Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Who's fault is it, mom or dog?
A mom is not paying attention to her child as it runs about, the child does one of two things, grabs the dog's hair or grabs the dog's owner, at anyrate, dog bites child and mother, who was in reaching distance of the child, literally less than two feet from the child, grabs the child and runs out of the room away from the dog. The Dog bit once, leaving multiple teeth marks but no blood. person A follows the mother out and offers to get some vitamin E or anything to help with the marks (unaware of if the skin was broken), the mother denies assistance. the dog's history is something to the effect of 3 children bit once each, never on the face, and one mailman attacked due to a faulty gate lock. the dog is a westie, approximately a foot tall, 17-20 pounds. Whose at fault, the dog, or the mother? can the mother be considered negligent?
the other two children belonged to the mother, she was aware of the history.
and the dog has been around other children as well, who have never been bit (excluding the two other children that belonged to the mother), the dog is not nervous around children
and the dog was initially seperated from other people, the mother entered the area of her own accord, with the owner. The dog was seperated from the area because there was a party and concerns were expressed that the dog might consume chocolate or other hazardous substances along with concern over children who did not play with dogs previously.
11 Answers
- CatLawLv 61 decade agoFavorite Answer
Personally I would hold the child (for taunting the dog) and then it's mother (for not paying attention) responsible. The law in most states unfortunately hangs this on the dog's owner. Would be worth taking into court.
Source(s): attorney - 1 decade ago
Like most questions in the real world, the answer is not one or the other, but a combination of factors. Since the dog has a history of biting, the owner should have at least notified the mother of the risks, and at most segregated the dog while others were around. Of course the mother shares responsibility in this situation. It is irresponsible to leave a young child with an unfamiliar animal. If there is no real damage to the child, all parties should be thankful and keep the dog closed off from others, and the child should not be allowed around strange animals (at least until they know how to treat an animal with respect).
- Susie DLv 61 decade ago
The dog's owner should have never placed his dog in a situation where he was near a child knowing his bite history.
If the mother knew the dog's bite history then the mother was negligient by placing her child in the situation.
The dog is damned animal who did not posess the brain power to remover HIMSELF from the situation and was the victim of stupid humans!
- Anonymous1 decade ago
The mother was negligent for not properly watching her child
around a dog and negligent for not asking the owner if the
dog was people friendly.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Was the mother warned that the dog gets nervous around kids? If not its the dog owners fault. I always warned them ahead of time. Either keep control of the kids or don't bring them to my house.
- scottclearLv 61 decade ago
Dog's owner is in trouble. Law of the land says a dog gets one free bite. In this story, the dog got it's quota. The next bite, they have to put him down.
- frogbfoundLv 41 decade ago
dog should be placed with a responsible owner and not allowed around children. Even possibly put down as it wasn't it's first time being aggressive. Dog should never be allowed around children with out muzzle.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
I'd consider the dog's owner negligent.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Dog's owner is in deep doodoo on this one and should hope the mother doesn't sue because she'll win.
