« Meanwhile in the Philippines | Main | In the text »
June 13, 2005
Mother of the Year
This is via Jonathon Last at Galley Slaves:
There really are no words to describe this...
A mother was "so concerned" about her dangerous pit bulls that she...shut her son in the basement while she did errands. The son got out, the dog mauled him to death. Her response:
"It's Nicky's time to go," she said in the interview. "When you're born you're destined to go and this was his time."
Posted by Amy Welborn | Permalink
Comments
Unbelieveable. May the child rest in peace.
Maybe someday the mother will be able face the truth about what happened and why.
You're right: there are no words....may this terrible incident serve as a warning to others that the child's safety must be the mother's primary concern.
Posted by: Lynn at Jun 13, 2005 12:31:12 PM
This. Makes. Me. Sick!
There really are no words...
Posted by: Touchy Technician at Jun 13, 2005 12:34:13 PM
Nice Catholic family in San Francisco.
His funeral was conducted by his great-uncle, a Catholic priest, at St. Anne of the Sunset Catholic Church.
Posted by: Benedetto at Jun 13, 2005 12:36:49 PM
No one should own pit bulls. The mother should be charged with child endangerment and child abuse for keeping a dangerous animal in the house and telling the boy to stay home. Why didnt she take him with her?
Posted by: Wilma Tyndale at Jun 13, 2005 12:43:09 PM
I have no intent to stir up religious baiting, but that attitude of fatalism runs strong in some religions. "It must have been their time to go" is a very, very common quote when I read about mass accidents in Saudi Arabia, such as a crush of worshipers during the Haj.
Still, I wonder how much in her right mind the mother was when some reporter hounded her for a quote. Sometimes distraught, unthinking utterances end up sounding as if they were sensible, carefully thought proclamations by the time they appear in a newspaper.
Posted by: Albertus M at Jun 13, 2005 1:06:24 PM
Stop it, Wilma! There's no animal in the world so dangerous as man, but so far we haven't been outlawed yet.
The problem here is the dogs' owner, not the dogs. While they are born powerful, they are not natural-born killers. They can be trained to be loyal defenders of the family. These dogs were obviously never properly trained.
I am sad beyond words for the boy and for the mother, who has obviously gotten her priorities so far out of order that she caused her son's violent death. May she someday understand and repent, if the guilt doesn't drive her to suicide.
Posted by: Yurodivi at Jun 13, 2005 1:07:13 PM
There are many pit bull owners who have controlled, trained, well-behaved dogs ..... until they let loose and maul someone to death. Doesn't mean every pit bull will kill but the potential is Always there.
Posted by: Nguoi Dang Chay at Jun 13, 2005 1:16:29 PM
Yurodivi is right. Pit bulls didn't evolve themselves, they were created by human beings for the "entertainment" of fighting. Anyone who has ever seen an undercover video of staged dog fights knows how unbelievably cruel they are.
The breed has been damaged by poor genetics and overaggressivness. I agree that no one with children should have Pit Bulls. They are also the breed of choice for drug dealers and I've seen many young men in the inner city areas of Cleveland, east and west, parading them around.
The response of this "mother" is pitiful beyond words. I hope she's prosecuted to the full extent of the law for the danger she placed her child in.
Meanwhile, I still fondly remember "Petey" from the little rascals. He was one sweet dog.
Posted by: Christine at Jun 13, 2005 1:16:46 PM
This is big news in the SF area.
No one is talking about prosecuting the mom. And I don't think attacking her right now is the right thing to do, whatever she says or does. She's obviously deeply grieved, as who wouldn't be.
I've known many well-behaved pit bulls. I met a sweety-pie of the species last weekend. But I admit they do make me a bit edgy.
Posted by: Nancy at Jun 13, 2005 1:22:34 PM
I think Mom should be charged with reckless endangerment at the very least.
She knew the dog was dangerous, or she wouldn't have locked up either the dog or her son. But she decided to restrain the one who had opposable thumbs, and was hence more able to open a locked door. Why? So the dog wouldn't feel put upon? If she thought the dog could break the door, there wasn't any safe way to have the boy at home at all.
Posted by: Ed the Roman at Jun 13, 2005 1:32:01 PM
Personally, I recommend the Korean Solution for pit bulls. Yummy.
Posted by: Benedetto at Jun 13, 2005 1:33:14 PM
Kids + various dangerous dog breeds = harm to kids. I have had numerous battles with my sister-in-law over her aggressive terrier around my son. It's the only thing we've ever really argued about - and she's Presbyterian!
Why do people with dogs and no kids insist they are correct about dogs and kids? Kids who are not used to being around dogs (sorry, we just do not have the time or energy for a dog) are not good around aggressive dogs.
Why does she insist on wanting to use her "nipping and biting" dog to teach my son how to be around a dog?
I grew up with dogs: calm beagles and mutts. I know a bit about dogs. My son is not afraid of nice, calm dogs...
Anyway, glad to get THAT off my chest...
(Yes, Benedetto, Korean meat is rather delicious. One of the best Asian restaurants, IMHO...)
Posted by: Brigid at Jun 13, 2005 1:46:13 PM
A pit bull is not like a raging human psychopath that will turn in murderous rage at the slightest provocation. Experienced owners put the dogs in their proper place in the "pack" and keep them there. They don't tolerate bad behavior.
Admittedly, there is a lot of potential for disaster, and if I had kids of any age, I wouldn't want to have a pit bull (in fact, I have neither children nor pit bulls!). But that doesn't mean that no one should be allowed to have both.
My solution would be to require people who get pit bulls to be trained *with* the dog instead of just shipping the dog off for "obedience school," which is usually a waste of money. That Cesar Millan guy on TV always says, "I *rehabilitate* dogs. I *train* owners."
Posted by: Yurodivi at Jun 13, 2005 1:58:32 PM
San Francisco has the highest population density in the U.S. outside Manhattan. We also have more dogs than kids. The dog situation is sickening in SF. There's crap on crowded sidewalks and city parks everywhere where kids should be falling down and playing. People feel freer each day to bring their dogs into stores and eating establishments. There's plenty of dog violence too. Part of it is the breeds some people keep, but part is the nature of the city. There's no room and the room there is is no place for pets.
This is a bit off topic, but it really is becoming a significant reason for the flight of families and the sane from SF.
Posted by: Jack Smith at Jun 13, 2005 2:00:33 PM
Why would anyone have any dogs that hadn't been "fixed" in their home with or without children? I wouldn't want to get between two chihuahuas in heat.
Also, I agree with Ed. Who locks up their kid and gives their dogs the run of the house?
Posted by: JohnM at Jun 13, 2005 2:20:20 PM
It's the mother's time to "go". (To jail that is).
Posted by: Tony Miller at Jun 13, 2005 2:39:32 PM
You all are so judgmental and uncatholic. Who are you to deny this woman the right to choose?
Posted by: Victor Morton at Jun 13, 2005 2:53:35 PM
I read this in the SF Chronicle and was sickened. I have no idea why the mom locked the boy in the basement (which was a family room, not a dark, damp storage area) instead of taking him with her or sending him with her daughter to a picnic. She said she didn't want to put the dogs in there because they would go through all the bags that were packed for their imminent move to Oregon. From what I've read, no one has talked about charging her with anything. I also don't get her fatalistic view.
People should remember that this is big news in SF because of a lethal dog mauling a few years ago by a couple of presa canarios.
I don't think pits should be outlawed, it has a lot to do with their upbringing and in particular, their handing between 3-16 weeks of age. My in-laws have a wonderful female pit that I trust with my kids. Pits, because of their publicity are the choice of dog for gangs, meth addicts, and the overly macho, who encourage the aggressive behavior. (I should note that after the other mauling death, lots of people started shopping for presa canarios. The responsible breeders put a stop to adopting out puppies for awhile.)
From Fatal Dog Attacks:
If the breed of dog was the primary or sole determining factor in a fatal dog attack, it would necessarily stand to reason that since there are literally millions of Rottweilers, Pit Bulls and German Shepherd Dogs in the United States, there would have to be countless more than an approximate 20 human fatalities per year.
In the SF case, the mother said the female was in heat and the male was intact and acting very aggressive lately because of that. A very good reason to spay and neuter dogs.
Posted by: mayangrl at Jun 13, 2005 3:00:07 PM
(Hey Victor, have you seen "Saving Face" yet? Saw it last night.)
In San Francisco, it would make perfect sense to lock your kid in the basement, secured with a shovel, and let your mating dogs have the run of the house. Who knows, may the kid has a gameboy, a bed and a small refrigerator down in his dungeon. One must treat animals humanely and let them get exercise.
Posted by: Benedetto at Jun 13, 2005 3:00:44 PM
There is no unsafe breed. There are unsafe individual dogs, and they are made that way sometimes by unsafe breeders, and sometimes by unsafe owners. There are also people who mean well and might even have successfully owned dogs before, but who honestly don't understand breed temperaments and individual dog personalities. (See unsafe owners.)
That said, cocker spaniels have the highest numbers of attacks. Overbreeding.
In general, breed temperament is something that breeders are supposed to guard carefully. A dog which is pathologically shy and fearful of strangers, or pathologically territorial, is a dog that should never be sold or bred. Breeders don't like to talk about culling, but sometimes it has to be done -- particularly in large breeds or breeds with powerful jaws. I think maybe small-breed breeders aren't as sensitive to this, so more vicious dogs get out on the street.
Another big reason for dog-on-dog attacks is dogs that have seizures being kept with other dogs. There's something about a dog going into grand mal that often provokes attack from other dogs -- very weird, since dogs don't attack humans in that state, and indeed show great concern and care. Seizures have been showing up lately in many breeds, thanks again to idiot breeders who don't keep in touch with owners and unscrupulous breeders who don't care about the general welfare and hide their breeding problems.
Posted by: Maureen at Jun 13, 2005 3:27:04 PM
Does anyone remember the story a couple weeks ago about a stray dog that rescued a little girl in where was it, Kenya I think? Those examples could be multiplied over and over. And through my husband's career as a police officer I learned of many faithful police dogs who literally saved officers' lives over and over.
Benedetto's flippant attitude towards dogs is pitiful. It is human beings who fashioned all the breeds that exist. And it is God who ultimately created all that exists.
I have had several canine companions over the years that brought me nothing but joy.
And personally, I'd like to see all "purebred" breeders cease and desist until the shelters are emptied out. And yes, Mayangirl, all responsible dog people should spay and neuter.
Posted by: Christine at Jun 13, 2005 3:46:36 PM
Sorry Christine, I don't like dogs.
Bite me.
Posted by: Benedetto at Jun 13, 2005 3:55:20 PM
Bingo Jack! I was hoping that I wasn't the only one who appreciated that point. The reality is that most San Franciscan's don't have the room to have the dogs they insist on having.
Posted by: Ken Crawford at Jun 13, 2005 3:55:25 PM
Christine, God also created black widows. I smash them every chance I get. And God created rattlesnakes, and I'll shoot every one I can find. God creaeted termites, and I kill those regularly, too, as well as any ants I find in my house. And I pull weeds, knowing God made them, too. Just because God made some critter or part of creation does not mean we need to live with it, or even like it. Different cultures have very different relationships with animals that pass as "pets" in America. For some people, a rabbit is a pet. For others, it's dinner. Same for cats and dogs, in some countries.
There is nothing innately "noble" about dogs in my book, anymore than a goose can save somebody, or a rooster can be an alarm clock. Animals is, basically, food and tools.
I think the most pathetic thing is that in a place like San Francisco dogs really get treated better (by law) than a lot of people. When was the last time you were in San Francisco? I was there ten days ago.
Posted by: Benedetto at Jun 13, 2005 4:04:21 PM
"Sorry Christine, I don't like dogs.
Bite me."
Nah, I wouldn't do that. Just don't ever come around dressed as a fire hydrant :) :)
As the psalmist wrote, "All your creatures, wild and tame, bless the Lord." Amen!!
Posted by: Christine at Jun 13, 2005 4:05:23 PM
