Dog Owner Causes a Stir after His Dog Chews Child’s Toy. What Would You Do?

If you own a dog, you most likely know how much they love stuffed toys, even if they don’t belong to them. You’re also probably used to having to wash your children’s toys after your dog slobbers all over them. Part of the package of dog ownership, right? 

But what if someone else’s dog slobbered all over your child’s toy? Would you happily take it back after it’s been in the dog’s mouth? Or would you ask the owner to replace it? What about if you were the dog owner? Would you offer to replace the toy after your dog had chewed on it? 

This is the dilemma of the day and it’s a slobbery doozy. 

Here’s the full story: 

A slobbery situation

One day a man was walking his golden retriever down the road. The man and his dog came across their neighbours – a mum, dad and a six-year-old. The little girl was holding onto a stuffed dinosaur that the dog clearly wanted. 

Excited by the toy, the pup snatched it from the child and played with it before the owner was able to retrieve it from his dog’s mouth. 

In the owner’s words:

“My dog got excited and snatched the toy from her [the child] which really spooked her and her parents. He was jumping around and shaking it for about a minute before I retrieved it and tried handing it back to the neighbours but they wouldn’t take it because ‘it’s been in your dog’s mouth'”. 

At first, the dog owner was willing to replace it without question. He asked the parents to send him a link of where they got the toy and he would buy the little girl a new one. 

The parents agreed and that seemed to be the end of it. The child gets a new not-slobbered-on toy and the dog can keep the old one. 

Except the dog owner then discovered that the stuffed dinosaur wasn’t your everyday $9.99 Kmart plush. It was a $150 plush from “one of those custom stores”. 

The dog owner wasn’t having it so he texted the parents, explaining that he wasn’t going to pay to replace it after all, but would rather get the toy cleaned. 

“I’m not paying that much for a toy just because they’re grossed out by one that was once in a dog’s mouth. The toy isn’t broken or torn or anything, it’s just dirty and wet and it won’t be once I wash it.” 

The parents declined the offer, saying they didn’t want the toy that’s been in his puppy’s mouth. They also called him an irresponsible dog owner which left the owner confused and a little ticked off. 

“I have no idea why I should pay for a new one when the old one is perfectly salvageable.” 

Now, this dude might not know why, but I do. Because you told them you would… 

So now the dog owner is left with a new stuffed toy for his dog, angry neighbours and perhaps a bit of a guilty conscious because he headed to Reddit’s AITA to ask if he was in the wrong here. 

And the verdict? Irresponsible dog owner gets called out

100% in the wrong. As many people pointed out, he already agreed to replace it. As others pointed out, he shouldn’t assume other people are okay with his dog’s slobber.

And, as many others pointed out, he is irresponsible for allowing his dog to snatch a toy from a child’s hand. 

These comments pretty much sum it up: 

“You are a irresponsible dog owner. You don’t control your dog. It was a toy but it could have been something else like a child or a pet. 

Clearly you were not holding your dog correctly on leash if he was able to grab the toy and you were not able to get it back immediately. 

Stop being an AH. Order a toy and use that as a lesson. Get your dog but especially you, trained.“

Another: 

“Learn to control your dog, apologise for scaring the child and pay for what it damaged. If you crashed into a car would you pay damages for a Ford but not a Mercedes? 

One more: 

“It doesn’t matter that it wouldn’t bother you. It grossed them out. Plus you scared the child.”

What do you think? I’m on the side of the parents on this one. Dogs will be dogs, but dog owners need to be in control. 

Take a look at a few other debates we’ve shared in the past including this argument about whether a mum should have to pay $3,200 to replace a blouse her newborn vomited on. Or how about this disagreement between two parents after one mum refused to buy the other child a $2 snack. 

What to read next

• Mum Refuses to Cater to Picky Eater at Son’s Birthday Party
• Grandma Banned for Life after Potty Training Faux Pas
• Mum’s Controversial Babysitting Plan Sparks Outrage