Talk:Pet adoption

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 January 2020 and 25 April 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Caroruguita.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 13 January 2020 and 4 March 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): ArielAlexis13.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 06:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Move?

Adopting a dog can be more encyclopedic as Dog adoption (currently non-existent), since the noun phrases allows a history section on dog adoption ("Legal adoption began in 1748 in Michigan, until that time, the processes were..."), whereas the Adopting a dog only describes the current procedure to go thru, perhaps not even the cosequences and social implications.

I had the exact same thought. :) Martin

This article needs complete de-americanising. It is littered with words only used in the US, terminology exclusive to the US, etc etc. Oh Zoe would just love its americocentrism. BTW is there anywhere on the planet other than the US that even uses the term Dog adoption? (On AIM tonight most non-Americans were in knots laughing at this "weird" article!) FearÉIREANN 07:05 8 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Well, I'm UK-based, and I would certainly talk about dog adoption. I'm not sure what terminology you're referring to. Martin 08:43 8 Jul 2003 (UTC)

"Adoption" is the standard term in Canada, which is after all, the second biggest country in the world. ;-) 142.167.71.226 12:49, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Why is this page specific to dogs? I see nothing which does not also apply to other pets (notably cats). -Tim (who will sign up when he's not so drunk) 82.68.187.214 01:43, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hmmm, good point. I think there are some things here that are more specific to dogs than to, say, cats or rabbits, and there are probably some issues related to cats that don't apply, but generally this might indeed be even better adjusted for those and listed under Pet adoption. Anyone else? Elf | Talk 02:47, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

A good idea; apparently nobody ever bothered to do this, so I have. --Saforrest 15:16, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Improvements

I found that the following contains an unsubstantiated claim AND has bias:

"Other people simply release the pet into the wild or otherwise abandon it, with the expectation that it will be able to take care of itself or that it will be found and adopted. More often, these pets succumb to hunger, weather, traffic, or common and treatable health problems. More responsibly, owners will take the pet to a shelter, or call a rescue organization, where it will be cared for properly until a home can be found."

Tell me if you can solve these two issues. I will be watching this page. --StevenL 03:05, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

---Also, the reference to breeders producing more animals than they can sell is very biased. This is true in many cases of what are commonly known as "backyard breeders" in the dog world. A true responsible breeder would never produce more puppies than they can find homes for, or would want to have in their home.

Improving the overall page, Would the paper become more organized and less of a personal reflection if the section of Big Black Dog, Black Cats, and Bunnies on Easter was put into its own section of Animals in Adoption Process or something along those lines? I believe having it currently stated in the Adoption Process is creating the thought that these three animals are the only animals affected during the process, when they are not. OliviaHendren (talk) 13:56, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Improvement aren't all improvements

Removing the section on BBD syndrome is not an improvement. It's an important problem shelters are dealing with. And why on earth would you use a picture of a purebred pug to illustrate a shelter dog? In eight years our local shelter has seen one pug among the hundreds of dogs placed, and it was quite old. The pic of the mixed breed was more representitive of a shelter dog. Mr. Shean 01:53, 7 August 2007 (UTC) Mr. Shean

Agreed. You have a better chance of being hit by lightning than finding a purebred Pug puppy at the shelter. LOL 142.167.71.226 12:47, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

The first issue was not a deliberate edit - it was cause by some rather bizarre vandalism in January 2007. I've tried to fix the vandalism. Graham87 15:53, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

This section needs sources that show it is a significant phenomenon in pet adoption. The fact that their are a couple of small nonprofits started up around the term doesn't mean it's appropriate to spend time on in a general article about pet adoption. -- SiobhanHansa 18:07, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks like there are a lot of sources citing the bias, in academia the terminology does not include "big" but rather goes with "black dog syndrome (BDS)" and "black dog bias (BDB).

There is mixed research on the bias' existence:

"Black Dog Syndrome (BDS) or Big Black Dog Syndrome (BBDS) is defined as “the extreme under-adoption of large black dogs based not on temperament or health, but rather on the confluence of a number of physical and environmental factors in conjunction with the Western symbolism of the color black” (Leonard 2011)" (Siniski, 2016, p. 639). "BDB was coined after reports from several animal shelters showed that black dogs are less likely to be adopted (Nakano, 2008; Orlando Sentinel, 2008, cited in Leonard, 2011) and are more likely to be euthanized (Leonard, 2011), compared with lighter-colored dogs." (Kulak, 2024)

Historically there are negative associations around black animals (Kulak, 2024, p. 782; Siniski, 2016, p. 639), but there are many biases associated with particular breeds and lineages of dogs that also lead to bias and higher euthanasia rates.  Some studies have suggested that: "BDB is a product of the social cognition phenomena known as “base rate fallacy”: black dogs are only more common in shelters because there are more of them (the dark color gene is dominant; Brown et al., 2013; Woodward, 2016)" (Kulak, 2024, p. 781).

A 2016 study in Kentucky found that "the significant interaction between breed size and coat shade did not support the purported BBDS: big dogs had similar outcomes regardless of color, and among smaller dogs, black dogs had worse outcomes than non-black counterparts." (Siniski, 2016, p. 648). A 2024 study by Kulak found that: "The existence of BDB is inconsistent across empirical and anecdotal literature (e.g., Goleman et al., 2014; Leonard, 2011; Lum et al., 2013; Sinski et al., 2016). Our research suppports that BDB might not be entirely founded; rather, BDB might be a product of base rate fallacy or other factors entirely (Woodward, 2016; Woodward et al., 2012)." (Kulak, 2024, 787). "Examining a large municipal animal shelter with a large number of dog and cat data, color and coat pattern were implicated in adoption rates, with more light-colored animals adopted and fewer euthanized than their dark-colored and patterned counterparts (Lepper, Kass and Hart 2002). "Wells and Hepper (1992) reported that potential adopters at an animal shelter in Northern Ireland preferred photographs of dogs with blonde over black coats, but when compared with actual purchase records, the color provided no significant impact on purchase." (Siniski, 2016, p. 640). "[A] study on dogs held at two no-kill shelters in New York State found that color was not implicated in length of stay (Brown, Davidson and Zuefle 2013)." (Siniski, 2016, p. 641). "[S]ome research found no evidence for BDB (Trevathan-Minnis et al., 2021; Woodward, 2016), instead determining that purebred status and size matter more." (Sinski et al., 2016)" (cited in Kulak, 2024)

Additional direct quotes:

"Svoboda and Hoffman (2015) utilized chi-square analy�ses from data collected from two non-profit shelters and found no support for coat color as a predictor of outcome. Brown, Davidson and Zuefle (2013) analyzed data from two no-kill shelters in New York State and found no effect of coat color on length of stay." (Siniski, 2016, p. 647)

A 2024 study by Kulak found that: "The existence of BDB is inconsistent across empirical and anecdotal literature (e.g., Goleman et al., 2014; Leonard, 2011; Lum et al., 2013; Sinski et al., 2016). Our research sup�ports that BDB might not be entirely founded; rather, BDB might be a product of base rate fallacy or other factors entirely (Woodward, 2016; Woodward et al., 2012)." (Kulak, 2024, 787).

"According to the online adoption site Petfinder, black dogs are listed four times longer than their lighter-colored counterparts (The Citizen, 2017)." (cited in Kulak, 2024)

References:

Brown, W. P., Davidson, J. P., & Zuefle, M. E. (2013). Effects of phenotypic characteristics on the length of stay of dogs at two no kill animal shelters. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 16(1), 2–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888705.2013.740967

Brown, W. P. and Morgan, K. T. (2015). Age, breed designation, coat color, and coat pattern influenced the length of stay of cats at a no-kill shelter. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 18(2): 169–180. doi:10.1080/10888705.2014.971156.

The Citizen. (2017, June 7). Helen Zille’s “black dog” post causes a storm on Twitter. https://www. citizen.co.za/news/south-africa/helen-zilles-black-dog-post-causes-a-storm-on-twitter

Goleman, M., Drozd, L., Karpinski, M., & Czyzowski, P. (2014). Black dog syndrome in animal shelters. Medycyna Weterynaryjna, 70(2), 122–127.

Kulak, K., McDermott, C. M., & Miller, M. K. (2024). Black Dog Bias in the Courtroom: A Potential Disadvantage? Anthrozoös, 37(4), 779–790. https://0-doi-org.aupac.lib.athabascau.ca/10.1080/08927936.2024.2356938

Leonard, A. (2011). The plight of “big black dogs” in American animal shelters: Color-based canine discrimination. Pap Kroeber Anthropological Sociology, 99(1), 168–183.

Lepper, M., Kass, P. H. and Hart, L. A. 2002. Prediction of adoption versus euthanasia among dogs and cats in a California animal shelter. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 5(1): 29–42.

Lum, H. C., Nau, N., & McClellan, K. (2013). Exploring the “Black Dog” syndrome: How color can influence perceptions of companion animals. Association for Human–Animal Bond Studies. http://www.animalbondstudies.org/2013/07/31/exploring-the-black-dog-syndrome-how-color�can-influence-perceptions-of-companion-animals/

Nakano, C. (2008, December 8). Black dog bias? Los Angeles Times. [https://www.latimes.com/style/la%02hm-black6-2008dec06-story.html https://www.latimes.com/style/la�hm-black6-2008dec06-story.html]

Orlando Sentinel. (2008). It’s hard to find homes for big, black dogs. http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/ features_lifestyle_animal/2008/04/its-hard

Pous, T. (2011). Are black pets less likely to be adopted? Time Magazine. http://newsfeed.time.com/ 2011/10/12/are-black-pets-less-likely-to-be-adopted/

Sinski, J., Carini, R. M., & Weber, J. D. (2016). Putting (big) black dog syndrome to the test: Evidence from a large metropolitan shelter. Anthrozoös, 29(4), 639–652. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936. 2016.1228769

Waldman, K. (2014, June 30). Black dog syndrome. Slate. https://slate.com/technology/2014/06/ black-dog-syndrome-are-people-racist-against-black-pets.htm

Wells, D. and Hepper, P. G. 1992. The behaviour of dogs in a rescue shelter. Animal Welfare 1(3): 171–186

Woodward, L. (2016, May 3). Are black dogs unadoptable? Rescue shelters perpetuate a false belief that dark-coated animals are unwanted. Zocalo Public Square. https://www.zocalopublicsquare. org/2016/05/03/are-black-dogs-unadoptable/ideas/nexus/

Woodward, L., Milliken, J., & Humy, S. (2012). Give a dog a bad name and hang him: Evaluating big, black dog syndrome. Society & Animals, 20(3), 236–253. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685306- 1234123 JoannaEfrafa (talk) 17:53, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

one more interesting one for reference: : Jennifer A. Coleman, Camilla W. Nonterah, Jennifer A. Joy-Gaba, Curtis Phills & Kristen C. Jacobson (2022) A Cross-Species Examination of Pro-White Color Bias Using a Novel Implicit Association Test, Anthrozoös, 35:3, 423-441, DOI: 10.1080/08927936.2021.1996024 JoannaEfrafa (talk) 17:58, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Article is too DOG CENTRIC

Pet adoptions includes more than dogs. It really needs to be more generic, but has lots of dog references. Also, it shouldn't mention specific organizations in the article. Perhaps in the external links. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.40.128.126 (talk) 04:53, 9 February 2008 (UTC) =]

I was thinking the same thing especially with the "Rescue dogs" section. I feel like the information in that section is important, but I feel like it makes the article more of a dog article than pet article and violates Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. I was thinking that it would be best to possibly split the Rescue dogs' section into its own article like Wikipedia:CONTENTSPLIT suggests. Pug888 (talk) 01:49, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

"Rehoming" Autodirect

I searched "Rehoming" hoping to find an article on the informal placement of children (generally adopted out of foster care) into another's home without the state's involvement in terminating parental rights. Instead I was redirected to this page. Can someone remove this re-directing? The practice of rehoming unwanted children is very different from adopting a pet. [Other than the fact that you can just give them to whoever you decide in most states with the exchange of a few pieces of paper.] RedDarling (talk) 20:18, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Interesting; it's a newer phenomenon, I guess. We probably need an article on the concept. Adoption apparently doesn't cover it? Montanabw^(talk) 06:18, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Targeted adoptions

Some adopters want (a) targeted adoptions (type of animals, species of animal, characteristics of animal, need of animal (e.g. rescue), etc. and (b) well-developed decisionmaking tools about (consumer, marketplace) decisions (they have pending, or which they are considering).

For instance, November is "National Adopt A Senior Pet Month!" (for which there is no article, nor a mention in the November article, nor even an article about senior pets, as there are not articles about short-haired hypoallergenic animals (often dogs, as Bo Obama, adopted by the First Family in 2010?). Can a brief section be developed for 'targeted adoptions' (whatever editors decide that section and topic should be labeled)?? For instance, when one chooses a cat over a dog because they don't need to be walked during the day, or a dog over a cat because they show more affection, or a caged bird over a free-roaming animal because they are more management, many issues emerge (and more are hidden): what about the 'rights' of the caged animal or the housed animal (and are those 'inherent rights' acknowledged and served (e.g. dog walking, letting out the dogs for a run and a poop, etc.) - or why any kind of animal (for 'company'?). Perhaps the WikiProject Pets should be better developed. MaynardClark (talk) 19:49, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

References

Wiki Education assignment: Technical Editing

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 January 2023 and 5 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Pug888 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Pug888 (talk) 03:19, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Editing Scope

Hi fellow editors! I am looking to edit and work on this article for the next few weeks. I believe that this article could benefit from a few revisions to make it as Wiki-friendly as possible. The major edits that I will be looking into will be in regard to the lead and adoption process section. I found the portions on unwanted pets, forever homes, and a few more to be leading and a little biased. I believe, with some organizational change and focus on coherence, the article would no longer come across as a personal reflection. I’m going to create a sandbox to examine the article and shift to live edits once it is ready to be edited. Any feedback is welcome and appreciated! Pug888 (talk) 03:33, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Rescue dog vs. rescued dog

The technical term in this article seems to be too colloquial in the use of words. In fact, so colloquial that it mixes up facts. The kind of dogs written about here is "rescued dogs" as these dogs are the ones having been rescued. A rescue dog is a specialized dog trained for rescueing humans in catastrophic areas, humans gotten lost, humans like in avalanche accidents. Mostly a search and rescue dog for humans in emergencies. So, an avalanche rescue dog is not a dog which has been rescued out of an avalanche but a dog which rescues something/someone out of an avalanche. Without clarifying the term, the article is incomplete and partially wrong. 2003:C0:DF15:4500:7015:6E85:F59E:C638 (talk) 15:31, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

While you're semantically correct, they're called rescue dogs (or shelter dogs), because they're commonly adopted from rescue groups (or shelters). Dogs which are trained for rescuing humans are called search and rescue dogs. Waz⁸:T-C-E 04:37, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

The term "rescue dog" instead of the standard term for an animal which has been rescued, i.e. "rescued dog" appears to be American English. It is definitely not British standard English.

New Headings

Hi all! I went through the article and made some changes to try and distinguish the information given. The biggest thing I changed was the lead section to format like Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section suggests. Before editing, I found a lot of information covered in the lead that was not mentioned in the rest of the article, which contradicts that it is supposed to summarize what the article contains. To make this change, I added the heading "before adoption" to cover all that was stated in the lead previously but frame it in a way that states how pets end up for adoption and what they go through before the adoption process.

Next, I changed the heading "Responsible Pet Ownership" to "Pet Ownership" to avoid violating Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Pug888 (talk) 02:58, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Recent edits and questions

I went through the article and tagged where citations were needed. The "Adoption Process" section needs a lot of citations, especially when stating the problems each animal is facing in shelters violating Wikipedia:No original research.

I was also wondering if "Rescue Dogs" may work better as its own article instead of here. While the information given in that section is important, it makes the article more dog-centric, which would work better if the article was "dog adoption" and not "pet adoption." Pug888 (talk) 03:08, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

I recommend that you instead add information about adopting other types of pets to this article. That dog-specific section was previously merged here from a separate "Rescue dog" article, where it was deemed to be too small. In addition, this article contains information which is relevant to dogs and other types of pets, providing better subject coverage than separate articles would. Waz⁸:T-C-E 04:47, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Beyond Breeds: Unlocking Pet Personalities with Science

DNA Matching: Breed-specific DNA testing: Partner with DNA testing companies to offer potential adopters the chance to find a pet with breed-specific traits they desire, while also prioritizing shelter animals.

Personality Matching: Develop a test using DNA and behavioral questionnaires to match people with the ideal pet based on compatibility factors like energy levels, social needs, and temperament.

Allergy-safe matching: Analyze potential adopters' and pets' DNA to predict allergy compatibility, fostering responsible adoption and reducing returns due to allergies.

Technology-driven adoption: VR Pet Interactions: Create a virtual reality experience where potential adopters can interact with shelter animals in a simulated environment, reducing their anxiety and helping them connect with the right pet.

Live-streamed shelter tours: Offer virtual tours of shelters through live streaming platforms, showcasing adoptable pets and allowing viewers to "meet" them in real-time.

AI-powered adoption platforms: Develop a platform that uses artificial intelligence to analyze personality traits, lifestyle preferences, and animal profiles to suggest compatible matches for both humans and pets.

Focus on specific needs: Senior-friendly adoptions: Partner with retirement homes and senior centers to match older pets with older adults, providing companionship and improving mental and physical well-being for both.

Working/Therapy Pets: Train and certify shelter animals for specific roles like service dogs, emotional support animals, or therapy pets, increasing their adoption chances and providing valuable support to people in need.

"Foster-to-adopt" with training support: Offer temporary foster care options where potential adopters receive professional training and support to help them integrate a new pet into their lives, increasing the success rate of adoptions.

[|https://petpawty.net/]] Petpawty (talk) 07:36, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SU24 - Sect 200 - Thu

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 May 2024 and 24 August 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Yz9988 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Zq2197 (talk) 04:27, 17 August 2024 (UTC)