Compassion ... and caution

» 2 Comments | Post a Comment

Our hearts go out to the family in Orange County whose toddler was killed by their dog.

The story is unfortunately not unique, but the sense of tragedy each story engenders never diminishes.

In this case, the 23-month-old girl wandered from her house and into the backyard where a pet pit bull was kept.

No one knows exactly what happened, but the child was mauled and was pronounced dead at the Univer-sity of Virginia Hospital.

There are no easy answers to this tragedy.

Early reports said the mother was distracted when the child wandered outdoors — but how many parents aren’t distracted from time to time? Perfect alertness 24/7 is impossible.

Some critics blame the fact that the dog was reportedly chained, implying that ill treatment contributed to the attack.

We don’t know the circumstances under which this dog might have been restricted, but we do know that attaching a chain to a long overhead wire to create a dog run is an acceptable practice in many rural settings.

Some blame the dog or its breed. But the dog had been a family pet for 10 years without incident.

That said, there are also some common themes to these types of trage-dies that deserve attention.

Jim Parrish, a Virginia lawyer who handles civil cases of dog attacks, said children are the most likely victims of dog attacks.

According to DogsBite.org, a public education Web site on dangerous dogs, 23 people in the U.S. were killed in 2008 in dog attacks. Of those, 16 were children.

In those 23 cases, 15 child and adult victims were killed by pit bulls.

Mr. Parrish said his research has shown that many attacks are by dogs the victim knows.

Children may not yet know how to behave safely around dogs. (Indeed, many adults don’t have these skills.)

Children may innocently antagonize a dog by some behavior that triggers the animal’s defensive attack instinct.

And a child’s small body is more vulnerable to attack.

There is no denying that in some breeds, the attack instinct is closer to the surface. Some small, unexpected movement even by a person well known to the dog can spark that instinct.

Pit bulls are also exceptionally strong and difficult to defend against.

This newspaper agrees with those who say that the breed should not be condemned, and we have editorialized against breed-specific bans.

But we also advocate common sense. Some breeds, and some individual dogs, demand to be treated with extra caution.

As of this writing, authorities have not said whether they might file charges in the death of the girl.

But whether or not that occurs, we recommend that everyone mix compassion with a strong dose of caution.

A tragedy has befallen a local family. And even without laying blame, we can certainly take warning.

Advertisement

 
View More: No tags are associated with this article
Not what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
 

Advertisement

Reader Reactions

Flag Comment Posted by myra on October 01, 2009 at 3:00 pm

Amen pitpackcom.
It almost seems intentional that this paper again used this “source” even though they had to have read the comments and disclosure about Dogsbites.org on the story they ran two days ago.
So, either they do not read the comment section of their own stories or they purposely chose to use this “source” again for some less than journalistic reason.

Flag Comment Posted by pitpackcom on October 01, 2009 at 12:53 pm

Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist’s credibility.  When you decide to use lawyers and fanatical anti-dog propaganda sites as references while ignoring the availability of dog trainers, behaviorists and other canine professionals you are damaging the reputation of the newspaper under who’s banner your article is printed.

Lawyers are experts in the law and should be called upon when there are legal questions at hand.  They are not experts in animal behavior.

One-sided anti-anything websites should never be presented a a credible reference.  Doing so leads the public to believe that what is published on these sites are fact when they are only opinions, devoid of any real research.

Allowing your research to begin and end with Google does a disservice to your profession and show a huge lack of respect for the readers.

The next time you sit down to write a story, forgo Google and try the phone book and the library.  That is how journalists did it in the pre-internet days and the quality of reporting was much better.

Post a Comment(Requires free registration)

The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Online Features
Blogs
DataCenter
Special Reports
Restaurant Guide
Movie Times
 
Video
Breaking News

Advertisement