deb explained the difference between carly/phoebe and clyde really well.

Posted: May 31, 2008 at 8:12 am

because the difference between them was organic vs. behavioral. phoebe and carly are manageable because their aggression is behavioral and therefore predictable, we know what sets them off, we try to minimize that. but clyde’s aggression came from a misfiring brain, damaged beyond repair and the rage syndrome was part of his seizure disease…it was not predictable or manageable…it was random acts of uncontrolled violence. a study of american prison’s back in the 70’s showed that 98% of violent offenders, suffered a brain injury sometime in their past. the brain is a very delicate and complicated organ.
the other part of this tho, is from the dogs point of view….the others, and from clyde’s.
phoebe always gives very good warning before she is going to bite…she snarls and growls and lifts her lips and gives the other dogs and people plenty of opportunity to get out of her space. carly is pretty quick with her warnings and doesn’t give alot of notice….. BUT..carly accepts being isolated, she doesn’t like it all that much but she accepts it, and clyde could not.

the other animals are therefore somewhat protected by virtue that carly is not roaming their midst and phoebe will tell them to “F” off…also both carly and phoebe are jumpers…they jump their victims and then they let them go once they have done what they felt they had to to re-establish their rules.

clyde wasn’t communicating with or disciplining personal rule breakers…he was in a red hot blind rage…which means he doesn’t stop until his rage goes away or something or someone else makes him stop.

i am sure there are many who think killing clyde was wrong and it WAS wrong for both clyde and for me. but it is not just clyde and me who happen to live here. and here is the crunch of this…i believe in the rights of one, and those are the same as the rights of many…take care of each one, individually and the many are cared for too.

except…this time it did not work that way.

how i felt about clyde, was not part of the decision i made. whether i loved him or not would have made no difference. i made a decision to sacrifice clyde because i was not willing to risk any more harm to anyone else, not ever again. and when looking at the isolation options, i was not willing to do that to him either.

all of these dogs are different…with effort, dogs like jesse, ben, carly and max can have quality of life while curtailing their freedom…but not all dogs can. and clyde could not….and emotionally traumatizing him day after day to keep him separate, was not going to give him any happiness or peace…it would have driven him completely insane. clyde was not a dog to wait patiently until someone happened to drop by and be with him…he would have fought and screamed to be rescued, he would have jumped and flung himself around to be free because that is who clyde was…a sweet and wonderful dog with a very badly physiologically damaged brain. he could not learn, he could not reason…all he could do was react.
my job is not to torment animals with no hope of ever finding release or happiness. my job is to care for them with respectful compassion and sometimes that means letting them go. i am not saying this makes ending his life right, i am saying that ending his life was necessary for his wellbeing and the others living here.

4 Comments on "deb explained the difference between carly/phoebe and clyde really well."

  • Jenine says

    Love you Carol.

  • Cheryl says

    If people are upset and angry about Clyde then they need to walk a mile in your shoes Carol. We had an aggresive dog years ago. We managed with him but it was always a struggle…after he passed we were heart broken but also walked around with this huge guilt thing in that life was so much easier with him gone. We could do things that we were unable to do with him in our lives. Simple things of someone coming to do the door and not having to yell hold it a minute while we locked him away…going for a walk at an off leash area and enjoying visiting other dogs…having company and not having to be on full alert at all times. He was NOT a damaged dog..we got him at 8 weeks old along with his sister who was an awesome dog. So no one should be upset with your decision…you made the correct one…I am very sorry Cuddles was harmed by him..he was not at fault..he was damaged..things will be easier for SAINTS sad but true with Clyde’s passing.

  • Julie says

    I am so sorry to hear about Clyde. Carol you did what was best for your rescues and most importantly what was best for Clyde. I’m sorry you even have to explain yourself to others when you were the one who stepped up and gave Clyde security and a home. I am glad you did. I am sure Clyde knew he was a very loved little boy even with his “broken” brain.

    My poodle Sassy sends Cuddles lot of kisses and wishes him a speedy recovery.

    Julie

  • Deb says

    Carol, you owe no explanations to anyone. Everything you do has a reason, and no decision is ever made without (sometimes) heartbreaking inner turmoil and self doubt. You do what you must, not what you want. I know that you would never choose to end an animal’s life willingly, and having anyone (including you) challenge your decision is self-serving.
    The Saints are safe now. It matters not whether everyone adored Clyde, he was a ticking time bomb, a clear and present danger to every other animal with which he had opportunity to interact. Clyde was never, ever going to be safe in the way that other SAINTS are safe, free to move about, free to be happy. Just think about trying to live inside poor Clyde’s fractured psyche. It must have been tortuous for him. That is not the SAINTS way. Carol, you had to let him go. He was in pain and it just could not be managed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *