DeGeneres in DeDoghouse
This one’s for the dogs.
One of our favorite talk show hosts, Ellen DeGeneres, got a surprise when the pet adoption agency she used to acquire a pooch repossessed the pooch from DeGeneres’ hairdresser after the host gave the dog to the ‘dresser when things didn’t work out for Ellen.
Cats is what didn’t work out, by the way. Ellen’s cats wouldn’t put up with the puppy, named Iggy. So Ellen took it upon herself to give Iggy a better, more cat-free home.
Unfortunately, that violated an agreement with the dog rescue agency Ellen employed, and the agency took the pooch from the hairdresser’s home – much to the consternation of Ellen and to the ‘dresser’s two pre-teen daughters, who’d already bonded with Iggy.
Ellen brought the situation to the attention of viewersTuesday, imploring the agency to reconsider its actions. "I thought I did a good thing,” she told the audience. “I tried to find a loving home for the dog because I couldn't keep it."
”I feel totally responsible for it and I'm so sorry. I'm begging them to give that dog back to that family. It's not their fault. It's my fault. I shouldn't have given the dog away. Just please give the dog back to those little girls."
The girls' impassioned plea for Iggy's return was delivered via video Tuesday, as well, on TMZ.com and YouTube.
No word on what the agency, Mutts and Moms, will do – but you gotta imagine some deal will be struck. On a personal level, it seems as though the family and the agency could get together to see if they’re a good fit and the fee - $3,000, already paid once by DeGeneres – could be waived.
But that depends, of course, on whether the 'dresser's home is suitable for the dog. It's a bit of a sticky wicket.
Maybe it’s just my Midwest sensibilities, but this doesn’t seem like an unworkable problem. What do you think? Give us your opinion in the comments section below!
Comments
Mutts for Moms should be ashamed of themselves, they are obviously not in it for “the best interest of dogs.” What kind of an agency would take a dog out of a loving home. They could have met with the people on the spot and been happy that the dog had a good home. This story really pisses me off!
I read in another article that Mutts for Moms has a policy of not placing small dogs in homes with children under a certain age. People who adopt from an agency need to abide by the policies of the agency. That said, I don’t quite understand how the agency could legally go onto someone else’s property (the hairdresser’s) and take back the dog.
Mutts for Moms,
Seems like an oxymoron to me. How in the world could they possibly think this is a good situation for Iggy? Not only have they outraged the family but they have outraged everyone who loves dogs. What a slap in the face to someone who obvioulsy takes very good care of their pet. I am ashamed of them. It seems to me they did this just to make themselves be seen in the public eye. As a Business owner I sure would not want this kind of bad attention.
If they cared in any way about animals, they will give the dog back to the family that Ellen gave it to, Ellen is a caring person and anyone knows she wouldnt do anything that wasnt right…I am very angry right now. Please return the dog to the family.
Unbelievable that Mutts for Moms would do this. Ellen loves animals and would not give an animal to an uncaring home. The Agency should review the situation and if satisfied with Iggy’s new home then return it back to the hair dresser and her two daughters. They are making a big stink about nothing!
Mutts for Moms is definitely not acting in the best interest of Iggy! What do they plan to do with the poor baby? His little puppy head will be spinning in confusion. The only fair thing would be to give him back to the hair dresser’s family and waive the fee. Those elitist asses really piss me off!
Mutts for Moms should be ashamed. What a terrible thing they are doing to this poor innocent puppy.
Being in rescue, I can tell you the rules must be followed. While it is unfortunate, the hairdresser can always apply for Iggy herself, and hopefully pass any home inspection, and adopt Iggy that way. The rules are made for reasons, and even Ellen has to abide by them.
The agency should return the dog back to the hairdresser Ellen gave him to, when Ellen felt she couldn’t take care of the dog she gave him to someone who she knew would take the correct care of the dog and love him the agency had no right in going to the hairdressers house and taking him away from them. The agency should be ashamed of themselves for taking the dog from a very loving family and should return the dog to the hairdressers family.
Reading # 8, I was reminded on how these agencies are so “bent out of shape” by rules, instead of seeing a loving situation stare them in the face. They should bend their rules and let the dog stay with the family. They can make an exception. It’s ridiculous that they took the dog away just like that. If they had been mature, they could have discussed it, and let the dog stay. Shame on the agency!
This incident was so poorly handled that I’d be ashamed to associate myself with the organization. I understand rules but they need to stop feeding the staff and management stupid pills. A home inspection and some paperwork is all that is needed here.
I truly feel sorry for the dog, that agency should have taken the time to research the family for the dogs sake. Give the DOG BACK!
This whole fiasco is disgusting. Shame on Mutts for Moms. Could it be that they are really more interested in another $3,000 adoption fee?!! Which is quite a bit of money.
I am disgusted with ALL these animal right wacko’s! They would rather see an animal live it’s life in a cage at a kennel or in a overcrowded “foster” home then placed in a family environment just because they can have the “power” to decide. The “rules & requirments” that some of these groups come up with are just absurd, and are not even reasonable. The dog had been moved into a caring and responsible family home and that is where he should have remained. I will almost guarentee that right this minute he is either in a cage or “foster” environment, neither of which are in his best interest. Speaking as a retired animal control officer, I can tell you that these groups are HORRIBLE and do not work in the best interest of animals with their overly emotional nonsense and lack of education in animal husbandry and welfare. I have personally been inside some of these “foster” homes for these groups and they are positively disgusting, and these environments are not in any animals best interest. I have also inspected some of the “kennels” of some of these groups and they too were a nightmare. Since these groups have become so involved in animal placement and rescue, they have done much more harm then good. They DO NOT operate based with staff who do the job with a solid education in an animal related field or experience; but rather with self proclaimed do gooders who elevate animals to human level and who do not have the education to know what they are doing and do it in a proper manner. This little dog had a chance for a very nice life in a very nice home, this group should be ashamed of how they handled this and they should be shut down. With all the animals who are homeless they removed a dog from a good caring home because a “rule” was broken?!? Oh yea, they love animals, NOT! Poor ELLEN!….You my friend did not do a thing wrong!
Great advertising for Mutts for Moms! They might as well pack it up and close shop now - they’re done!
I so completely agree with Nancy ~ what a travesty. Are they in it for the money??? Or the animal???? Ellen did a really GOOD thing and Mutts for Moms has made a huge mistake - taking this little pup from a loving home to a kennel. Good Job, Mutts for Moms!
$3000 to adopt a pet? Where does the money go? I read the Mutt’s group is having trouble their day jobs because of all the calls and controversy. So, again…these people have jobs… where is a $3000 adoption fee going? The average person can get a pet from most Humane Societies for under $300! Ellen didn’t buy a car that could be repossessed if she didn’t pay for it. And the young girls in question… 11 and 12, I believe…hardly “small” children who would pull or poke at a puppy. This may be one of those times when any publicity is absolutely not good publicity. If Mutts is a nonprofit, they might want to get their books in order for an audit.
Thank the Lord for animal rights. everyliving things nees something or someone to help them throught life Now that said. Has any one given or sold a puppy with the provisions tha animal comes back if it does not work out. A deal is a deal. Ellen,s heart was in the right place but that is not the issue.Myra said it all We are not privey to all the facts and it may be the puppy will go back to the hairdresser but Ellen should figured her cats might be a problem and given time they would probably adjust. Ann
i feel that the agency should let the children have the puppy, all that is needed is a good home and i do not think for a minute that elen would give a pet to an unworthly family, apparently the kids love the dog let them give it a loving home…..elen was not aware that this was wrong please give the dog to those kids that have learned to love it and make it a part of their family taking it i just feel is wrong……
Ellen should be ashamed. Figure it out. Pet’s aren’t throw away. You better be ready to care for an animal when you adopt. Yes, there are rules.. you may not like them but it protects the animal from kids and being shuffled around. I’m glad the rescue agency took charge and followed up on the contract signed by Ellen, despite her popularity.
I saw Ellen on TV this morning and I felt so sorry for her. She really did think that she was doing the right thing for little Iggy by giving her to a caring family and they were crazy about her. I agree that the agency needs to pull their heads out of their asses and care about the welfare of the puppy and not their stinking agency. Animals are killed all the time at dog pounds because people don’t adopt them. This is not the case here since Iggy is already in a great families home. I agree that you need to think about the two daughters feelings and their love of the puppy also.
my name is Debra Sermons.im weiting this for my friend Cathy,because she doesn,t have a computer. it wasn,t your falt that you did that. you didn,t know that dog was someone else. we know how you fell because we are animal lover too. my friend want to move into apt,but she has to get raid of all her cats expost one and it just breaking her heart because she has those cats for about ten years. she has papers on them from her DR,S saying she needs her cats. and she don,t what to do. her name is Cathy Flemming.
debrasermons@hotmail.com
What a sad situation!The agency should get ready for an audit- their fee seems excessive- without knowing all the facts, it does seem they are unreasonable and should not be allowed to continue their dubious “good work”.
I watched Ellen’s show when she broke down crying over this mess. To inform the other commenters, the $3000 she paid included having the dog neutered, his shots, paying the vet EXTRA so that Iggy would sleep at the vet’s house while recovering instead of recouperating in a cage, and also a trainer to try to acclimatize her cats to Iggy so they could be one big happy family. She didn’t mention what the agency fee charged by Moms and Mutts was.
I think the fact that Ellen did everything in her power to make a comfortable home for Iggy speaks volumes. It didn’t work out at her home, so she gave him to a friend with two daughters looking for a puppy - someone who she can visit to see Iggy and check out how things are going - not a total stranger she didn’t know.
Moms and Mutts should spend more time considering what poor Iggy is experiencing being pulled from a second home where he was loved, and possibly sent to ANOTHER home! I think the agency is just ticked off that they didn’t get to charge the second family adoption fees.
GIVE IGGY BACK TO THOSE GIRLS AND DO THE RIGHT AND LOGICAL THING! It is the only thing that will save this so-called ‘rescue agency’.
I feel Ellen made an honest error.In doing this she did what was best for Iggy.Some rules are not fitting in all cases. This is one that needs a definite refit.
My husband and I have been the fortunate recipients of dogs who needed homes.They have lived out happy lives and have been well loved.To keep moving dear little
Iggy is unfair to the puppy. Let the puppy settle in at with his family and stop all the heartbreak to all involved.The puppy is going to be traumatized all over a rule that can be changed.Good Luck, Iggy!
HI, IF THEY WANT TO BE SUCH IDIOTS ELLEN SHOULD BUY THE DAM PLACE AND SHUT THEM DOWN OUT OF IT!!!!!!!!!!!
Why is it that Following the rules are more important than the well being of animals and kids. The home and the people in it (hairdresser’s family) are great for the dog or Ellen (a dog lover, herself) would not have given it to them. I can understand setting rules but I also believe that there are exceptions to every rule. GIVE IGGY BACK TO THE GIRLS.
The rescue agency should have handled this situation differently. They could have made this a positive outcome instead it’s become negative outcome, especially since they have already adopted the Iggy out to a new family again. Now it really sounds as if the rescue agency is in it for $$$$ otherwise they would have given the family that had the dog an application and transferred the dog for a small paper handling fee. Is so sad because what this rescue group not only hurts them but other rescue groups as well.
Seeing Ellen cry made me cry too. She thought it better to give her puppy to a happy, loving home than give the dog back to the shelter. (The shelters never really know what kind of people adopt their pets… At least she knew the mother and kids well enough to trust them with the puppy’s happiness.)
The shelter had no business trespassing on the property to take the dog and the need for rules is understood but COME ON…this is just silly. Give the damn dog back to the kids! Make everyone happy and try to salvage your reputation, Moms and Mutts!
What a wicked way to make money, charge 3grand to set up the ‘adoption’ then repossess when some trivial rule is broken and hey presto re-adoption! Another 3grand. coool
Hopefully the reason for the rules is to make sure that the dog is in a good situation. As long as this purpose is served, the rules themselves don’t matter. They are only one means to this end. The visit to the hairdresser’s home should have been to verify that the dog was being well taken care of, not to unconditionally snatch the dog. Since Moms and Mutts had a free kennel, they should have filled it with a dog that needed a home, not one that already had one. Moms and Mutts: verify the appropriateness of the home, return the dog, admit that you screwed up, and wake up from this public relations nightmare.
I don’t understand how they let Ellen take the puppy home to be with her cats in the first place–wasn’t there a ‘trial’ time to see if the puppy could be introduced…I’m sure they were just thrilled to soak her for the 3G’s–
The rules are there in a business for a reason, but in fairness, if it didn’t work out, both the dog and the fees should have been returned…perhaps some communication from Ellen’s ample staff could have alleviated some of this uneccessary hubbub.
I’m still in sticker shock over the $3,000 — did she save that much from driving that Prius?!
The agency was thinking “more money” obviously. Ellen found it a very good home and has now traumatized the puppy as well as the kids. You should have checked the home first. You should not be in business and the publicity you have received is WELL DESERVED.
Who cares about her personal problems, everybody has them whether it be dogs, children issues, etc. Just because you are on the air doesn’t mean you should try use that as a tool to manipulate others to be simpethetic towards your Personal problems. Deal with it like an adult. I thought she looked totally rediculous and pathetic crying like that on national television while airing her issues. That made absolutely no sense to me; I don’t want to see a television host boo-hooing on screen over what should be dealt with behind closed doors. What if the poparazzi invaded her privacy, then she’d be crying about that, so make up her mind!
So many of these “rescue” agencies get subsidies and non-profit status based on the # of dogs they house that there is no incentive for them to place them. And they have regulations on par with adopting a child! Its rediculous!! I can understand screening a potential puppy parent to make sure they aren’t going to breed, fight or abandon the puppy but no one with $3k to spend on a dog is likely to do that. These agencies are rediculous and I don’t support any of them. If you want to RESCUE a dog, go to the pound and if you want to pay for a specific breed go to a breeder that has invested time into the health and genetics of their line.
A rescue agency has the primary responsibility for the dogs they place. What if the hairdresser gave the dog to her mechanic, etc. Ellen should have given the dog back to the agency and then recommended the hairdresser to apply for adoption. Why did she think the rules of the agency did not apply to her. What a jerk.
I agree with #13. That was the first thing I thought when i read the story. Seems like an awfully big fee. The way I hear the dog has already been re-adopted…for what another $3000 fee???? Shame on you Mutts for Mom and another pet adoption agency. I understand that there is money involved with taking care of the animals before they are adopted but with fees that high no wonder the shelters are so full.
“Mutts for Moms” sounds an awful lot like the Wicked Witch from “The Wizard of Oz”. “I’ll get you my pretty, and your little dog to.” I don’t know about ya’ll but $3.00.00 to adopt a “Mutt”? Sounds like a scam to me.
I agree with Jan Huffman, comment #31. use the space in their kennel for some poor little animal who had no where to go and send someone to inspect little girls home to make sure it qualified. So many people wasting so much time over a ridiculous incident.I do think Ellen should have controlled her tears a little and been a bit more professional.
Reading this story from the other side of the Atlantic and not even knowing who Ellen DeGeneres is … I cannot help but stare in amazement at my computer screen. You get a pooch from the pond here for a few cans of dogfood and a contribution to the vet fees incurred. I imagine $ 300 would be a very upper limit. For $ 3,000 I could go out and buy a trained, agile greyhound or a prizewinning breeding dog from a professional outfit. The whole sorry story apart … the charges raised by “Mutts for Moms” have my head spinning …
On he other hand I have to admit that simply passing the dog on was not a great idea, one should have checked the small print first.
Did anyone else cry when you saw this on tv? What a terrible excuse for an adoption agency!!
I am sure Ellen would not have rescued this dog if she thought she couldn’t take care of it? Things happen, so she found a loving home with people she trusted, and she was forthright and honest!! Could you imagine it happening to you? Shame on these people who think of it in black and white. Poor Iggy!!
Let me toss a new question into the mix. What’s the best solution? Where do you think these two parties can find compromise?
Celebrities like Ellen DeGeneres think they’re above the law and don’t have to follow the rules. Her favorite animal isn’t even dogs — it’s crocodiles, as in the crocodile tears she shed on her show. She’s a complete manipulator and doesn’t deserve to decide any dog’s fate. (And as a “comedian,” she’s the least funny woman in show business!)
WOW, if only agencies cared this much about children. Our Laws let people fight them for money , kill , hunt, but God Forbid you give them to a loving family. Shame on Ellen for breaking the rules, and being honest . Should have told them iggy ran away.. finders keepers , the family could have kept him then. Don’t you need a court order to go onto someones property to remove something? would have made that agency take this one to court with a jury trial. We’re talking a dog here !! You know puppies are meant to be with loving families, and my gosh children too, Do they think that an 11 and 12 year old would sit on the puppy or anything…. Mutts and Mom’s need to consider going into another business…Hopefully this will be “a Farewll stunt” of thiers.
$3,000.00 ?? a bit high for a pup. I’ll bet Ellen isn’t the first home they yanked a dog from, to get more fees. Probably the only way they make any money. Arrogant doesn’t descibe them , Insensitive and Ignorant does.
The lawyer for Mutts and Moms have spoken out. They tried to give the dog to the hairdresser– however, the hairdresser did not want to fill out the paperwork for adoption. Mutts and Moms have the e-mails going back and forth to prove this point. It’s amazing that hardly any of the press mentions this fact.
I thought the whole idea was to find these pets a loving home. And $3,000.00 for a puppy? Come on. Are they just taking Iggy back to make more money? Some people lose sight of what the whole thing is about when they get a little power. It’s a shame. If I could afford to send it from AR to Ellen, I’d send her one of mine to give to the girls.
I, totally, agree with Deb [post #14]. Anyone who’s ever watched Ellen on her show knows that she is a compassionate person & animal lover. She wouldn’t have put this puppy in jeopardy. These people could have checked out this hairdressers home & bent the rules in this situation. I feel these so-called rescue people, knew exactly what they were doing. They knew it would draw media attention to their business. Well, hopefully, it has backfired on their no-good asses. I know, I wouldn’t go to them to find a pet. They did NOT act in the best interests of this puppy!
P.S. It is my understanding that this rescue person has, already, placed Iggy in another home. That was fast! Just how or why did that happen? This lady who runs this business is vindictive & pure evil IMO.
All Mutts and Moms needed to do was check the place out that the dog was in and not make such a ruckus about this episode. The doggy had a wonderful new home they could have reprimanded Ellen with a never can she come back warning to them! This is utterly rediculous just a silly waste of air time and reviews. Please Mutts and Moms get with the program did they really think a celeb would place a dog in a horrible situation how crazy is this world!
SEE COMMENT #45…
They had a chance and didn’t want to take it…they wanted special treatment.
Whats the problem if it had a good home and a large fee was paid for the dog? As many unwanted dogs as their are, why would they want to take back one from a decent home? Do they think their judgement is better? I adopted a pit bull from a rescue place that said they were going to check out our living arrangements and that was 7 years ago and they have never made an appearance here yet. Give her a break and return that dog to people who will love it and give it a good home!!!
$3,000 for a dog? I have 3 champion Rat Terriers, and they altogether do not add up to that much. As for taking Iggy out of the hairdresser’s home, I feel that Mutts for Moms just wants the money, and don’t really care about the animals they SAY are so important to them. Be realistic!!! I love dogs too, and have 4, besides our daughter’s 2 living at our place, and they are ALL well fed, well loved, and well cared for. And we DID NOT pay $3,ooo for them.
In fact, I have a vet bill over $1500. to make sure they ARE well taken care. GIVE IGGY BACK TO A FAMILY THAT REALLY DOES CARE FOR IGGY. WHY HOLD OUT FOR MONEY, WHEN, IN THE END, MONEY IS JUST MONEY, BUT LOVE FROM 2 GIRLS FOR IGGY IS MORE IMPORTANT!!!