Man Never Wanted A Dog But Allowed His Wife And Kids To Have One As Long As They Took Care Of It, Gets Called A Jerk For Calling Out Their Neglect
An OP (original poster) shares about a family dog that was only ever taken in under the terms that the OP would not have to take care of it. Although OP was obviously opposed to getting a dog, he finally agreed as long as he didn’t have to take care of it – his wife and kids had to do all that. It worked for the first year and half before OP’s family lost interest, so OP was the one who ended up caring for the dog — they were taking care of the dog with feeding it, taking it out to walk, cleaning up after it, and dealing with behavioural issues. After years of reluctantly shouldering the burden, OP finally told them enough was enough: the family can either look after the dog responsibly, find it a new home, or pay for someone else to take care of it. OP’s wife and kids claim that they are being too harsh and that the dog has had weeks to bond with OP.
Read for more info Reddit
Dads who don’t want dogs end up loving them the most, but this one is an exception
He didn’t want a dog but was convinced by his family that he wouldn’t need to take care of it, so he allowed them to get it
Annoyed, he gathered the family to present them an ultimatum and was called a jerk for bringing it up
OP’s situation illustrates a common problem seen in households where pets are purchased without a solid, ongoing commitment to their care. The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) notes that 20–30% of pets are rehomed by their owners, who are ill-equipped for the life-long commitment. Here, OP has stated their boundaries and their family has not upheld them, but pushed the burden onto OP. Previous research on pet ownership has highlighted the need for broadly equitably distributed responsibility in families to avoid situations like this.
Ethically, OP is on sound ground — pet ownership 101 is to always put the animal first. If a pet is neglected for a long period of time, such as not getting enough exercise or attention, this can also lead to the pet developing behavioral problems or other forms of anxiety, which can end up negatively impacting the quality of life for the pet. OP is empathetic and instead of just whining about it or complaining, they instead recognize these signs and come to a conclusion for the dog’s sake (rehome it to a better place where it can be properly cared for)
OP was also protected legally, with a signed agreement, which is a rare but great way of handling family expectations when it comes to pets. The idea behind the document may not be legally enforceable, but it does capture neatly the amounts to which OP tried to block off from the beginning. That helps to reduce the impression that what OP is doing is out of nowhere or out of some emotion.
With similar cases in the internet/online forum, OP’s experience is the same. One of the most popular motifs is how one family member winds up being the “default caregiver” after early ebullience from others fizzles. In such scenarios, many users call for candor, accountability, and the acceptance of hard choices–such as rehoming–if the animal cannot be properly cared for.
But Reddit users saw the decision to be responsible and were actually impressed seeing that the man wasn’t a dog person
OP is not the A-hole. With otherwords, they have done so much to take care of a dog they did not want to adopt to begin with, keeping the dog happy, just because. This ultimatum is pragmatic, sensible, and prioritizes both the well-being of the dog and family responsibility. The family may rightfully decry the approach as harsh, but it is a rational response to two years of failure to meet commitments. Even OP set up a new place for the dog to live which shows that the well-being of the dog is more important than the convenience of having it in the house.
