DeGeneres under fire for giving away dog - NON CHOW

Jeff&Peks · Post by **Jeff&Peks** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:29 pm

I like Ellen Degeneras but she did wrong. Talk about a strict rescue, this is the way all rescues should be. Like I say, don't mess with the dogs, fastest way there is to turn the public against you.

DeGeneres under fire for giving away dog By BETH HARRIS, Associated Press Writer
Mon Oct 15, 11:09 PM ET

LOS ANGELES - Ellen DeGeneres is in the doghouse with a pet rescue agency after giving a pooch away to her hairdresser because it didn't get along with her cats.

The talk show hostess and her partner Portia de Rossi adopted Iggy, a Brussels Griffon mix, on Sept. 20. But when things didn't work out, DeGeneres gave the dog to her hairdresser.

In doing so, DeGeneres violated an agreement with the Mutts and Moms agency by not informing them of the handoff.

When the agency called DeGeneres to ask about Iggy, she said she found another home for the dog. The agency sent a representative to the hairdresser's home Sunday and took the dog away.

DeGeneres went public with the doggy ordeal Monday while taping an episode of her show to air Tuesday. She admitted she didn't read all the paperwork involving the adoption.

DeGeneres said she spent $3,000 having the dog neutered and trained to be with her cats. But the dog had too much energy and was too rambunctious, she told her television audience.

"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," she said in a show transcript provided to The Associated Press.

"I thought I did a good thing. I tried to find a loving home for the dog because I couldn't keep it."

DeGeneres said her hairdresser's daughters, ages 11 and 12, had bonded with Iggy and were heartbroken when the dog was taken away.

"Because I did it wrong, those people went and took that dog out of their home, and took it away from those kids," a sobbing DeGeneres said on her show.

"I feel totally responsible for it and I'm so sorry. I'm begging them to give that dog back to that family. I just want the family to have their dog. It's not their fault. It's my fault. I shouldn't have given the dog away. Just please give the dog back to those little girls."

Mutts and Moms, a volunteer nonprofit organization in Pasadena, does not have a listed phone number and didn't immediately respond to an e-mail request for comment.

redangie24 · Post by **redangie24** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:38 am

She should have given it back if the pup was not a good fit for the family. However, the agency should have at least evaluated the new family before taking it away. The pup may have had a good home to live in. I wounder how much time she spent with the pup and if she had introduced the pup before the adoption. Seems with all her money she could afford the best trainers and dogsitters to help with the extra energy. You would think she would have checked out how well the pup got along with cats beforehand....since she has cats. Oh, well. Hope the pup gets a good home.

enchantedonyx · Post by **enchantedonyx** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 10:01 am

Thing is, if she had called the rescue and said, "hey, this isn't working out and my friend's family wants the dog," they probably would have done a home visit and application from the friend and let them have the dog.

And when you adopt a pet from a rescue they tell you, "If you can't keep him/her, you must give him/her back to us!"

I like Ellen, too, but lately she's getting on my nerves- first for parading her "designer" dog on tv and raving about the "breed" and now this.

sit_by_the_beach · Post by **sit_by_the_beach** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 10:06 am

I adopted my first chow Luna sight unseen. I had 8 cats at the time and took the chance. It was either I adopt Luna or she'd end up in a shelter where no one, believe me no one would have adopted her.

Three of my cats were aging. Luna did a quick chase the first day and all was quiet after that. It was the eldest cat that cornered Luna one day, the other cats joined and formed a half circle. They all growled and made the most horrible noises. Luna could have killed them all had she wanted to. I took a pitcher of water and splashed the cats. From then on, I locked the dog in my bedroom whenever I had to leave the house...for Luna's protection.. You can't always predict if animals do or don't get along.

I think if Ellen D. had more time on her hands, she may have been able to train the dog or seperate the pets? Some people have more money than brains.

-Karin

bama · Post by **bama** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 11:45 am

Something sounds strange about this story.
If the dog came from a shelter or rescue, wouldn't it already be neutered?
I'd like to hear what the shelter/foster parent has to say?
Were there any approved applicants, who were turned down, because Ellen D. was accepted?
What does the amount of money Ellen spent have to do with a hill of beans?
I'm sorry for the little girls, it's not their fault, but it's not for Ellen to decide the puppy's fate, no matter how much money she spent.
What's stopping this family from making an application to adopt this puppy?
Lots of unanswered questions here.

Post by **Auddymay** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 12:05 pm

You know you are in Lala-land, when someone spends $3,000 on a problem that doesn't get fixed...good gravy!

Jeff&Peks · Post by **Jeff&Peks** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 10:08 pm

More to the story.

DeGeneres' former dog stays with agency

LOS ANGELES - Ellen DeGeneres' doggy drama intensified Tuesday after her tearful plea on her talk show led to death threats against the rescue group that took back her adopted dog for violating the contract, according to a spokesman for the agency's owners.

DeGeneres explained on her show that the Brussels Griffon terrier mix didn't get along with her cats, so she gave it to her hairstylist's family. The owners of Mutts and Moms claimed that DeGeneres violated the adoption agreement by not informing them that she was giving the dog away and removed Iggy from the hairstylist's home Sunday.

As a result of the publicity, Marina Batkis and Vanessa Chekroun received voice mail and e-mail threats of death and arson and were besieged by the media, disrupting business at Paws Boutique store in Pasadena, where they handle the volunteer, nonprofit rescue agency, attorney Keith A. Fink said.

Batkis rejected DeGeneres' plea to give the dog back to her hairstylist's family.

"She (Batkis) doesn't think this is the type of family that should have the dog," said Fink, who is not legally representing the owners but is authorized to speak for them. "She is adamant that she is not going to be bullied around by the Ellen DeGenereses of the world ... They are using their power, position and wealth to try to get what it is they want."

DeGeneres' attorney, Kevin Yorn, did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

"It's very upsetting to hear that someone is getting those kind of calls," DeGeneres' publicist Kelly Bush said. "Ellen just wants the dog reunited with the family."

On her talk show taped Tuesday and airing Wednesday, a serious DeGeneres reiterated to her audience that "the dog needs to go to the family."

It "just needs to be in a good home," she continued, according to a transcript given to The Associated Press. "All that you're supposed to do is put a dog in a loving home."

DeGeneres had said her hairdresser's daughters, ages 11 and 12, had bonded with Iggy and were heartbroken when the dog was taken away.

Fink said Moms and Mutts has a rule that families with children under 14 are not allowed to adopt small dogs.

"It's for the protection of the dog," he said.

Laura · Post by **Laura** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 5:05 am

Well I'm not a huge Ellen fan and yeah she should have read the contract and called the agency...butttttttt...there are a gazillion animals that need homes and their policy of not adopting to families with children under the age of 14 seems ridiculous to me. Little kids would make more sense to me. Isn't the point to find the animals a good home with people who want them to love? Sheesh. As far as death threats and the like that is just stupid.

coleywoley · Post by **coleywoley** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 5:11 am

I learned when looking at shelters and rescue groups that quite a few of them have policies like that. The most common one I found was families with children under six could not adopt a puppy. I understand the reasoning behind that one, though I don't agree with it bbut fourteen seems extreme to me.

luvchows · Post by **luvchows** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 6:16 am

It sounds like this rescue concentrates on small dogs. I am sure they, like other rescues, have developed policies and procedures based on previous experiences with small dogs and children under 14 yrs. old. Bottom line, the dog is probably highly adoptable and could be placed in a lower risk home, without adolescent children. So, the dog WILL find another great home.

Ellen is ultimately responsible for what happened to her hairdresser’s family and the little dog. She would prove herself to be the bigger person if she just swallowed her pride, and apologized to everyone involved. Then go about the business of trying to help her hairdresser’s family find another dog.

redangie24 · Post by **redangie24** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 6:19 am

Did y'all see the video? It really was like watching a child who was not getting their way. Silly woman. I really have a hard time beliving they did not tell her outright that she had to return the pup if she could not care for it. Rescues are big on that point.

furballchowbaby · Post by **furballchowbaby** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 6:36 am

This "rescue" was a bonafide pet store. What rescue charges $600 for a dog that isn't even neutered?? So, they charge Ellen $600, she messes up and they see an opportunity to legally take the dog back without returning the $600 and can turn around and adopt that same dog back out at $600 or more since it's now neutered. Meanwhile, this dog is in a CAGE instead of with a family. Something stinks here and it isn't dog pooh.

sit_by_the_beach · Post by **sit_by_the_beach** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 8:32 am

I had a verbal agreement to return my first chow Luna to the foster parent if the adoption didn't work out. I also agreed to have her spayed, no puppies. This is legally binding in Canada even though I never signed a paper.
Karin

Post by **Zhuyos mom** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 8:36 am

Ditto Melissa. Now my RDR adoption agreement for Tigger has a "within two weeks of adoption" refund clause. After that the donation is not refundable. I'm sure that is the case with Mom's and Mutts. However, the under 14/small dog clause is odd. But they must have some bad experiences with it or they wouldn't have it on their agreement. Personally, I was already training a family dog by 14. And I wouldn't really consider a PBGV a small dog, but we haven't seen a photo of it since it is a mix. What is clear with my adoption agreement is the agreement to not transfer ownership of the pet to any person, friend or family member without the autho of the rescue. That's in bold.

I think both ends should be more open minded. Ellen should have the rescue people on her show and they can discuss. Other than the under 14, I wonder if the hairdresser's family put in an adoption application and if the rescue did a home inspection. Or is this all going by hear-say. Then again, I think November sweeps are coming so this drama, timely or not, has a method to the madness.

Jeff&Peks · Post by **Jeff&Peks** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 9:57 am

I like the fact that the Rescue is so strict but I don't agree with the 14 year old policy and there's a small thought at the back of my mind there might be some other motives going on here, money and who the adopter is. You can tell what kind of minds are in LA, who calls and makes death threats to a Rescue there's a bunch of nuts in LA so you have to be really careful where that dog goes.

When we adopted Pekoe from the Milo Foundation we had to sign an agreement that we would return her if we were ever unable to keep her, They never called to check but they held their adoption events where we shopped in Berkley so we would stop by on the week ends and let them see Pekoe, I still e-mail them every few years to give them an update on her. Pekoe is posted on Milo's websites success stories.

luvchows · Post by **luvchows** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:14 am

What rescue charges $600 for a dog that isn't even neutered??

You would be surprised what rescues get for those little froo froo dogs…
Even in the Midwest, it is not unusual for them to charge adoption fees of $400-450 for unaltered puppies. If this dog was a puppy under 6 months they probably prefered not to neuter that young.

<<So, they charge Ellen $600, she messes up and they see an opportunity to legally take the dog back without returning the $600 and can turn around and adopt that same dog back out at $600 or more since it's now neutered.>>

Key point is Ellen messed up! After a reasonable period of time, which is usually stated on the contract, not refunding the fee is standard practice. In rescue those funds are used to help other foster dogs in need.

<<Meanwhile, this dog is in a CAGE instead of with a family.>>

We don’t know the family or the dog, but somethings are worse than being caged… like being passed around like a pair of used shoes or a used car. Someone has to step up and take responsibility for the dog and that is what the rescue did. They had every right and Ellen should not have known better!

Post by **jerryo** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:17 am

Here we go again!!!

I am DEFINATELY NOT an Ellen fan!! Due to some of her political positions, I am just the opposite, so it really bothers me to be on her side on this one.

More accurately, I'm on the side of "kids and dogs", and against "adults" who pervert that loving relationship for their own vile purposes. If nothing else good comes from sacrificing the happiness of two children and a dog, MAYBE it will shine the light of day on the insufferable arrogance of some alleged humans in the pet imprisonment industry. These ?????s live by the code of "We will because we can." and they don't care who they hurt in the process. They take a $600 "donation" for their "rescue" because if they sold it through their pet story they'd have to pay tax. They bend their rules for a celebrity, but turn into control freaks with delusions of godhood if faced with a working class family with kids who actually love the dog in question. Better to rip a puppy from a child's arms, so they can decide who deserves to love a dog.

Better to keep the dog caged in their rescue/pet shop until THEY decide to bestow favor on an adult of their, not the dogs, choosing.

And, oh yeah, said adult better have some bucks for a good "donation" to the pet store, err rescue.

God has a real special place in hell for animal and child abusers, and despite all their phoney piety, there are some "rescuers" with standing reservations there. God speed them all on their way.

Jeff&Peks · Post by **Jeff&Peks** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:32 am

As always the press isn't giving both sides of the story they are making the Rescue sound like the bad guys, they make it sound like the rescue just went out and took the dog from two kids. In LA there could be many reasons they took the dog back, the people may live in an apartment, The part of town the people live in, the dog could be being left alone all day, LA, could be illegals, gangs, who knows but the press isn't telling the whole story. I doubt the rescue just went out and grabed the dog out of two poor crying kids arms and ran away with him.

I think the show where she apologies is being aired today.

coleywoley · Post by **coleywoley** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:35 am

I have a small breed dog so I know what kind of havoc a child can wreak in their lives. But I think that way before fourteen a child should know better. My daughter is two and she is animal trained- for both the animal's she runs into and her safety. Growing up with an animal is a great thing for a kid and I thin it makes us better people since you have to think about someone else other than you constantly. I hate that Ellen has decided to use her show as a way to rectify the situation. By doing so she has hurt rescue groups who try to do better for animals as well as the one rescue-pet store she dealt with. It's shameful.

TJordan · Post by **TJordan** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 11:14 am

Who knows what the rescue/store people would have done differently if they hadn't been thrown into the spotlight by Ellen though. nothing good came out of her putting it on her show. She has caused more harm now and people getting death threats, that is insane and she should speak to that fact and put an end to this.

Sojourner11 · Post by **Sojourner11** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 11:37 am

Well what if the family suddenly wasn't able to care for the dog? Do they pass it off again?

I gotta side with the rescue...one they had a contract. Nuff said about that. Portia Rossi must have not been a contract lawyer on Ally McBeal, and Ellen's ignorance to the contract she signed doesn't fly either...she is in show business and everything in show business is about a contract.

It isn't like this is the only dog in CA, if that family really wanted a dog they'd have one. Celebs want to be above everybody and think that nothing with us common folk seems to apply to them and this rescues actions seem to contradict Ellens "above it all" celebrity stature.

luvchows · Post by **luvchows** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 11:37 am

More accurately, I'm on the side of "kids and dogs", and against "adults" who pervert that loving relationship for their own vile purposes. If nothing else good comes from sacrificing the happiness of two children and a dog, MAYBE it will shine the light of day on the insufferable arrogance of some alleged humans in the pet imprisonment industry. These ?????s live by the code of "We will because we can." and they don't care who they hurt in the process. They take a $600 "donation" for their "rescue" because if they sold it through their pet story they'd have to pay tax. They bend their rules for a celebrity, but turn into control freaks with delusions of godhood if faced with a working class family with kids who actually love the dog in question. Better to rip a puppy from a child's arms, so they can decide who deserves to love a dog. Better to keep the dog caged in their rescue/pet shop until THEY decide to bestow favor on an adult of their, not the dogs, choosing. And, oh yeah, said adult better have some bucks for a good "donation" to the pet store, err rescue.

God has a real special place in hell for animal and child abusers, and despite all their phoney piety, there are some "rescuers" with standing reservations there. God speed them all on their way.

Considering that none of us know all the facts, you really took the ball and ran all the way down the field with it, Jerry!! Come back down to earth buddy and get a grip, please!

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:51 pm

Where is Rosie O, maybe she could help Ellen get the little doggie back!

Sounds like the store is trying to make some bucks to me, go snatch the dog and sell it again. Sometimes these rescues just get way too serious for no reason too!

Post by **jerryo** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:51 pm

After having just seen an interview with the lawyer for the rescue on TV, I'll stick with my prior impression.

Interviewer asked 'wouldn't it have been alot easier to just check out the family and redo the paperwork, considering that Ellen was already saying she was the one who screwed up, instead of taking the puppy from two little girls and ending up looking like Snideley Whiplash to the whole world?'

Attorney says, 'well sure, we could have done that. But my clients are "principled" people, and didn't feel anyone else should be making decisions about the dog other than them.'

As I interpret their lawyers position, it all devolved into a spittin' contest not worthy of an elementary school playground. The rescue/pet store operator decided to stand on her perogatives -- damn the kids and puppy!

I don't like Ellen. I don't agree with her on anything I can think of. But I don't find it impossible to believe that anyone could fall in love with a rescue dog. (I know alot of good people who have.) I can believe that dog might not turn out to be a good match to a particular home, (especially if the "rescue" didn't check out the match much in the first place, due to starlight or dollar signs). I can believe that someone could be discussing the need to rehome said dog, when the barber/stlyist or whoever says, "My little girls have been wanting a dog just like that." I can believe that two little girls could fall in love with that puppy and vice versa. I can believe that a person could be so happy to have found a good home for the puppy that they would forget the legalistic details. I can even believe that there are people out there who will hurt children without a second thought and feel self-rightous about it. BUT I DO NOT HAVE TO LIKE IT! Just because it's legal doesn't make it right.

What if the stylist loses her job and can't support the dog. That's possible, but not very likely if she has reached this level of expertise, and people keep growing hair.

Sean, you really surprised me with that comment about "this isn't the only dog in California". I would have thought you, above all others, would understand that each dog is special, especially to the people who love it.

Anyway, the news says that the puppy has been resold. The girls are crushed. The "principled rescuer" can go on feeling good about herself, but I gotta believe she's got a LARGE load of baaad karma coming her way.

Jeff&Peks · Post by **Jeff&Peks** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 3:22 pm

So lets see what PETA has to say.

PETA defends DeGeneres in doggie flap

LOS ANGELES, Oct. 17 (UPI) -- People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals is commending U.S. talk-show host Ellen DeGeneres for adopting a dog from a shelter, even though she gave it away.

PETA officials told TMZ.com they think DeGeneres had good intentions when she gave the pooch she adopted to a friend and her family because the dog did not get along with DeGeneres' cats.

Mutts and Moms, the shelter where DeGeneres adopted Iggy, however, has confiscated the dog, stating DeGeneres was supposed to get its approval before transferring ownership.

"At a time when so many people in Hollywood ... are making impetuous 'pet' purchases, PETA commends Ellen for adopting a homeless animal from a shelter rather than buying a dog," PETA said in a statement.

Although the group doesn't "fully side" with DeGeneres, who skirted rules PETA supports, the organization said the dog should be returned to its adoptive home.

"Ellen was trying to do the right thing in finding the dog a new home," PETA said in a statement. "She just missed a step in neglecting to contact the agency first. We hope that if the new home she arranged turns out to be as good as she thought, the agency will allow the family to take the dog back."