First Do No Harm
By dog worshiper Richard Belzer
For countless years dogs have been bred and nurtured to trust humans. They are by far the best friend of the human race -- they have protected us, worked for us, performed miraculous feats of courage: saving lives, rescuing people and pets, from flattened buildings (after Hurricane Katrina, and other disasters) when humans gave up because of the seeming impossibility of people surviving such daunting destruction...
And yet the dogs did not give up! If any animal is capable of unconditional love it is surely the canine: they are forgiving, caring, life-affirming creatures who humble us and teach us to be more human and compassionate. Also, let us never forget: specially-trained dogs help
physically and mentally handicapped individuals have a much better lifestyle. Plus, when dogs visit hospitals they bring a healing presence to all those they come in contact with in ways humans cannot!
Dog owners and dog lovers recognize and respect the bond that has evolved over the centuries.
To take these divine animals and make them fight each other and kill them in the most heinous and torturous fashion if they are not "tough enough" is unquestionably horrific, vile and degrading behavior. People were reflexively and rightfully sickened, incredulous, heartbroken and beyond shocked. How could anyone so viciously betray this ancient trust that dogs have shown us? What does this tell us about who we are and what we can do to protect our most dear companion?: Raise consciousness about the thousands (yes thousands) of organized dog fights that go in America). Law enforcement and legislators have to be made more aware of these grotesque goings on!
Also of key importance is how to treat our pet dogs that we are so devoted to. Most owners do their best in caring for their dogs. But unfortunately there are some wildly popular training techniques that are misguided and harmful.
An alarming and important press release (that was depressingly ignored by the press and others) issued by the American Humane Association. (Founded in 1877, it is the oldest national organization dedicated to protecting both children and animals. Through a network of child and animal protection agencies and individuals the association develops policies, legislation, training curricula and training programs to protect children and from abuse, neglect and exploitation.) The release expresses dismay over the "numerous inhumane training techniques" advocated by Cesar Millan on "Dog Whisperer."
Instances of cruel and dangerous treatment -- promoted by Millan as acceptable training methods -- were documented by the American Humane Association, including one in which a dog was partially asphyxiated in an episode. In this instance the dog was pinned to the ground by its neck after first being "hung" by a collar incrementally tightened by Millan. Millan's goal -- of subduing a fractious animal -- was accomplished by partially cutting off the blood supply to its brain.
The AHA has requested that National Geographic stop airing the program immediately and issue a statement explaining that the tactics featured on the program are inhumane, and it encourages National Geographic to begin developing programming that sets a positive example by featuring proper humane animal training. In its letter, AHA said: "we believe that achieving the goal of improving the way people interact with their pets would be far more successful and beneficial for the National Geographic channel if it ceased sending the contradictory message that violent treatment of animals is acceptable."
"As a forerunner in the movement towards dog training, we find the excessively rough handling of animals on the show and inhumane training methods to be potentially harmful for the animals and the people on the show," said Bill Torgerson, DVM, MBA, who is vice president of Animal Protection Services for American Humane. "It also does a disservice to all the program's viewers by espousing an inaccurate message about what constitutes effective training and appropriate treatment of animals."
Torgerson noted that the safety of a woman and her German Shepherd were jeopardized in one episode by the use of a shock collar, which forced the tormented dog to redirect its aggression at its owner, biting her arm.
"Furthermore, the television audience was never told that Mr. Millan was attempting to modify the dog's behavior by causing pain with the shock collar."
The fact that the "Dog Whisperer" has been nominated for an Emmy should give serious pause to all those in the business who are about to vote for the awards. Dog owners and dog lovers would be disturbingly misled if Mr. Millan and his program are honored in such a high-profile way.
There are other highly effective and humane methods for training our beloved companions. Please take note and let others know.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Great post!
My dogs are my best friends and I will never understand how anyone could mistreat any animal. Dogs are God's angels sent to be our companions and to protect us.
I took a philosophy class (Ethics 101) once, where this hypothetical question was posed: Is the life of any child worth more than the life of any dog? Put another way, Would we be willing, hypothetically, to put our pet dog to death if it were guaranteed to save the life of an African child?
While some will argue that this is an unfair question, a bullshit question---one of those trick questions that give philosophy a bad name--the class took it seriously. All but 2 students, in a class of approximately 25, said that they wouldn't trade their pet dog's life for the life of some kid in Africa they didn't know.
I and another student were the two hold-outs. Now, I've had pet dogs all my life, and I've loved them. Indeed, I cried when little "Tiny" died when I was kid. It broke my heart. But, unlike those who say with a straight face that their friggin' dog is as important as a child, I've never allowed my priorities to get that screwed up.
Just because you disagree about the value of one life over the value of another life doesn't make the other point of view "screwed up". It is just different.
I am a mother and also am privileged to enjoy the companionship of a little Bichon Frise named Abby. I love my daughter, but Abby has never given me a day of heartache and pain, while the daughter...well, don't get me started.
You can't know what someone else's relationship is with their dog based on your own experience just as I cannot know someone else's relationship with their spouse or child based on mine.
We have experiences and we have opinions. You are expressing your opinion about someone else's experience.
excellent post, groovy
This is an appalling post. Of course Abby has never given you a day of heartache and pain. She can't think for herself, as your daughter can. Abby was not engineered to one day go off and live an independent life. Of course you love your daughter, but when you say that you don't mean (I hope) that your love for Abby is of a kind.
Dogs and other pets are great. But there is a hierarchy of value regarding life and it is - or should be - self evident. Obviously we'd rather have life smooth, and have OTHERS behave like our pets. But are YOU capable of that? Would you WANT to behave like your dog? God, I hope the answer is no.
You could also ask the "hypothetical" question: If two children were drowning, yours and one you didn't know, and you could only save one, which one would you save? The fact that people would save their own child in no way makes the life of the other child less valuable. Your own child just has more value to you. In your hypothetical situation people's dogs have more value to them then some child they've never seen. Doesn't make one life more valuable than another. It's all relative.
Thank you frann,
Your answer revealed the bias of the question. Yes, it is all relative. Our personal experience is the factor that decides what choices we make. BTW, why does the child need to be of any particular race or culture? This maudlin and heavy handed ignorance is what misses the point. Let's get back to the facts. Abuse is abuse is abuse, dog fighting, cock fighting, bull fighting are manifestations of brutality and stupidity especially in this day and age - totally unforgivable.
Trann,
Actually, I would argue that the distinction (if I understand you) isn't relative at all. Indeed, ny answer to your hypothetical question is absolute: I would save my child over another person's child always, and in all cases. Maybe it's "selfish," but that's my absolute answer. And there's nothing "relative" about it.
Would I save any child over any dog? Yes, I would. I would save any child over any dog in all cases. Again, my answer is absolute.
By saying "it's all relative," you're suggesting that my regard for humans, my animal-loving neighbor's regard for dogs, and my other neighbor's regard for silverfish are all somehow "equal."
But, clearly, they are not equal. Why? Because neither you nor I would excuse a person for choosing to save a drowning silverfish over a drowining child. We simply wouldn't excuse it--not if the person had the ability to save either one they chose. And our not excusing it would be absolute.
I've always had dogs. I raised the last one--a Samoyed--since she was 8 weeks old and she died last October of old age, not cancer or some other dread disease; she was 15. How in the world can anyone say that she wasn't part of my family, that she wasn't like a child to me and as valuable to me as the child I never had? The bond we had was so strong that I still cry when I think of her. I had her cremated and have yet to bury her. I keep her with me and when I go, she'll be buried with me. I just can't let her go.
The loss is life-draining but I would still have taken her in even if I knew what was to lie ahead and the sadness that went with it. Equate my dog with a child? Yes. I do. That's my decision to make. My dog was like my own child.
I read in the Geographic a while back--the magazine, not the TV show--that a group of primatologists studying social behavior and the psychology of the Hominidae, that is, the Great Apes + Man, determined that the only species in the group which exhibits friendship and loyalty beyond close familial limits is the only species in the group which has enjoyed a long and intimate relationship with dogs, to which such traits come naturally.
As far as "Ethics 101"-- which ought to be better known as "Sophie's Choice 101"--I would willingly sacrifice anybody who taught this kind of fraudulent philosophy rather than harm a crippled roof rat, and the world would be the better for it.
It's only a "Sophie's Choice" if you think dogs and humans had equal value. But let's not pretend that we don't already assign hierarchies. Would having to decide between a cockroach and a dog also present you with a brutal, "Sophie's Choice" dilemma? Of course it wouldn't.
So hierarchies do exist. If you think dogs matter (or should matter) in this world as much as children do, just come out and say so. But we shouldn't blame a professor for asking us to think "philosophically."
That said, let me agree with you on something. Yes, this is a rather contrived intellectual exercise. Yet, for me at least, it goes a ways to explain how we can all know, intellectually, that 90,000 children in the world die each week from malnutrition-related diseases, and yet not "suffer" psychically from it.
The question is a matter of 'knowing' the child or the dog. Your classmates know and love their dogs; not the african child. They have a relationship with the dog. That's what I've always hated about philosophy - it takes emotion out of the equation and we are an emotional species. So the question is outside of any realm of the reality we enounter.
If the question was posed between killing their dog or killing a child they knew, you would have gotten a different answer. It has nothing to do with valuing one species over the other.
cleveland,
The Q&A was followed by a long discussion, during which the point you raised was mentioned. Obviously, personal attachment would be a factor.
But what would we, as parents, say to our kids when it came to counselling them on so philosophical an issue? Would we preach to them that, as much as we love ol' Spot, his life (like that of the cockroach and gerbil) is less precious than human life? Isn't that the approach we take in teaching our children not to lie? Even parents who are chronic liars tend to preach the virtues of honesty to their children.
We should not demonize the likes of Michael Vick for his culturally challenged treatment of pit bulls. Mr. Vicks may yet step forward as a champion for animal rights on his road to rehabilitation. Imagine twenty million football fan's fingers crossed. In the meantime, Brad Pitt can forget about his Dog Fight Club movie project.
I applaud Richard's commentary.
No one's demonized Vick. He's done a good job of doing that himself. Too many people are tossing off responsibilty for what Vick did on everything from some abstraction like culture to fame. Vick alone was responsible for the trouble he's now in and he should pay for it dearly with several years in prison and banishment from the football field for the rest of his life.
We dont have to demonize vick; he's already done that himself. "Culturally challenged" is a nice euphemism for the cruel behavior of such a heartless monster!
And shame on his momma for not raising him right. The main objective of parenting is to raise one's children to be compassionate, caring, principled human beings. vick's mother failed spectacularly in that task. I feel sorry for her; she must feel really badly that her son turned out to be such a piece of garbage!
Let's give equal blame to his father, shall we? He should have taught him by example how to be a man. Why do mothers get all the blame?
Thank you Mr. Belzer (I am a huge fan of all of the TV shows you've graced with your presence). I thought at first read, your article was going to be about Michael Vick - that scumbag. I have never seen "Dog Whisperer" but it seems that the title belies what's underneath. Training dogs with pain is unforgiveable and I am thankful that you have brought this to all readers of Huffpost and hopefully millions more.
Good piece. I have seen "The Dog Whisperer" on TV and I thought to myself, this guy credits himself with being able to handle dogs? I thought he was over the top with some of his techniques. And, furthermore, his title alone suggests arrogance. Thanks for posting this. I cannot believe people find the "sport" entertaining. It's sick!
A society is judged by how it treats its less fortunate and its animals.
--
If this is true, then America will be judged very harshly indeed. And by whom? We don't seem to care what other countries think of us.
"A SOCIETY IS JUDGED BY HOW IT TREATS ITS LESS FORTUNATE AND ITS ANIMALS."
I believe that was the statement made. The answer would be "future generations."
Many Asian countries eat dogs, Islamic countries hate dogs, etc.
It has nothing to do about what other countries think about America, but more what we think about ourselves.
You have got to think about something other than those broken-record talking points.
Not every thing comes back to them.
This is for the late, great, mute, we called Bubba, the best friend and family member we have ever known. (My family and I.)
He was not our property, but a family member.
"We don't seem to care what (they) think of us."
Famous last words.
Amen to that!
History isn't going to be too kind to us of late 20th-early 21st century America, and rightly so. We've become a dog-eat-dog society in so many ways.
KindAndThoughtful--I totally agree.
We have become a nation of blood lusting killers.
We have lost our connection to life: human, animal, and planetary. We are destroying our planet and the life that inhabits it. We should be ashamed of our thoughtlessness. I am sick of all the killing Americans pursue for sport, for fun. Michael Vick is a sociopath and so is anyone connected to dog fighting or a culture that thinks humans know best just because we have opposable thumbs and can master language.
Our world is in ruination because people don't value life. We don't get it. But each of us will be revisiting those attitudes on our death beds.
I'll take my dog over most humans any day.
How many children do you have?
I have four. Four beautiful and often confounding daughters who's lives and well being I place infinitely above and beyond my own. My wife and I are trying to be honest and open in our rearing of them.
They want a dog. I hate dogs. Just do. I never developed a taste for alcohol, I never paid any attention to sports, and I never had that boy/dog relationship you've read about in a variety of stories over the years. I don't wish them harm, I just don't notice them.
Eventually I'll cave (because I always do). I'll get them a dog... But I would never endorse the confusion of pet over people importance.
By the way... It's our environment that's in trouble. Not the planet. The planet is an indifferent ball of rock and water. It'll be following it's path around the sun with or without human beings. It did so for millions of years before humans, and will (barring an enormous meteor strike or similar catastrophe) continue to do so after be it covered in ice, water, molten lava, desert, or dijon mustard.
Some questions to consider before owning a dog: Can I afford it? Do I have space for it? Is it fair to keep it on a chain or cooped up in the house while I work? Should I consider the rights and feelings of my neighbors? (tough one here unless everybody in your trailer park insists on having dogs), should I depend on the local municipalities to provide recreational space and activities for my dogs? Training?
A few other things to consider before buying any pet. Do you have the time for it? Are you at work all day and much of the weekend? After work is it late when you get home because of other obligations or socalizing? You do not have time and it's unfair to the animal. The best animal will eventually have behavorial problems and end up at the pound in this situation. Are you getting the animal as a pet for a child? Pets are wonderful for children, but read the above again. Remeber you are the adult and without fail you will shoulder a big portion of the responsibility.
It amazes me how so many people consider animals, nature, other people expendable. We should be ashamed that we harm all that we touch without regard to our future. This kind of sociopathic behaviour is a symptom of a greater disease.
I have rescued many former fighting dogs that would have surely died if I did not buy them form their sick, sociopathic weak and inferior owners. Each of them looking at first with fear, only to be renewed by love and care. I too was renewed by those experiences. I will never forget those that I saved and those that I could not because I was too late or could only afforb to buy one or two at the time.
I will NEVER watch football again (avid, rabid fan pun intended) if they allow that murdererous Michael Vick back on the field. He and those like him should rot in jail for the rest of their lives.
It amazes me how so many people consider animals, nature, other people expendable. We should be ashamed that we harm all that we touch without regard to our future. This kind of sociopathic behaviour is a symptom of a greater disease.....Amen Brother
I am a fan, Mr. Belzer. And so is my dog, Teddy. Methinks you remind him of his long lost father.
My brother's dog growled at a toddler and he slammed that mutt really hard in order to get the point across.
He inflicted pain and fear on the dog to condition her against aggression towards children.
What's the alternative, euthanasia?
Ceazar Milan is definitely not perfect. He's saved some dogs which would definitely have been euthanized if not for him training the dog through physical aggression.
On the other hand, one of Ceazar's trainers almost killed a dog by leaving it left tied up on a tread mill.
Maybe Ceazar's dog pack is getting too big.
PaulGaskin,
The dogs personal trainer(not belonging to the CM staff) hired by the owner pryor to the visit at the dog center was there.Cesar Milan was not present.It was an unfortunate accident but the dog is ok and there was a settlement.
Your brother should have also investigated why the dog growled at the toddler. People with kids always blame the dog when many times the kids haven't been taught how to treat animals. Which is why so many get bitten.
The dog growling was a warning. Did your brother see what had happened before that?
My cousin has two boys. One day his visiting mother observed one of them hitting the dog on the head with his metal bowl very hard while the other one giggled and was squealing for 'his turn'. The dog turned and snapped. My cousin went batshit at the dog when all the dog was doing was trying to defend itself.
If you're going to have kids and animals in the same house it is up to the parent - not the dog - to teach the child to not tease, pull,poke or hit them. The problem with too many parents is that they expect their dog to take the same crap they do from their kids and a dog isn't going to.
"My brother's dog growled at a toddler and he slammed that mutt really hard in order to get the point across."
And the point IS??
You really think the dog connected growling at the toddler with getting " slammed" by your brother?
The dog more likely connected being near your brother with getting hit! The next time your brother calls the dog he will pissed off that the dog won't come and probably "slam " him again! The he will never be able to get the dog to come to him since it will think it will get hit if it is near your brother.
The better explaination is your brother was just pissed at the dog for gowling and "slammed" it. Makes your brother feel good but doesn't teach the dog much except to be afraid of him.
Always amazes me how little people understand about dog behavior. Hitting a dog is DEFIETILY NOT TRAINING, it is more like abuse from an ignorant owner.
"What is the alternative ? " Too many people believe that brute force is the only way to deal with dogs with behavioral problems. This blogger is ignorant concerning alternative methods of training and changing behavior. There are myriad ways to counter condition dogs using operant conditioning and desensitization and they are expressed in books and dvds by Bob Bailey, Jean Donaldson,Patricia McConnell, Turid Rugass and more. It's "Me or the Dog" on Animal Planet is a much better alternative to "The Dog Whisperer"
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
