Ellen's terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day

They made Ellen cry! REVOLT!!!!!!

Seriously, if the dog was safe and with kids who loved it, what was the problem? The dog agency needs to reevaluate itself.

I <3 Ellen...she can do no wrong.

I LOVE Ellen so damn much...

Her feelings are genuine and it breaks my heart seeing her this way :(

I understand the Mutts and Moms dog rescue agency in wanting to make sure the dogs get a lovely home but come on it's Ellen Degeneres animal lover, like she would give her dog to some neglectful random family. Seriously?

It must have been very hard for Ellen to give her dog away.  That dog agency doesn't seem to be thinking of the owner's feelings on this matter.  Couldn't they have sent someone to check up on Iggy at the new place?  I would think the owner should have a say so in what happens to their dog, without these type of stipulations, but I also understand why they are there. They are there to protect the dog. However, I think they should re-evaluate Ellen's situation and see if it's truly in the dogs best interest.  Which I believe it was.  The only thing wrong with that is, if they allow her to do it, they would have to allow others to do it.  It can't be like that, it has to be one way or other people will feel like giving their dogs away when they want, or are fed up with having them.

"No one in this world is a virgin, the world screws us all!"

Rationally dealing with the situation would have been a better way to go. It's not a nazi camp, it's a dog rescue agency! If she would have spoken to the right people(without the sob-fest) I'm sure something could have been arranged.

And I'm sure the dog wasn't taken away a second before she started filming the show. Why was she still crying? Since she could collect herseld so quickly during the show it makes me wonder why couldn't she have done that before it started? Or maybe she could have but the waterworks just seemed a better way to go.

The first would indicate that she is overly emotional, quite irrational and cannot be taken seriously. On the other hand she might have chosen to manipulate the agency/the public to get her way.

Either way she has discredited herself, probably in the eyes of the agency workers as well as mine. Don't get me wrong, I love Ellen as much as the next lesbian, but that was out of line.

What kind of agency is this? I guess since it's "adoption", they treat it like it's a child...and that WOULD be bad if she just gave a baby away to another family..heh. I don't know, I know it's their policy or whatever, but I think that's complete crap. She wouldn't do anything to put the animal in danger, she's such an animal lover....grrrr.

www.myspace.com/emmahuntermusic

It's just a dog.

Save those tears for starving africans or something.

I feel for her, I've got three dogs and know just how they can win your heart over!

Some animal organisations need a stern shaking up, don't get me wrong, they do a fantastic job raising the awareness of animal rights and saving their lives but sometimes they can get a little bureaucratic and fanatical in the way they deal with individual cases. There is a tendency for them to think that when it comes to animal welfare, they are the last word of authority...which is utter bollocks of course. Have a heart and give the kids back their dog!

What this agency did was just plain HORRIBLE! Instead of acting in this manner they should have looked into the situation and environment where the dog was living. Their first priority should have been Iggy (which is a cute name by the way!). They could have interviewed the family to determine that he was in fact in a loving & safe environment. Ripping Iggy away from those kids and returning him to the custody of their "organization" was not in his best interest. I'm sure the dog was just as attached to the family as they were to him.

That agency was way too harsh. I don't think Ellen is crying just over the dog. For starters it had to be extremely difficult for her to give Iggy away. Her only comfort, I'm sure, was in knowing he was with a family who loved him & wanted him. 10 times out of 10 she's upset about the fact the family has been made to go through what they are now experiencing. It's also probably a pretty upseting thought knowing the dog is now living in a facility and not with his family who he grew attached to. I respect people that are REAL and if Ellen felt like crying and making an emotional plea that was just fine. She didn't hurt anybody or did that make her less of a woman, lesbian nor anything else.

This can't be ok if it makes Ellen cry! I bet she just meant to talk about it, but sometimes you just can't hold back the tears.

I understand that the dog rescue agency has to 'follow the rules', but sometimes following rules without thinking makes you do stupid things. A little common sense is very much appreciated. Would it have been so difficult to just send someone to check on the dog, make sure it was ok in the new home? I'm no expert, but I don't think it would...

over the top, imo.

I mostly agree with what p6der and JBLuver said.

Being reasonably sentimental people, we may think of hundreds of ways in which the agency could have made the situation lighter. But then again, that's us being sympathetic with Ellen. From a neutral viewpoint, the agency was only conforming to a legally enforceable contract and they have the right to choose to not be nice. Everyone has their own problem, right?

I seriously think Ellen could have been more mature about it, sharing the moral of the story (read the contracts that you signed) with the audience, for instance. Why did she have to cry (like a baby) and plead? Why made a fuss about it on her relatively popular show, and then have us make a fuss about her questionable manner?

And it is precisely because I love Ellen that I am criticizing her.

I agree with many of the statements made.  I believe the rescue shelter went too far by removing the dog from the loving home.  They should have checked up with  the new family to see if the dog was in good hands.  I wonder if they did what they did to make a spectacle of the situation.  Probably so.  If Ellen was shedding tears than she really was sorry for what happened.  Give the damn dog back to the loving home and Ellen thought she was doing the right thing and I believe she did. 

"Normal is not something to aspire to, it's something to get away from."

...or do alot of you guys actually think that Ellen hasn't talked to the organization after this happened? Would she be allowed (/would she allow herself) to do this if there was a better, less public way of resolving this matter? I guess it's possible but it just doesn't make any sense.

I feel for Ellen. What I got from this clip was that she feels like a total ass for making the family go through this and now she wants to make everything right. It felt like she's tried but didn't succeed and that this is the last way out. And that that's why she's so upset.

Did Ellen get the adoption fee's refunded?  I would think not being as she gave it to another family, thus violating her contract.  If this family still wants Iggy and I'm sure they do, I would think they have to pay an adoption fee. 

This would make Iggy paid for twice.

I've read some pretty lame things in my day, but these comments take the cake.

I've worked in animal rescue for 30 years.  There is one fundamental rule of ethical and responsible dog ownership: A dog is for life!  When asked when it is acceptable to surrender a dog, the only correct answer is, "Never."  Yet at least 60% of all dogs are abandoned by their families, at some point.  This is at least the THIRD home for this poor dog.  The original breeder is to blame.  The former owner is to blame.  Ellen is to blame.  Neither the rescue group, nor the hairdresser share any blame.

I have yet to find anyone who agrees to take a dog and admits they'll neglect it, choke with a collar, yell at it, won't train it, won't properly supervise it, and will be willing to give it away to the next person who comes along and says he/she'll give it a "good" home, if the dog becomes an inconvenience at some point in the future.  For goodness sakes one of the most common excuses given for abandoning a dog is "moving".  That tells me everything I need to know about how so many dogs end up in rescue in the first place.

Number of dogs killed in shelters because (formerly) "loving" owners didn't want them anymore: http://www.humanesocietyall.com/spayneuter/

The majority of animal cruelty is committed by owners who claim they "love" their dogs: http://www.pet-abuse.com/pages/cruelty_database.php

When you don't carefully screen potential homes, and fail to have buyers/adopters sign a legal contract requiring them to return the dog if, at any time in the dog's life, they decide to re-home it, you just can't know what happens to that dog: http://www.animalaidsw.org/free.html

Every reputable breeder/rescue group/shelter has a similar contract.  We go through a great deal of effort ensuring the next home is the last.  I have spent tens of thousands of dollars readying homeless dogs for adoption.  I can't calculate the amount of time and effort that goes into it, as well.  That doesn' count the screening pocess, the home checks, the reference checks, and the interview process.  And to think some thoughtless person would come along and negate it all with her ignorance or "good intentins" is offensive to me.  Our work is ALWAYS about the dog, and doing everything humanly possible to ensure it has the best available home...FOR LIFE!  Even celebrities aren't allowed to circumvent legal contracts.  They're there for a reason, which clearly both Ellen and many people here have yet to grasp.

I agree that the best solution would be to approve the hairdresser's home, given the cicumstances.  But that is up to the dog's legal guardian: the rescue group.

Unlike children, a dog can never report its abuse or neglect to authorities.  They rely on their current guardians to do everything they can to ensure the best available home.  The very worst thing, short of actual cruelty, anyone can do to a dog is to rip it from its pack.  Ellen did that, despite the efforts of the rescue group, so she clearly lacks credibilty on this issue.  She also broke the terms of the contract.  She made a lot of bad choices here.  I generally like Ellen, but this was a very bad show. 

If she really wanted to help, she should push the rescue group to appove her hairdresser's home, and offer to pay to solve any problems that might be standing in the way (i.e. lack of fencing, hiring a dog walker if the dog will be alone for long periods, etc.).  That would at least be helpful.  Crying and suggesting the rescue shouldn't have re-rescued the dog from an unapproved home makes a mockery of the whole animal rescue process.  We work hard at this.  We know what we're doing. Our policies are in place for a reason that seem to be inexplicable to so many...but WE (at least) know, and live with the consequences of capricious attitdes in transfering ownership of dogs.  I have absolutely no reason to believe the hairdresser and her family understand the lifetime responsibilities of dog ownership, or won't just give it away to some stranger who promises, with cream and sugar on top, to give it a good home, at some point in the future.

Here's an example of a relatively good adoption process:  http://www.magdrl.org/adoptionprocedure.htm

Here's the kind of form anyone acquiring a dog (from any repuable source, such as a reputable breeder, rescue group, or shelter) should have to fill out, even to be considered: http://www.danesindistress.com/adoptions/adoptionapp.php

If you didn't have to go through a similar process when you acquired your dog, you acquired it from an unethical source...without question.  You can choose to be part of the solution (for so many abandoned dogs), or you can choose to remain part of the problem.  Much of the public still supports unethical breeding and ownership practices.

If you want to know more about responsible dog ownership or ethical re-homing practices, feel free to contact me.

Ellen is very funny and a lovely woman.  She made a terrible mistake.  The rescue group will do the right thing for this dog, in the end...what ever they determine that to be.

"Arson!!!!!Arson!!!!" Curse You Mutts and Moms! OK Reflect and reason..... I think they were just followin the agreement.... but still Arson! I say!

i have watched Ellen's show for a while now and can only remember one other time when she has cried (please, let me know if there have been more). I feel that she would never do anything for publicity. Rather, she is only human and will get emotional over issues (whether it's hosting an awards show or having to give away her dog). As a regular person it must be difficult to put on a happy face when you've been having trouble with, what ultimately feels like, the loss of a family member. While being honest about what's going on in her personal life (as she always has been - from coming out to discussing how she forgot Portia's birthday to being in a minor car accident) her sadness clearly got the best of her. Who are we to judge or blame her?

...Senihele...

...That some of us have never abandoned a dog. 

Not understanding the issues involved in RESPONSIBLY re-homing dogs just proves your lack credibility on this subject.

And I could argue equally as well that the dog may not have been tested for its behavior around children that age, since it was supposed to be living with two adults.  If the dog later bit one of the girls, who would be to blame?  (It always ends up being the voiceless dog, of course.)  Woud the rescue groups adoption procedures make sense then?  Is that what it would take for people to "get" it???

The little girl is crying because Ellen violated the contract she signed with a rescue group; one that is bound to do what is in the best interests of that dog, even if it is unpopular.  They don't just have the legal right, but they have a moral and ethical duty to make sure it goes to an approved home. 

I posted links to common adoption procedures any reputable rescue group/shelter/breeder already has in place. Did you read them?  The point is, they're the standard contract most adopters sign.  Every one of them does (or should) prohibit subsequent transfer of ownership of the dog.

It is NOT ethical or responsible to just give a dog to somone you "think" will give it what you "think" is a good home.  I've had to kick far too many dog owners in the pants, over the decades, to get them to realize that leaving a dog alone for 8 hours every day is not okay, or that yanking it by the neck or yelling at it is not okay, or leaving it in the yard while they go out and do errands is not okay, or "spanking" it when they've failed to propely housetrain it is not okay.  I mean, I could go on and on and on and on.  The torment that people, who always swear up and down that they love their dogs, are willing to put them through, never ceases to amaze me.

As I wrote already, ideally the hairdresser's home could be approved by the rescue group.  But that is up to the dog's legal guardian...you know...since Ellen violated the contract...that would be the rescue group.

For goodness sakes.  My 9-year-old Great Dane must be returned to the rescue organization, if I ever lose my mind, and decide I don't want her anymore.  You see, it may have been over eight years ago, but I SIGNED A CONTRACT THAT LEGALLY REQUIRES ME TO DO SO.  The concern is always that the dog goes to a sceened, approved home, above all else.  Everyone says they'll give a dog a good home.  Millions of dogs are killed in shelters after living with these folks or a while.  Millions more suffer outright abuse and neglect.  Even more suffer daily indignities and minor abuses, in silence.

It's shameful the lack of understanding for even basic responsible dog ownership principles.  This is why rescue is so desperately needed. 

Yeah...animal rescue groups are the problem...not the millions of people who abandon their pets.

Let's just put it this way.  By abandoning your dog, you demonstrate you're not a responsible dog owner.  ("A dog is for life." "The only correct answer to the question, 'When is it okay to surrener a dog?' is 'Never.'")  By definition, an irresponsble dog owner is probably the worst person to ensure the appropriateness of a new home.

When a dog of my preferred breed was discovered up for sale on the Internet  (FOR SALE!!!  ON THE INTERNET!?!?), a concerned person contacted me for help.  I contacted the seller and offered to take the dog, no questions asked, and ensure it was responsibly re-homed.  I emphasized that I would not pay anything for it, of course.  I'd just make sure it went to an approved home.

I didn't hear anything from the seller (didn't expect to).  Then, late one night, I checked my email before going to bed, and received an email from the seller with the following message.  "Can you come and get him now?"

That's real concern for the dog.  I could be anyone.

Long story short, I went and picked up the dog, about an hour away.  The owner just handed him over to me (choke chain and all) (loser), and we arrived home around midnight.  Needed all kinds of veterinary care.  Not housetrained.  A 130lb puppy with no training whatsoever.  His arrival made three Danes in my home...all of them from rescue situations.  I won't bother trying to count how many homeless, abandoned, abused dogs have passed through my doors, in 30 years.  I just know I've never abanoned an animal.  Every single one of my pets has come from some kind of re-homing situation.

You'll forgive me if I don't buy he "oh, we'll give him a good home" plea. 

Oh, and I have to say I really don't think ensuring a dog remains in the home where it was placed counts as continuous meddling in peronsal affairs.  Every reputable breeder/rescue group/shelter has this clause, and people successfully adopt dogs every day.  Unless you're planning to do something unethical, it shouldn't even be a concern. 

you want people to care for non human animals?? you need to let them be consistent.

if ellen was a supporter of the organization, she ought to respect their policies and understand why they are in place.

i'm sure she does understand and respect them, she just forgot to follow them.

we all cry when it's not the best time/place sometimes.

the dog will probably end up with the girls anyway--- just within the system this time, rather than outside of it.

i bet that group has done so much and the employees/volunteers ggive so much of themselves to be there for their shifts and keep it going. it's not easy.

i don't think it was appropriate to publicize the whole thing, especially on her veyr popular tv show, but .... it IS her show.

so let's just move along :)

i hope someone took the time to be close with iggy during everything.

my adopted boy is super sensitive since his owners of 8 years brought him to the HS just because they were moving to an apartment where no pets were allowed..... and i've known/worked with alot of animals coming from similar places... and it is the saddest thing. so above all, i hope iggy was taken care of first and foremost, and i'm sure ellen, her audience, and the organization all can agree on that.