Anger as Woman Goes Back on Deal to Regularly Visit Dog's Older Ex-Owner

A pet owner has drawn criticism online after backing out of a verbal agreement to take her dog regularly to visit the canine's previous owner.

Writing in a post shared to Mumsnet under the handle DatingAdvice72, the pet's new owner explained the canine came into her care around 14 months ago after she answered a "social-media plea" from the older woman's adult children.

According to a 2020 study from the Department of Ethology at Eötvös Loránd University, in Budapest, Hungary, dogs have episodic-like memories, meaning they are capable of recalling past events in much the same way humans do.

Researchers trained a group of dogs to repeat a small set of actions upon request. They were then tested on their ability to repeat other actions they had previously performed spontaneously in everyday situations.

The dogs repeated their own actions after delays ranging from a couple of seconds to an hour, with this response deemed typical of episodic memory. Researchers noted that the dogs were able to repeat their own actions, irrespective of whether these were included in the "repeat training" or not.

In this case, the former owner was "moving into a care home" and could no longer take care of her dog. The family were looking to re-home the dog but noted that adopting the canine came with a "stipulation" that the pet "visit their mom regularly."

A "verbal agreement" was reached while the dog's microchip was "legally signed over" to the new owner. At first, she visited every month, but now the older woman's family have accused the dog's new owner of going back on the deal after significantly reducing these trips.

Regular visits from a pet can prove a source of comfort for older former owners and, in the case of dogs, the feeling is likely mutual.

In this context, it is entirely conceivable that the older woman's dog would be just as happy to see her as she would be them. However, the canine's new owner is keen to alter the arrangement, explaining that her "circumstances have changed."

According to her Mumsnet post, a combination of "new jobs and working days and hours," along with the fact her child has developed a medical condition that required "hospital investigations," means she is now "struggling to commit" to the visits previously promised.

"I've said I can try and visit every 6-8 weeks instead so she doesn't stop seeing the dog completely but her family have started getting really funny over it," she wrote.

Despite this, the woman is aware that the fact they struck a verbal agreement means they can't "legally do anything about it" and is considering following through with her plan.

But while that approach may have appeared heartless, Renee Rhoades, a multicertified head dog behavior consultant at R+Dogs, told Newsweek that it was a "challenging situation for everyone involved."

"What it comes down to is what is realistic for the new guardian to do. If visiting too often stresses them out, that stress is then going to start to affect the quality of life that the dog has," she said. "The new guardian might even decide that she can't keep the dog and then switching homes again can be unnecessary trauma for the dog."

Rhoades, who has 20 years' experience working with dogs, added: "My advice would be to come to some sort of compromise that is comfortable for the new guardian. Something like visiting at least once a month on a prearranged day or seeing if it's possible at the facility for the dog to stay overnight occasionally.

"I think the most important aspect is to make sure that the dog is well cared for in their current home. If that means that the dog unfortunately does not get to see their previous guardian as often, but they are living a happy and fulfilled life, that is the best outcome."

But while Rhoades talked of compromise, others on social media were less forgiving.

One Mumsnet user wrote: "Yes, it's a verbal agreement but morally I think moving visits to every 2 months is wrong." A second commented that what "you need to consider is another person may be more suitable for the task you accepted now that you have had a significant change of circumstances."

Others, however, defended her right to change the arrangement. One posted: "I would perhaps (kindly) offer the family the choice between that, or stopping coming altogether and let the lady say goodbye to her former dog, and see what they'd prefer."

Another wrote: "If the family couldn't or wouldn't take the dog on and commit to this arrangement themselves, they really have no right to pressure you."

Newsweek was unable to reach the original poster for comment.