Running head: SAVE ALL DOGS 1

Save All Dogs: The Incorporation of a Screening Process into Dog Shelters

Aidan Petty

First Colonial High School

Legal Studies Academy

SAVE ALL DOGS 2

Abstract

This paper focuses on the use of behavioral background checks and assessments in dog shelters.

It compiles a vast amount of research on different types of behavioral assessments and the idea

that these assessments are not legally required. Reflecting on all parts of research for the paper, it

connects to the GO Rescue Pet Adoption Center and the process of behavioral assessments

Georgia Obenaus utilizes. My paper first leads into the introduction which explains the

usefulness of using behavioral checks on dogs that are brought into shelters to gain information

on the dog’s temperament as well as finding out the previous history of the dog. After, the paper

goes into methods of behavioral screening in the US that are being used around the country as

well as locally with GO Rescue Pet Adoption Center. Then the paper ties in behavioral screening

to my senior project with the use of the dog shelter I am working with to raise money for,

showing the method behind GO Rescue Pet Adoption Center. Then the paper goes into analyzing

and summarizing a research study done in Queensland, Australia as well as in combination with

talking about foreign methods that are used to screen the behavior of dogs. Following, the paper

then goes into talking about the usefulness of fostering dogs before rehoming and the negative

effects of shelters on a dog’s behavior and emotion. Finally, the paper talks about the laws that

govern dangerous dogs that have been identified as such, as well as the laws prohibiting the sale

premature and unweaned dogs. This also includes a court case that relates to the topic.
SAVE ALL DOGS 3

Save All Dogs: The Incorporation of a Screening Process into Dog Shelters

In order to relieve each and every dog of a horrible fate of euthanasia, the

implementations of behavioral screenings must be performed in every dog shelter. What would

life be like if every person who acted in an aggressive and fearful manner was euthanized for

their behavior? This is the idea that we have to encompass when thinking about the euthanization

of dogs around the world. Each dog has the right to a life where they are not at risk of being put

down for their inappropriate behavior. The implementation of behavioral screenings will provide

the ability for these dogs to have a second chance at changing their behavior through intervention

rather than euthanization. Some shelters around the world have made this a conscious effort to

not only make sure a behavioral assessment is completed on each dog, but also to establish their

shelter as a no-kill shelter in order to provide the statement that that shelter refuses to give up on

a dog. Every dog’s life is just as important as the next and with the use of behavioral

assessments, society can continue to cut down on the number of euthanizations in dog shelters

around the world.

Screening Process in the United States: Forms of Behavioral Assessment

SAFER (Safety Assessment for Evaluating Rehoming)

The ASPCA commonly uses a method known as SAFER ("SAFER®," n.d.). This

behavioral test consists of a seven-item assessment that evaluates the aggression of the dog in

under 10 minutes. The program was founded and developed by Emily Weiss, Ph. D. This test

found whether dogs, six months and older, needed to endure behavioral changes before adoption

or if they were not aggressive at all. The seven-item assessment consists of the following: “look,

sensitivity, tag; playing with the dog, squeezing the arms of the dog, reaction to food, reaction to
SAVE ALL DOGS 4

toys, and dog-to-dog interactions” ("SAFER®," n.d.). In addition to a test of the dog’s behavior,

any information on the dog from the previous owner must be provided to the shelter as prior

history of the dog ("SAFER®," n.d.)​. ​Animal shelters such as the SPCA can advise adopters that

an animal is not suited for a certain kind of home but have to give the dog to the adopter no

matter what. While the ASPCA dogs may go through the SAFER method of behavioral

assessment, yet there are easy ways in which to disqualify the dog for adoption ("SAFER®,"

n.d.). ​“In general terms, ‘shelter access’ refers to various legal measures, proposed or enacted,

which attempt to strictly limit the circumstances in which animals in the care of shelters may be

euthanized” yet the actions of the dogs can still be seen as aggressive or harmful even in a

playful state of mind of the dog itself. Still, there are laws that limit the circumstances that an

animal is able to be euthanized, sometimes without the considerations of public safety and

animal health ​("SAFER®," n.d.)​. At most SPCA’s if a dog even causes a scratch with their tooth,

no matter if they were playing or actually acting aggressively towards someone, that dog will be

taken off the adoption list ​("SAFER®," n.d.)​. The SPCA has stated that “A bite is a bite” and any

wound caused by teeth is still a bite regardless of the manner that the incident took place in

("Position Statement on Responsibilities of Animal Shelters," n.d.). Even if the evaluator knew

that the dog was simply acting in a playful manner, and was acting non-aggressively, that dog

can still be taken off the adoption list which often leads to euthanasia. Unfortunately, a majority

of SPCA’s around the world have been set up as shelters willing to euthanize, which a small

amount of SPCA’s are no-kill shelters ​("Position Statement on Responsibilities of Animal

Shelters," n.d.). This is the whole idea behind shelters such as the GO-Rescue Pet Adoption

Center; through behavioral assessments and aid for aggressive behavior, dogs can have a better
SAVE ALL DOGS 5

chance to find a fitting and long-lasting home where they will not end up in a shelter again

(Obenaus, n.d.).

Assess-A-Pet and Train-to-Adopt

The Animals for Adoption Foundation has created Assess-A-Pet which is a program

founded by Sue Sternberg with the outlook to provide a behavioral assessment method with the

goal to make sure that no dog is euthanized simply because of the lack of room or money to hold

them (Sternberg, n.d.). While also helping to determine the behavior of the dog it also “​helps

keep shelter workers, who generally have little or no information about the dogs in their care,

safer” from the harm that the dog might cause to workers in their surroundings (Sternberg, n.d.).

The gentle, humane, 15-minute evaluation process takes specialized training to

implement effectively. The method was developed over two decades of hands-on animal

shelter work and dog behavior analysis, including experience in making decisions on

safety, adoptability and euthanasia, matching dogs with new families, and surveying

owners after "returns" for aggression in the new home. ​The test has been honed and

polished since 1993 at ​Rondout Valley Animals for Adoption​; every exercise in the test,

every nuance, has a purpose developed by hundreds of video taped hours of evaluating

dogs, completing adoptions, and following up over the course of years. (Sternberg, n.d.)

This program was developed by Sue Sternberg, in conjunction with the development of

Assess-A-Pet. Train-to-Adopt uses the information gathered from the Assess-A-Pet to conduct

behavioral exercises in order to keep dogs behaved within the shelter (Sternberg, n.d.). The

program aims to identify the dog’s behavioral tolerability in order to conduct different exercises

to correct the dog’s behavior. Mrs. Sternberg’s goal in creating Train-to-Adopt in conjunction
SAVE ALL DOGS 6

with Assess-A-Pet is to allow every dog the chance to fix their behavior in order to escape the

threat of euthanization and to have the opportunity to start a new life following adoption

(Sternberg, n.d.). Sternberg states that “​Dogs that are identified as behaviorally adoptable can

maintain their temperaments/dispositions and not lose their ability to connect with people” which

means that the dog, may be stressed and scared within the shelter, will not completely change

their aggressive or nonaggressive behavior just because they are in a shelter ​(Sternberg, n.d.)​.

This behavior, throughout the testing, will remain consistent because the dog's aggressive

behavior will be revealed through this test (Sternberg, n.d.). This program can be adopted by

different animal shelters as a method utilized to assess dog’s temperament as they come into

these shelters​.

Match-up II Behavioral Evaluation

The Match-Up II method of behavioral evaluation was developed by Tufts University,

the Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine ("Validate Behavior Assessment," 2017). ​“​An

accurate and reliable understanding of behavioral tendencies and personality is important in

determining a dog's suitability for rehoming, need for behavioral treatment and intervention

while in the shelter, and best placement when rehomed.” This information will be used to speed

up the rehoming process by having exact needs of the dog for a new home. As relieving as a

shelter may seem for dogs who are taken from homes where they are unwanted, uncared for, or

abused, the shelter atmosphere can be quite stressful for dog as well as cause them to become

more aggressive as they are scared because they are being kept in a cage for an extensive amount

of time. The Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine “worked to validate the Match-Up II

Behavior Evaluation, part of the Match-Up II Shelter Dog Rehoming Program” which is as
SAVE ALL DOGS 7

“investigation of its ability to identify common canine personality traits, the reliability of its

behavioral coding (consistency of measurement over time, place, and evaluator), and the

predictive validity of its results (the accuracy in predicting behavior in the home).” The

Match-Up II Behavioral Evaluation is a program that shelters can sign up for to use their

methods which are proven to aid in defining dog’s behavioral trait ("Validate Behavior

Assessment," 2017). The Match-Up II Behavioral Evaluation consists of 18 subtests, “analysis

yielded a four-factor solution which accounted for 45.3% of the total variance and included 26 of

the behaviors.” The four-factor components that equaled the 45.3% were “fearfulness,

friendliness, aggressiveness, and the fourth component, interest.” In the Match-Up II Behavior

Evaluation the use of a fake dog in a dog-to-dog interaction was tested ("Validate Behavior

Assessment," 2017). It was concluded that using a fake dog in a dog-to-dog interaction cannot be

used as a substitute for a real dog due to the fact that in a real dog-to-dog reaction, responses

from each dog will influence the other. Tufts University found “that the fake dog is a useful

device to evaluate friendly behavior toward other canines.” Regardless of the friendly behavior

demonstrated by the canine in response to a fake dog stimulus, the process did not prove the

tendency of the dog to be aggressive towards another dog. The Cummings School of Veterinary

Medicine, also known as the Center for Shelter Dogs, provide validity and reliability following

standardization that is a key ingredient to measure the usefulness of the assessments ("Validate

Behavior Assessment," 2017). The Center for Shelter Dogs found through examination of the

consistency of the findings that the study was reliable, as well as responses from the dogs that

was collected through these tests was used to improve the validity, reliability, and
SAVE ALL DOGS 8

standardization of the test which could provide the ability to create the ideal assessment for

testing a dog’s behavior.

Shelter Owner Discrepancy

Focusing on the aspect of behavioral assessments, there are no laws in Virginia

specifically that govern how to perform background checks on dogs. While there aren’t laws that

govern behavioral assessments, shelters are required to provide vetting and microchipping or

have the adopter sign documentation saying that they will provide this vetting for the dog (G.

Obenaus, Personal communication, October 29, 2017). While speaking with Mrs. Obenaus, she

provided information on how she conducts a behavioral assessment on dogs (G. Obenaus,

Personal communication, October 29, 2017). Mrs. Georgia Obenaus stated that she hardly ever

needs to conduct an actual behavioral assessment due to the fact that she can “determine the level

of fear of a dog simply by looking at the eyes of the dog” (G. Obenaus, Personal communication,

October 29, 2017). Mrs. Obenaus is credible due to her long history of raising dogs and

sheltering them until they can be rehomed (Obenaus, n.d.). She has developed a connection to

understand dog's behavior based on the breed of the dog as well as getting to know the dog

individually. Mrs. Obenaus has been successful to keep hundreds of dogs in her shelter to

eventually find them a new home to change their lives (G. Obenaus, Personal communication,

October 29, 2017). Some individuals such as Mrs. Obenaus, who has 15 years of experience with

all different breeds of dogs, have developed the ability to access the general temperament of each

dog and get to know each dog’s specific triggers. “Dogs are still animals” and much of the

aggressive behavior is a result of the inappropriate behavior by the owner and human

misunderstanding of the dog’s tolerance (G. Obenaus, Personal communication, October 29,
SAVE ALL DOGS 9

2017). The dog will react to the behavior of the owner; therefore, if the owner acts in such way

that makes a dog feel threatened, that dog may react in an aggressive manner in a fight or flight

response (G. Obenaus, Personal communication, October 29, 2017). Mrs. Obenaus has the ability

to refuse to relinquish the dog the adopter wants to adopt if she feels that the dog’s needs do not

fit what you can provide for that dog. If Mrs. Obenaus chooses to relinquish the dog that the

adopter is interested in adopting, her shelter is then not liable for the actions of the dog once the

dog has left the ownership of the shelter, and a contract is signed to make sure this is known by

the adopter (G. Obenaus, Personal communication, October 29, 2017). Along with making sure

the adopter knows that they are in full possession of the dog at adoption, Mrs. Obenaus also

makes the adopter sign a contract, binding people to get the puppy spayed or neutered when they

are old enough for the procedure (G. Obenaus, Personal communication, October 29, 2017).

Every additional dog that is an adult is spayed or neutered before leaving the rescue shelter.

Additionally, Mrs. Obenaus has found the internet to be extremely reliable while trying to

pre-determine the dog’s behavior. While not only being able to see the dog and determine some

of the behavior from a picture or video, it also helps to advertise dogs that are at the shelter. GO

Rescue Pet Adoption Center has worked in conjunction with Adopt-A-Pet.com which is the

“North America's Largest Non-Profit Pet Adoption Website” ("Dog Adoption :: Search by

Breed, Size, Age and Location.," 2004). This website has been created with the help of sponsors

such as Purina, Petco, The Petco Foundation, and Bayer Animal Health. This website allows for

thousands of rescues including GO Rescue to advertise the dogs that are available for adoption as

well as information on the dog such as if the dog has any special needs ("Dog Adoption :: Search

by Breed, Size, Age and Location.," 2004). Occasionally with the knowledge that the issue
SAVE ALL DOGS 10

behind the dog’s behavior is not the dog itself but instead the owner, the shelter will go through

extensive measures in order to find the right home for the dog (Yoffe, 2012). Often, animal

shelters will drive away families who are attempting to rescue a dog due to the continuous

questioning of the home environment, members of the family, and other knowledge to fit the dog

in the right home (Yoffe, 2012). This questioning commonly causes families to turn to breeders

who will ask little questions, where families can take a dog home, question free no matter the

cost (Yoffe, 2012). What a lot of families don’t realize is that shelters are only doing what is best

to find the right home for these dogs and this extensive questioning is needed in order to prevent

dogs to end up in the wrong home (Yoffe, 2012). Extensive measures have been taken to limit

the amount of euthanasia within dog shelters (Yoffe, 2012). Approximately 40 years ago on

average there were 20 million dogs and cats euthanized for various reasons including sickness,

behavior, or just the inability to rehome the animal (Yoffe, 2012). Since then several humane

organizations have started a campaign to spay and neuter pets, mainly the ones coming from

shelters, and as of today over 4 million dogs and cats are being euthanized compared to the

original 20 million (Yoffe, 2012).

Behavioral Screening in Louisiana Shelter

Families are no longer able to go to an animal shelter, pay a small fee, and bring home

the dog of their choice. This is a common misconception of many people who believe that an

animal shelter, or dog shelter in this case, will relinquish any dog that you like in order to save

them from a life in the kennel or euthanasia. This article was produced by the Houma Today

Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana​,​ to describe how the Terrebonne Parish Animal Shelter uses the

information that is gathered on the dog to screen the family who is attempting to adopt the dog to
SAVE ALL DOGS 11

find the perfect home (Writer, 2012). Instead of extensive screenings of the dog’s behavior,

shelters in Louisiana focus on pinpointing the needs of the dogs, rather than taking extensive

measures to find the right home for that dog. ​‘We owe it to the animals, who can’t speak for

themselves, to do our best to find them a forever home,’ Chaisson said who is the Vice President

of the Hope for Animals shelter in Thibodaux, Louisiana ​(Writer, 2012)​. ​The shelters are

working to find the needs of the dogs based on if the dog endured abandonment, abuse, and/or

surrender by their owners who didn’t want them or couldn’t take care of them (Writer, 2012).

“The Terrebonne Animal Shelter has a single-page adoption questionnaire. It asks questions that

are standard for animal-rescue groups and shelters in the area, including whether the family has

children or other pets” which is a compiler of basic information for the shelter to get a

background on the dog (Writer, 2012). In addition to the information provided on this

questionnaire, this shelter, as for an example, will make a home visit near the end of the adoption

process in order to see if the information provided on the questionnaire was correct and if the

home is actually fit for the dog (Writer, 2012). “The shelter will check to make sure you’re

allowed to have a pet in your home and will make sure that your other pets are current on all

their vaccinations and have received proper vet care.” The home visit will cover all of these

different topics, including a prior agreement from a landlord giving permission for a dog to be

brought into the home (Writer, 2012). The article by the Terrebonne Animal Shelter states, “We

don’t dig too deep,” but the shelter is looking for indications that based on the dog’s needs,

whether special or just regular for a family, that the family or home is not a good fit for the dog

(Writer, 2012). Basic questions are provided to the potential adopters of the dog, at the home

visit such as the plan of where to keep the dog when the owner is away from home as well as an
SAVE ALL DOGS 12

indication of the area the dog is allowed to play in and what kind of exercise, fur, and nail care

you plan to provide.” The board at the rescue will decide whether the family is a good fit based

on the knowledge that they have gained from you, observations, and the needs that fit the dog's

needs (Writer, 2012). One rescue by the name of Hope for Animals in Louisiana makes these

home visits and also makes the family sign a contract stating that they will return the dog to the

shelter if they no longer care for the dog (Writer, 2012). The manager at the Terrebonne Parish

Animal Shelter, Valerie Robinson stated that “many families looking to adopt are happy to go

along with the process because they want a pet that will be a good match,” and sometimes

families are willing to go through extensive measures in order to adopt the dog (Writer, 2012).

For instance, one family who attempted to adopt a dog from the Terrebonne Parish Animal

Shelter was not allowed to adopt due to the rest of their dogs not being fixed; therefore, the

family had all of their dogs fixed in order to become eligible to adopt the dog (Writer, 2012).

This shows that those people who are serious about adoption from shelters like this one, will go

through the process that the shelter has set up in order to find the right home for each dog with

minimal to no complications.

Foreign Screening Process: Forms of Behavioral Assessment

Assessing the Reliability of Behavioral Assessments

A research study titled ​An Evaluation of a Behaviour Assessment to Determine the

Suitability to Shelter Dogs for Rehoming​ took place in Queensland, Australia (Poulsen, 2010).

This study found that hyperactivity, separation anxiety, and vocalization were all behaviors

witnessed when dogs were turned over by their owners to the shelter. This knowledge was used

to find the best way to use behavioral assessments on the dogs. The purpose of this study was to
SAVE ALL DOGS 13

take already established assessments, provide information on each, and analyze their assessment

methods. An American study that this research study quotes stated that ​“...41% of dogs who

passed a behavioral assessment and were subsequently adopted from an animal shelter exhibited

aggression post-adoption” ​(Poulsen, 2010). This brings up the concern of the research study to

pinpoint the areas in which behavioral assessments are failing to measure the dog’s real

behavior. The ​main concern for the study is how they can prevent aggression through valid

assessments of these dogs. The assessments that the study analyzed was Sue Sternberg’s,

Assess-A-Pet programme, SAFER or the Safety Assessment for Evaluation Rehoming program,

and the RSPCA’s behavior assessment. All of these assessments were analyzed to find if they

were suitable for rehoming dogs based on their behavior. Results for each test found different

aspects of the test that could be changed in order to better validate and make the tests more

reliable for the shelters that utilize these tests. This will help shelter workers and adopters stay

safe from the dogs that are in fact aggressive.

RSPCA (Royal Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Animals in Queensland)

The RSPCA is another form of assessment which is pointed out in the research study that

took place in Queensland, Australia. The research article on ​An Evaluation of a Behaviour

Assessment to Determine the Suitability to Shelter Dogs for Rehoming ​summarized the

assessment produced by the RSPCA (Poulsen, 2010). This is an important behavioral assessment

test because it provides a clear-cut point system of how to rate the dogs behavior. The

assessment lays out the point system to rate the dog on whether they have been found to have an

aggressive behavior or are instead well fit to be rehomed. The RSPCA is the ​Royal Society for

the Protection of Cruelty to Animals in Queensland which provides information on their own test
SAVE ALL DOGS 14

that is conducted to assess a dog’s behavior that is used within shelters in Australia. During the

course of the behavioral test, “the test was terminated immediately if the dog displayed

aggression to the handler (growling, baring teeth or biting)” as well as if “...terminated

immediately if the dog showed severe anxiety, evidence of shaking, or avoiding the assessor”

which would cause the dog to either have to be retested at a later time or the dog would be taken

off the adoption list ​(Poulsen, 2010)​. To better validate the test, the assessment would be held

and last only 20 minutes with was found to provide reliable information within this time frame.

As well to validate the test, two random male and two random female employees at the RSPCA

would be used to perform the test as to provide for a male or female preference from the dog to

arise if present. The assessment consists of the use of 28 separate tests, each of which has a

scoring scale of 0-5, where 0 is being the active and playful and 5 being aggressive or fearful

(Poulsen, 2010)​. When all 28 tests were completed the lower score the dog received, the less

aggressive the dog performed. If the dog were to receive a score of 0-70 this means that the dog

had “no exhibition of severe anxiety, fearfulness or aggression” and therefore, the dog has passed

and is eligible for rehoming ​(Poulsen, 2010)​. If the dog were to receive a score of 71-80, that

meant that the dog had “no exhibition of severe anxiety, fearfulness or aggression: placed on a

behavioral modification program and then retested approximately one week later” ​(Poulsen,

2010). If the dog received a score of 81-135, this meant that the dog had “any exhibition of

severe anxiety, fearfulness or aggression: fail, in which case the dog was euthanized” (Poulsen,

2010). This aspect of the test is quite controversial with the enactment of euthanization if the dog

scores within the range of 81-135.

SAVE ALL DOGS 15

The aim of the second behavioral assessment was to replicate the initial assessment in the

dog’s new home, using the researcher (AHP) as assessor, who had been trained to

produce the same scores as RSPCA assessors. All of the behavioral assessments

post-adoption were carried out by two people, as in the first assessment, with one person

administering the test (AHP) and the second recording the responses of the dog. The

second assessment took place in either the back or front yard, in order to replicate as

much as possible the outside environment of the initial assessment at the shelter.

Like most organizations of the SPCA around the world, different shelters use or do not

use euthanization, and likewise, with the use of GO-Rescue Pet Adoption Center as my shelter

example, euthanization should not be an option for most dogs. For those dogs who receive a

passing score, the shelter must take into account additional accommodations for the dog’s needs

including, “​(1) whether they were suitable to enter a home with children… (2) whether the new

owner should be experienced at adoption, experienced with specific breeds and (3) whether the

dog was suitable for frail or elderly people” (Poulsen, 2010). The use of the RSPCA’s behavioral

assessment provides for a valid and reliable approach to stating if a dog is able to be rehomed or

if behavioral intervention is needed which makes adoption and keeping people safe possible.

Legalization

In Virginia, along with all other states, there are no laws governing the direct

implementation of a behavioral screening into dog shelters. During the interview with Georgia

Obenaus, owner and CEO of GO-Rescue Pet Adoption Center, she clearly stated that there are

no laws that govern how or if shelters must screen dogs that are brought into the shelters (G.

Obenaus, Personal communication, October 29, 2017). Thankfully, there have been many
SAVE ALL DOGS 16

different advocates who have brought forth useful behavioral tests that shelters such as the SPCA

and other shelters in the country are using such as SAFER ("SAFER®," n.d.). Even though there

are not laws that implement behavioral screenings into each dog shelter, there are laws in

Virginia that state what to do if a dog is deemed dangerous and how to deem it so. Based on

Virginia Law § 3.2-6540: Control of Dangerous Dogs; penalties, screenings may be held by

law-enforcement officers in order to say if a dog is not-dangerous after an incident (LIS Virginia

Law, 2017). After a dog has inflicted harm on another animal or person, a law-enforcement

officer will deem the dog not dangerous under the following criteria. The law-enforcement must

find that “(1) no serious physical injury, as determined by a licensed veterinarian, had occurred

to the other animal... (2) both animals were owned by the same person (3) the attack occurred on

the owner’s property” in order to deem the dog not-dangerous (LIS Virginia Law, 2017). A

law-enforcer may deem a dog not-dangerous after a dog has inflicted harm on a person if the

situation meets the following criteria. The dog is not-dangerous if the “the canine only caused a

single nip or bite resulting in only a scratch, abrasion or other minor injury” (LIS Virginia Law,

2017). This part of the law code in Virginia also states that no canine will be found dangerous

because of its breed alone (LIS Virginia Law, 2017). This means that the dilemma of all pit-bulls

being dangerous simply because of their breed is not allowed. Virginia is one of 39 states that

have laws governing dangerous dogs (Randolph, n.d.). While law-enforcement officers can deem

a dog dangerous or not, dogs may be put on trial, like humans, to be legally declared dangerous.

In this case, if a dog is found guilty while on trial the judge has the ability to order to owner to

hold that dog securely in order to avoid future dangerous behavior, or have the dog euthanized as

an alternative (Randolph, n.d.). In most states, owners will be punished for the damaged that the
SAVE ALL DOGS 17

dog has caused leading up to the point that the dog is declared dangerous. The owner will only

go to court if he or she requests a court hearing after a law-enforcement officer, or animal

control, has deemed the dog dangerous (Randolph, n.d.).

In accordance with the ability of behavioral screenings to be up to the discrepancy of the

shelter, there are some requirements of these shelters under Virginia Law. Based on Virginia

Law § 2.3-6510, first, no dog is to be sold that is under the age of seven weeks and must be

unweaned over this age, which applies to both shelters and private vendors (LIS Virginia Law,

2014). At this age, a dog is considered to be premature and if sold, must be sold with their

mothers (LIS Virginia Law, 2014). The law code also states that shelters and dealers must

provide all dogs with current vaccines, where in most cases, shelters have the adopter sign a

contract stating that they will, under the law, get these vaccines for the dog after adoption (LIS

Virginia Law, 2014). Most local shelters also have the resources to pre-vet every dog before

adoption. The main purpose of this is the fact that most dog shelters, and animal shelters in

general, cannot afford to give vaccinations to all the animals in their shelter. All of these things

are done to protect premature animals from being harmed through early adoption where they are

not ready to be separated from their mothers, as well as to help show any signs of aggressive

behavior in early life.

Court Case

In June of 1990, Betty Lou Stidham was mauled to death by two neighboring pit bulls

who had a previous history of violent behavior. Following her death, “Stidham’s estate brought a

wrongful death against the City of Memphis Animal Shelter” which would eventually end up in

the Supreme Court of Tennessee. The owner of the two pit bulls, Edwin Hill, as well as his
SAVE ALL DOGS 18

mother, had been attacked by the dogs prior to this case arising. In February of 1990, the two

dogs entered Stidham’s yard and maimed her own dog. Stidham contacted the City of Memphis

Animal Shelter and “filed a vicious animal complaint.” Through evaluation of the dogs, the

shelter established that the dogs should be deemed “dangerous” but not “vicious” meaning that

these dogs were capable of inflicting serious injury. The shelter ordered Hill, the owner of the

dogs, to enroll the dogs in obedience training as well as repairing the damaged fencing the dogs

caused during the maiming of Stidham’s dog. The shelter also established that they would visit

Hill’s home in order to make sure he was following through with the guidelines that were

ordered by the shelter. The City of Memphis Animal Shelter failed to make sure Hill enrolled his

dogs in this obedience training and therefore, the shelter failed to “reclassify the dogs as vicious

and seize them” which they were supposed to do if the guidelines that the shelter proposed to

Hill were not followed. These same dogs then mauled and killed Stidham five months later.

When the case ended up in the Tennessee Supreme Court (Chase v. City of Memphis), the city

was “negligent in failing to follow-up on the obedience training requirement and failing to

impound the dogs if this was not completed.” The government establishment was not immune

under the Governmental Tort Liability Act and was therefore found liable for the death of Betty

Lou Stidham. The purpose in providing this case was to show how the City of Memphis, who

was the owner of the shelter, was negligent to follow up on the dogs progress to fix their vicious

behavior, which caused the death of Betty Lou Stidham.

Conclusion

Society must make it a priority to protect all dogs from the horrible outcome of

euthanasia through the use of a valid and reliable behavioral assessment to find every dog’s
SAVE ALL DOGS 19

needs and tolerances. We all must give these furry creatures our best efforts to provide every

chance we can to rehome them, fix inappropriate and aggressive behavior, and most importantly

keep them alive and well. In order to do this, society needs to study every breed of dog and find a

valid and reliable assessment in order to save each dog and bring them the life they deserve.

Each person can make an impact by raising awareness, support, and money for a local dog

shelter and through this, learn the ways in which shelter owners are successful in rehoming their

dogs. No dog is meant to hurt another or any person, and even if this behavior is present it can be

changed with effort and time, euthanasia is not the answer and we need to make sure that is

known to all. Picture this… simply because your new puppy has an accident, would you want to

euthanize them? Of course not, dogs need to be taught how to act like every human and don’t

know better until done so. Euthanasia is not the answer and dogs have the same right to live as

humans do.