.

[BWonka]

And you spend your life making numerous posts showing your hatred of women and dogs. Talk about pathetic! What a loser.

[gubblebumm]

I have 4 rescue dogs and as well meaning as the rescue places are, sometimes the people can be very annoying and controlling.

We were looking to adopt a dog, and we had 3 home visits, numerous emails back and forth, many phone calls, and guess what? The foster dad kept the dog, after dragging many families like ours through the process.

I can understand the need to have rules, and such about giving the dog away, but come on people, muttandmoms blew it....they could have asked Ellen about the dog, said, well, I am sure that would be okay, but we would like to check...

but to do that shows they cared more about their rules then they actually did for the animal

[Meah]

There are MANY MANY people who just flat out lack common sense. Common sense is something you just can't teach to people. You either have it or you don't. This shelter shot themselves in the foot because they did not follow a procedure that could have kept that dog in that home. Many people claim to be compassionate but are totally not that way at all. What a nasty thing to do. Just readopt the dog to the children!

[NoonDaySun]

That is the thinking of authoritarian followers: by the book, even against common sense.

"I'm just doing my job," "it's policy," "that's the rules" -- the Yuppie-Nuremburg defense.

[PaceSetter]

Stoopid rescue agency nazis are worse than baby adoption agencies. Plus they take good dogs away from worthy pet owners because they swoop in and out-bid ordinary citizens with their "private donations".

Dogs at L.A.’s animal shelters are now auctioned off for as much as $1,000 a pooch.

http://www.lacitybeat.com/article.php?id=2611&IssueNum=119

[sandhi]

I think that there are times when you have to look at the individual case. That being said...and I'm not taking the side of the shelter here, but you have to understand the idiots that these shelter people see every day who either try to adopt a pet, or the ones who drop them off for every stupid reason under the sun.

I remember a while back two friends of mine had just moved in together and they decided they wanted to adopt a kitten. They went to several shelters and were turned down for varying reasons. The number one being that they were not at that address for long enough, so that they didn't seem 'stable'. Well, they complained and complained and pissed and moaned about how unfair this was and even went on to say "It's only a KITTEN for crying out loud!!!".

Well, they did persist and finally found a shelter that let them adopt a kitten and lo and behold, less than a year later they decided to part ways and neither one wanted the cat anymore, so guess what? It went BACK to a shelter.

So, you see? THIS is the kind of thing that these shelters see way too often. They see the bad side of human nature too much and it jades them. But can you really blame them?

Too many people do NOT understand the concept of
"Forever Home" for their pets. They think that they can just get rid of it when it no longer fits into the lifestyle for whatever lame reason.

In Ellen's case, I think that the shelter could have made an exception, being that Ellen is a known animal lover and I'm sure that she wouldn't have put the dog into a bad situation. But in so many other cases, and even in this one really...you just can't blame them for being cautious...they see too much animal abuse and neglect with their very own eyes every day.

[deckard70]

As retrieved on Oct 12, 2007:

Mutts and Moms
Email: [e-mail]

[raker]

What kind of bizarro animal shelter has a policy against putting rescued dogs in loving homes? Is it to make sure animals don't end up with sadists or dogfighters or fur factories? So they went after Ellen's hairdresser's dog because...why? And why would anyone accept a dog from a shelter in the first place with restrictions on ownership? This doesn't make sense. There has to be more to the story.

[ScorchedEarth]

I am sure they have this policy so the dog is not passed off into a bad home. I think the shelter wants assurance that the home is good.

You people seem to not think before you post.

[DMSmith]

We do think before we post. I might ask you if you do?!

What we are suggesting is that the shelter should have thought before they took a dog from two loving kid's home.

That dog needs to be returned, and the kids made to feel ok. In this case, it's two children, as well as the dog, who need to be treated well.

They blew it bigtime and any amount of thinking will lead you to that conclusion.

[BWonka]

"You people seem to not think before you post. "

Said by a Bu$hbot who has never had an original thought - peavy the perv just can't stop his hate.

[raker]

This animal wasn't sold into slavery. It was given to a loving little girl - by Ellen de Frikkin Generes! until The Elvira Gulch Puppy Asylum came to the rescue. People like that give do-gooders a bad name.

[Balzac]

Yeah, it seems like the dog shelter is run by assholes.

[LeftLeftLeft]

This COULD have been a great oportunity for Mutts&Moms to display some wisdom and get a little free publicity of the positive kind. Maybe even some donations! Instead, they traded all that for what was behind door #4 . . . a public display of inflexibility and insensitivity. Shame. . . .shame on them.

[AbbieX]

"Ve ver yust following orders" Ellen DeGeneres is a kind and loving person who clearly was upset about this. She chose not to ditch work, but to come in and share her sadness, hoping someone would be able to help where she found herself inadequate. So what's the problem. People wonder why "shelters" are raided and animals are taken. These are not shelters, they are concentration camps for unwanted animals who have no rights, and when "Zee rules" state that they will be gassed, they are gassed. Sick. Stand fast Ellen, we love you.

[nammy50]

I understand the shelter must have rules. People adopt an animal then abandon or pass it on. BUT please, take the facts and make a decision based upon them.

As long as the dog gets a good and loving home that should be the end of it.

[Tobias F.]

Exactly...another sign of the slow, steady loss of common sense in the U.S.

And by the way--not that this would ever be an issue for a wealthy celebrity--but what if a person moved into an apartment a year or two after they'd adopted a dog? Would they have to give it back to the shelter then? Does anyone know their policy?

[TimtheDemocrat]

People who run these shelters are typically callous assholes who enjoy abusing dog owners because of their own mental issues having mostly to do with the fact that they kill dogs all the time. They act like God, a nasty awful God.

[drblack]

Perhaps the family who received the dog from Ellen can apply to adopt it.
Wouldn't this be a good thing all around?

[JQP]

Exactly what I was thinking. I've adopted several dogs from the shelter over the years and I remember the contract I had to sign vaguely. I think that clause is put in so people don't just adopt animals to distribute them like a pet store or something along those lines. There isn't anything punitive that I remember so nothing should be stopping them from adopting the dog themselves. The shelter's function is to place the animals in good homes as their guideline dictate, a quiet conversation with the employees at the shelter is all that it would take if the family fits those guidelines. (ie. fence height requirement) They are desparate to place these animals and I doubt they like taking them back.

This isn't a controversy. The shelter had to remove a dog that Ellen herself said had problems from a home they could not confirm could take care of it. The fact that little girls were emotionally hurt by this isn't the fault of the shelter or it's employees. It's unfortunate but completely correctable.

And no, Ellen's word that they are capable of taking care of the dog is not enough. I've had them come out and inspect my property before greenlighting some of my adoptions. This isn't like a adopting a baby. Some dogs can be deadly if something triggers them and you need to be careful when placing animals with children (from the state's perspective) to keep from being libel.

[JettFuel]

I can't believe you guys would come down on Ellen......really how fucking cold hearted can you be.

The botton line is the dog has a safe comfortable home to go to and the city is hold that dog back.

It is an outrage.

Go rag on Paris or Perez.....these are the same posters that see no harm in the actions of Michael Vickhead

jettfuel

[rainey]

Why? She isn't supposed to honor the agreements she makes?

I bet something can be worked out — which is what she should have tried to do in the first place — but using public airways for emotional extortion against a group that is doing nothing more than trying to rescue animals and enforce the terms of their agreements is also very wrong.

[johnmorgan]

It's a stupid rule. They take a dog from a loving home, to put it back in a cold shelter. What service is that to the pet or to anyone?

[unmutual]

Man up, Ellen

[Balzac]

You sound like a Masculinist.

Do you go to men's gatherings to deepen your understanding of manhood?

[esgabel]

Sometimes in the most unexpected ways our hearts are touched by total honesty. Ellen could have railed against the insensitivity of the shelter, but she didn't. She took full responsibility for making a mistake. So few of us would do that, Ellen is a kind, loving, honest person. I honestly feel sorry for the situation and hope this can be rectified.
I am a former executive director of a shelter--we had the same rule--primarily because we did not want animals used for dog fighting or put into an unsuitable homes--there are reasons for our rules but as with all things they need to be tempered by common sense, judgement and compassion.

[Meah]

Can't the family that she gave the dog to go to the shelter and set up an adoption with them. Are they out of the picture because they innocently took the dog?

[esgabel]

People sometimes paint themselves into a corner--I'm afraid the shelter will feel they are under seige and not be willing to listen to anyone right now...sad, isn't it?--all anyone wanted to do was place the dog in a loving home.
If the dog is the right size for the living space, if the dog has the right disposition to be with children, and if the family is able to care for and exercize the dog there shouldn't be a problem...but we don't know the particulars...
Instead people are taking sides based on politics, sexual orientation and against one or more parties in the dispute--completely forgetting the dog and the children.
Instead of finding solutions we fight...