Choose Dogs, Movies With Kids In Mind
Had a letter last week from a mother in Texas who is searching for a family dog. The woman’s husband spent his boyhood with American Staffordshire Terriers; his family is partial to the breed, and the Fort Worth mother has been getting plenty of advice from spouse and in-laws of late - not to say pressure - to add one of the dogs to the family.
But she is skeptical. Her children are small and AmStaffs can be bruisers - up to 80 pounds of solid muscle. While the breed originated in England as a cross between fighting bulldogs and terriers, breeding the dogs for aggressiveness is anathema to AmStaff fanciers. Instead, the classical AmStaff is bred to be a docile companion and guardian of the home. But even though a well-bred AmStaff can be a sweet and lovable, though stalwart, character, my correspondent’s caution is appropriate.
What breed books like Michelle Lowell’s “Your Purebred Puppy” say about American Staffordshire Terriers is that they are fine with “older, considerate children,” that they “can be very aggressive with other animals,” that housebreaking them can be a challenge, that they “may refuse commands from family members who have not established leadership,” and finally, that care is needed because “if you buy from a poor breeder or raise the dog incorrectly, you could end up with an aggressive AmStaff.”
The Texas mother checked with AmStaff breeders and owners around the country (I gave her the names of a couple). “NO ONE that owned an AmStaff would advise me against getting one,” she wrote me, going on to comment on the “religious fervor” people can feel toward their favorite breeds. “But I tried very hard to pay attention to everything they said and in doing that decided against one as a family pet.”
This was because of the accounts she heard about AmStaffs who “enjoyed a good fight with other dogs” and who were routinely kenneled when friends came over “to avoid any trouble.”
“Everyone said that my children would have to establish dominance over the dog,” she continued. “I am really not sure how 4-year-old that barely weighs 35 lbs is going to establish dominance, stop a dog fight or make all of his friends be nice to him so that the dog does not see the need to ‘protect’ him.”
But a mother who will conduct a nationwide search for a dog for her kids, imposing her own criteria regardless of family bias, is obviously resourceful. In her research, she told me, she had identified several other breeds she felt might make good family members. One of these is the Greater Swiss Mountain Dog. What’s more, she had located a breeder in Kentucky who seems to have the right stuff. The breeder screens for genetic disease, screens buyers, won’t ship puppies but will make arrangements to meet new owners, etc.
“I will spend the next few weeks visiting people in my area that have purchased dogs from her and other people that own these dogs. Wish me luck.”
I do, but efforts like hers go a long way toward making luck unnecessary. Besides, it strikes me that in using the welfare of children as a litmus test, this mother is onto something. Reminds me of an experience our family had last week.
On the recommendation of a friend, we went to see the movie “Rob Roy.” We were told it was a great adventure, full of wonderful costumes and romance. We took three teenagers with us, and none of us found it to be as advertised. Instead, its violence, coarseness, scatology, and ludicrous meanness (they even shot a dog!) left us all feeling low.
We later checked the movie reviews on America Online and discovered, to our dismay, that they were largely favorable. One even lauded the film’s “nonexploitative rape” - an oxymoron if I ever heard one. Then, however, we discovered an on-line review called “Kids In Mind.” It described the “Rob Roy” we saw: “A woman is raped in a very long and quite brutal scene … a man is brutally stabbed and dies,” etc.
Keeping kids in mind, it strikes me, is a good way to choose both dogs and movies.
xxxx