DeGeneres Cancels Show Tapings After Dog Controversy, Mutts and Moms Attorney Speaks

Ellen DeGeneres is taking a long weekend from taping her show after the controversy over her giving an adopted dog, Iggy, away to her hairdresser.

Meanwhile, the attorney for Mutts and Moms, the dog rescue agency that DeGeneres adopted from, spoke out on “The O’Reilly Factor” show.

Keith Fink, the attorney, said that Mutts and Moms did offer the hairdresser’s family to come in and file adoption papers for Iggy. But he said that DeGeneres refused and the family also refused to come in and fill out paperwork, and he has emails to prove it.

Fink further added that DeGeneres is trying to use her fame and power to get things done her way. He stated that DeGeneres did this “because of brash arrogance; and two, for her own aggrandizement.”

UPDATE: On Friday, Keith Fink said Iggy has been placed with a new family earlier this week. He stated Iggy is doing well, and the identity of the family will not be revealed to protect their privacy.

Source: Fox News, Associated Press

(Thanks menusux)

43 Responses to “DeGeneres Cancels Show Tapings After Dog Controversy, Mutts and Moms Attorney Speaks”

  1. Stefani says:

    Well, that adds a whole other dimension to the story. If the family refused to fill out adoption papers with the rescue, then I really can’t take up for them. They should agree to go through the standard screening process, and should have been given “first dibs” if they were willing to do so and passed. If they refused, then . . . I may have to change my view of this whole situation.


  2. Debbie4747 says:

    I sided with the agency with the stipulation that I thought their 14 years of age was a bit harsh. Ellen, being in show biz, should have known about contracts. They agency operating wrongfully erred there. No one in this is really right. However, if the family really did refuse to sign papers, then they are clearly out of the picture…end of story. Maybe now Ellen can use her airtime to help this agency get back on track…that is if she is up to taping. Wouldn’t want to stress her out any further. I don’t see where she is showing any real responsibility with anything. Wish I could cancel work anytime I feel stressed, even if it’s not “job related”.
    And I’d still like to know just what kind of a following she has that goes around issuing death thread and arson threats on her behalf. Nice people don’t get that kind of following. Sick if you ask me.

  3. Traci says:

    “And I’d still like to know just what kind of a following she has that goes around issuing death thread and arson threats on her behalf. Nice people don’t get that kind of following. Sick if you ask me.”

    She is a celebrity and celebrities, nice or not, attract fan(atic)s with no lives other than the celebrities. These people are nut jobs who might be stalking her if they weren’t making death threats on her behalf.

  4. Bridgett says:

    Stefani, me too. Bizarre. If they wanted the dog that bad they would have signed the paper work.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Didn’t know Ellen could be such a wimp!

  6. Jane Anderson says:

    I am not so sure about this. First of all, I read on another site that the family immediately filled in an application for adoption as soon as Ellen turned the dog over to them. Second, why would the adoption rescue even ASK them to fill out an application when they already knew the family had kids younger than the cutoff age. Third, when the rescue went to the familys home, I read something about the family thought it was to discuss the adoption. Fourth, why would the family say in email (that is easily shared with the entire world) that they flat out refuse to fill in an application. And last, WHY is this revelation only coming to surface now? There is something a little fishy going on with that agency. When they started getting the death threats, all they had to do was to say the family refused to fill out an application. But the agency said nothing. Things that make you go hmmmmm.

  7. Jenny Bark says:

    Jane Anderson, I agree with you for all your reasons plus, this attorney said he talks for M & M but he does not represent them & Ellen has not spoken out yet. Why does he only talk for them & not have them as clinets, correct me if I am wrong but doesn’t it only take a dollar.

    Imo if m &m is telling the truth it won’t matter because the damage has already been done & now people know about the co-owner part of the contract & don’t like it.

    Imo if they are not telling the truth I think Ellen will now start a big law suite. Time will tell, most everything comes out in the end.

  8. shibadiva says:

    O’REILLY: OK. Now let me stop you. So you’re saying — and I want to get this on the record — that the family, the hairdresser, Ellen’s friend, wouldn’t come in and fill out the paperwork to get Iggy? You’re saying that flat out: they would not do it?

    FINK: Flat out, and I have the e-mails.

    Ellen’s having a breakdown. Marina’s having a breakdown. Now, how do they all stop this?

  9. sylvia says:

    This attorney possibly “doth not speak the truth”. The little girl was interviewed on some show, NY tv, last night. She said the “rescue’? women were invited in as the family was told they brought the applications to fill out and wanted to make a home check. The little girl was not lying and the original story had the “rescue’?” people being invited into the house to do just what the child said. So sad to see some people swing a different direction every time a new story comes out but that seems to be common in our country today. Let’s get the facts people. Just the facts. As for O’Reilly, who buys into that goofus anyway?

  10. Lesliek says:

    The whole story on both sides sounds a little iffy to me. I still say the dog should be the important factor. It seems to be the last thing either side is concerned about.And I agree why didn’t M&M bring these emails up earlier. Also why didn’t Ellen try to mediate off air first.It looks like an all around ego trip & meanwhile the dog is where ?

  11. Bridgett says:

    The only ones who know the facts are Ellen, M&M and the family. Ellen isn’t talking anymore, the family hasn’t spoken since this first started and the M&M “lawyer” won’t shut up. Frankly, I don’t think Ellen is aggrandizing or pushing her weight around. The only hysterical, unstable person I have seen in this Marina B.

    At the same time, that lawyer is going out on a limb saying that he has proof. Could it be a hoax by the same crowd that is making the death threats? Certainly, but wouldn’t Ellen & Co. have denied this evidence by now?

    Also what concerns me is Ellen giving away dogs. This is her second dog that she has given away. Atleast the second, if you believe some sources. It takes cats along time to get used to new family members. Months! And two weeks isn’t enough to teach a puppy not to chase a cat. I have had my dog for two years and we are still working on that.

    Both sides have changed their stories. Or perhaps it is the interpretation by the media of the same accounts. Who knows.

    It is time to remember the saying “take it with a grain of salt”.

  12. Lynn says:

    Spokesperson for MandM, attorney Fink, does labor law [e.g., sexual harrassment]. Wonder if he’s just a family member….. But he’s getting to promote himself, isn’t he?

    As far as proof that the family was invited to fill out adoption papers:

    ~ Let’s see the email proof, Fink. Not going to take your word for it.

    ~ If, mind you, I wrote IF, the family refused to file papers for the adoption agency, my guess is that THEIR legal respresentation advised that they not do it at this point, lest they condone all parts of the contract. Sounds like reasonable legal advice.

    Debbie4747: Don’t be so gullible as to believe the woman got death threats. She’s such an opportunist that she might have asked friends to send death threats. Ellen a wimp? Sad you should think so. It takes courage to stand up and decide today I am not feeling funny, so I’m not going to go onstage and look pathetic….only for people to complain about THAT. It’s a no-win situation for her.

    As far as not giving Iggy long enough to adjust… don’t know what went on. And sometimes you just KNOW it’s not going to work in spite of all the training. Maybe Marina should have put Iggy in a room with some cats BEFORE she sent him off into a new home.

    Marina really blew it for everyone. And now people will remember this and will start shopping in pet shops [puppy mill products] more than ever. Gee…….wonderful. :-(

  13. June says:

    Not only does Ellen not feel funny, she is NOT funny anymore. And I wonder if the mother with the two girls really wanted to fill out the paperwork, but since she was employed by Ellen she had to choose between feeding her daughters or not breaking their hearts?

    Ellen should not have made a media circus out of this. I don’t like her anymore. And I don’t like the portion of her fan base that is rabid and gullible, either.

  14. Scratch says:

    I wonder if the hairdresser was given a dollar amount to ‘adopt’ Iggy. There’s a lot here that we don’t know.

  15. Lynn says:

    And I’d be willing to wager a lot that Marina is the bad guy here.

    I will say this: if something like this had happened to me and I had a tv show, I would want the world to know who did it to me. It wouldn’t be because I wanted to get the ratings up… would be out of my love for animals. So, here’s to you, Ellen, for being the honest and caring person you are.

  16. straybaby says:

    Scratch says:
    October 19th, 2007 at 8:29 pm

    I wonder if the hairdresser was given a dollar amount to ‘adopt’ Iggy. There’s a lot here that we don’t know.

    i was wondering that also. . . .

  17. Jenny Bark says:

    I read on different posts that Ellen has received the ASPCA Founders Award. that she gave lots of money to different rescue groups & also funded & performed for their different events to raise money for them Does anyone know if all or any of this is true? I read different post that sounded like she really gave them lots of money. I know most of you are really good on the net.

  18. CJ says:

    There’s a video interview on wherein Ruby, the little girl, flat-out says that the rescue wanted the family to come in and fill out the adoption paperwork. But she says they were in Pasadena and “it’s, like, two hours away”. So the family didn’t want to make much of an effort to adopt this dog if a two-hour car ride was too much. It wasn’t too much for the rescue lady, bless her.

  19. KimS says:

    Not everything that happens is a dirty, little controversial secret. Not everything comes from a hidden agenda meant to screw you over.
    Sometimes people are simply idiots, overreact, make dumb little mistakes and say stupid things. Let them. It’s too bad, I feel sorry for the dog and for anyone who bonded with the dog.

    Ellen and Portia don’t have time or patience for a dog, hopefully they now understand that. The hairdressers family should make extra effort and go by the book next time for things they want. And the rescue org should review things on a case by case basis and learn better people skills.

    Maybe Ellen should have lied about it all along.

  20. June says:

    Lynn says:

    October 19th, 2007 at 10:25 pm
    And I’d be willing to wager a lot that Marina is the bad guy here.

    I will say this: if something like this had happened to me and I had a tv show, I would want the world to know who did it to me. It wouldn’t be because I wanted to get the ratings up… would be out of my love for animals. So, here’s to you, Ellen, for being the honest and caring person you are.

    What does loving animals have to do with wanting to “let the world know who did it to me”…ME? How about caring about the dog or the kids? That proves my point that Ellen was very egocentric in making a media circus over the problem just because she had the power to do so.
    One thing I will say in her fans’ defense is that I doubt that many, if any, of them were making the death and arson threats to the rescue lady. I suspect that rough bunch was made up of puppy mill operators and backyard breeder types that took the opportunity to vent some ‘righteous rage’ on the competition. That sounds like the twisted stuff those types would indulge in.

  21. trucorgi says:

    Has anyone noticed the resembelance of Marina Baktis to Andria Hinkle?

  22. Gindy says:

    All I have to do is consider the source. The “attorney” went on a KNOWN bulls$%^t artist’s show to even further sensationalize this she-said/she-said pile of dog doo.
    It sounds to me like two egos got into a pissing contest and each one is trying to see how high on the back of the garage their stream can go.
    I don’t feel bad for any of the humans involved, except the children (nice example “adults”) and the canine who is now confused as all get out.
    These supposed adults need to grow up, get to the table, and work this out face to face instead of in the freaking media.

  23. Jenny Bark says:

    All I can say if any of the posts I read are true rescue has lost a good friend and big money machine when they lost Ellen (my post at 1:45). Has anybody found out if this is true about the money & ASPCA Founders award?

  24. shibadiva says:

    Trucorgi, I hadn’t noticed any resemblance. I cannot imagine what Marina is going through right now, because I’ve never received that amount of hate mail. I do know what my visceral reaction was when I read some of the suggestions for a lingering death on some of the chats. Hopefully it is only the anonymity of web posting that allows people to be so vicious, and it doesn’t go beyond that. Regardless, words can do as much damage as sticks and stones. I can only visualize the helplessness that volunteers at one of our local rescues would feel if some multi-millionaire media star pulled out all the stops and threw them to the masses.

    Here’s another source to consider, since we’re looking for a fresh spin.

    Linda Milazzo is an L.A. writer who spoke with Ellen’s publicist, Ellen’s dog trainer, the Vice President of Publicity for Telepictures (which produces Ellen’s show), lawyer Keith Fink, and several animal rescue experts in the area. Here is her point of view.

    Iggy did not live with DeGeneres and De Rossi for the full two weeks before he was given to hairdresser Cheryl Marks. Iggy was left in the care of Los Angeles dog trainer, Zach Grey (, who reunited Iggy with DeGeneres and De Rossi after 9 days of individual and group training - at which time Degeneres and De Rossi concluded that they didn’t want a young puppy.

    Ricky Whitman, Vice President of Community Resources for the Pasadena Humane Society (PHS), told me she was not clearly represented in the press when quoted as saying “her group would’ve handled this [Iggy situation] very differently.”

    What Whitman actually meant (and we are hearing this second-hand through Linda, but we were hearing it through AP the first time) is that since PHS has contracts to provide animal control services to different cities, they would have been required to remove Iggy in the presence of animal control officers and under much more stringent conditions - hence “differently.” Whitman lauded the owners of Mutts & Moms for their rescue accomplishments, stating, “We have worked closely and well with Mutts & Moms in the past. We have honored them for their work.”

    On the evening Mutts & Moms confiscated Iggy from the hairdresser’s house, TMZ (also a Telepictures product) had been called (by DeGeneres) to video the visit.

    More at:

    BTW, according to Linda, in addition to the petition against Mutts and Moms, there was apparently another one circulating, which encouraged people to boycott all animal rescue organizations until Iggy was returned. The second petition has been removed.

    Quite the Pandora’s box.

  25. Meghan says:

    Wayne Pacelle of The Humane Society of the United States commented on the situation yesterday: He says Mutts & Moms threw common sense out the window.

  26. shibadiva says:

    Good for Pacelle for getting concerned about how this incident could affect rescue organizations in general (and their financial support). Heavy-handed adherence to rules, and (he missed this point in his blog) inciting the masses through media haven’t helped their cause. If Linda Milazzo is accurate, the petition to boycott other rescue organizations may only be the leading wave in the tsunami that HSUS would like to avoid.

  27. Stefani says:

    I am so confused. I signed a petition to return Iggy to this family, and now I think I want my sig removed.

    Certainly, no matter what the facts are in this melee, if Iggy is NOW in a NEW home and if it is a GOOD home and he has bonded with them, the worst thing in the world would be to move him again now.

    Maybe this hairdresser and her family felt that the dog was legally theirs because Degeneres had given it to them and they weren’t a party to the original contract stating the dog would be returned. But they should have been willing to go the proper route to apply for the dog.

    I assumed that Ellen was trying to use her celebrity for good, to get this dog out of a rescue environment and into a loving home. Now I am hearing things that make it seem like she was trying to strongarm the rescue (sending TMZ to tape the rescue taking the dog?)

    That is also bad behavior. But Mutt’s and Mom’s also has a ridiculous policy (no families with children under 14) and Mutts and Mom’s could have allowed the family to apply, without taking the dog, and only take the dog if they were not cleared. In making those comments about not letting the “Degeneres’ of the world” push her around, the rescue lady also made herself look like she was off on some personal, ego thing.

    Perhaps everyone has behaved badly in this situation — except, of course, Iggy. I hope somehow, his new family is down to earth enough not to get their own egos involved in teh situation, by walking around telling everyone that now they have the famous Degeneres dog. I can only pray for Iggy’s sake that they will keep that quiet and try to love the dog as best they can.

    As for DeRossi and Degeneres returning dogs and boarding Iggy for 9 days . . . I don’t doubt that they are “animal lovers” but animal lovers have to recognize their limits. If their pet situation at home is such that they couldn’t bring Iggy into it without boarding him for training and, I assume, behavior mod, then they should not have adopted him. They weren’t doing him any favors. Bonding with his new family is what Iggy needed to be doing, not going to doggy boarding school. You can’t adopt and save every animal that steals your heart. You have to know your limits in order to be able to do your pets any good.

    I think the best thing that could happen is all parties involved just drop it, and try to learn from it. No good has come out of this. Except, perhaps, Iggy may finally be in a home and no longer being torn apart in an ego-driven spectacle that has gotten out of control.


  28. Jane Anderson says:

    We have two revelations here. The little girl said the rescue is 2 hours away. Yet the rescue drove to their house. The family thought it was to discuss aboption. Could it be that what really happened, when the rescue was told by the family that it was too far to drive, the rescue then lied to them and said “Oh we’ll come to you.” It makes a lot of sense. The unsuspecting family was then put at ease, thinking everything was going to work out. It may be that the family did not refuse at all to drive the 2 hours to fill out the application for adoption. Why should they when the adoption will come to them!

  29. dog collar addict says:

    i think that this is a mountain out of a mole hill. b/c its a kid/animal story it’s caught the median attention. there are more important things to get angry about like, i dunno’, the war in iraq, hungry people or the crappy minumum wage.

  30. Jenny Bark says:

    They may have been right on the letter of the law, but not in the spirit of the mission of Mutts & Moms.

    Ellen broadcast this turn of events on her television show Tuesday, begging that Iggy be reunited with the hairdresser’s family. Ellen pleaded with the rescue to allow Iggy to stay with the new family, since a strong bond had already been formed and because they were capable of providing a great home.

    Ellen acknowledged she shouldn’t have given Iggy away, but it’s clear she had genuine concerns about providing the pooch with a good home. Ellen has a long and consistent record of being on the side of animals, and that counts for a lot in a case like this. She has the interests of Iggy at heart.

    Mutts & Moms was too rigid, even though I am sure they are very fine and dedicated people. They were a slave to form and forgot the real-world circumstances. They lost their chance to have Ellen serve as an advocate for them and for animal adoption, instead turning a potentially positive event into a distressing experience for all involved, including Iggy.

    The episode won’t help the reputation of animal rescue organizations. And that is a shame. One adoption mishandled should not define their work. Rescues serve an invaluable role for animals, and the vast majority of people who run them and work for them are remarkably selfless people—investing their own time, energy and resources to place unwanted animals who might otherwise be euthanized.

    Looks like the Humane & ASPCA both don’t think Ellen is so wrong. I liked reading the links on the HS page about Ellen. It looks they are trying to be a little more relaxed in adoption. I really like the person who talked about adopting rabbits, said she still belives in open adoption. I fell the same way I will not do co-adoption. Imo I think we will see something happen Monday.

  31. shibadiva says:

    Jane, it’s quite possible that M&M made the commitment to drive two hours to do a home inspection in good faith and, if the family hadn’t completed the application (one of Glosslips’ sources said they did something online), to fix up the paperwork. While they were there and, to their surprise, being filmed, they may have been conversations that indicated to them that it wasn’t going to work out. We really don’t know, and reporting and commentary hasn’t exactly been balanced.

    Iggy did eventually get re-homed to agency standards (whether you agree with them or not). This is important because a few blogs have been on about the importance of getting pets to a decent home, and overlooking the completion of this important goal.

    What irks me is the power of media. This is such a David and Goliath situation, and a few misplaced words on TV get some very nasty things going worldwide. I expect it is weighing on Ellen’s mind that she can have such a negative impact on a small agency and the very real people who run it and have been rescuing puppies and their mothers for year, as well as on rescue agencies (and their funding) in general, including HSUS and ASPCA. As an animal advocate, I’d expect this has turned out to be her worst nightmare. Of course, her PR person has only dug her in deeper.

    Lesliek summed things up well earlier: “The whole story on both sides sounds a little iffy to me.”

  32. Jane Anderson says:

    Shibadiva, I don’t agree. This agency demonstrated their unyielding values right from the getgo. I also read about the family immediately filling out an application online (so why did they have to drive 2 hours to fill it out). When the tenacious rescue saw that the 2 girls were under their age limit, they went there for the sole purpose of seizing the dog. Why else would they have a cop with them!

  33. trucorgi says:

    shibadiva says: “I expect it is weighing on Ellen’s mind that she can have such a negative impact on a small agency and the very real people who run it and have been rescuing puppies and their mothers for year, as well as on rescue agencies (and their funding) in general, including HSUS and ASPCA.”

    Don’t worry about Ellen affecting HSUS’s funding. Bill Gates just gave them $100k.

  34. shibadiva says:

    OK, I won’t worry. And I’m looking forward to Wayne’s next blog article saying it’s not nice to drive rescue organizations out of business. I mean the ones that actually DO rescue.

  35. straybaby says:

    “and, to their surprise, being filmed,”

    wasn’t it the father who decided to video it after things started going downhill? I think TMZ showed up after the fact, as did ellen and her partner. the rescue woman showed up with her partner and another guy who i believe turned out to be their *lawyer who doesn’t represent them but can speak on their behalf*. i think on the video taken that evening the girl referred to him as a body guard or something to that effect. but i do wonder why they brought him along, if i have this right ;)

    and from what i saw of M&M’s website before it was yanked, they had a lot of dogs, but didn’t look like a lot of mom’s w/litters. looks like they do take them in from what i could glean from the archives, but not a majority of their rescues. may have been their original intent . . . . but they didn’t strike me as any different than any other all-breed rescue except that they only had one pit that i could see, lol!~

  36. straybaby says:


    seems like the no kids under 14 rule is a relatively new rule. From their website, archive dated April 07:

    Do you have children under 12 or 14? Getting a dog is like adding another child to your household. And a puppy is even harder. Many families find that with the demands of raising children and driving them to various activities, they don’t have time to housebreak or train a puppy. And soon the little puppy becomes a big dog jumping on children and guests, begging for attention, and even getting into trouble. Obedience training is recommended for every household member, so everyone is practicing the same techniques (consistent practice is the key to training). We strongly recommend families consider a more mature dog whose size and temperament is known. A dog who seems happy, active, likes to be touched, and is not sensitive to handling and noise is typically a good choice for homes with children.

    If you want a puppy, why? No matter how adorable, all puppies grow up, and grow quickly. A cute, sweet little puppy can become a rough and difficult dog if not given consistent, effective obedience training. Being good with children is highly dependent on the breed, temperament and practicing good obedience training. If you have a busy household, a puppy is not the best choice. Puppies require more supervision and training, especially for discouraging common behavior such as jumping, chewing and nipping.

    What size is right for you? If you have children in the home, tiny breeds are a poor choice, since children can accidentally hurt the dog, and many small breeds are naturally wary of children. Choose a dog with whom the children can safely play. And size does not indicate energy level; some small boisterous terriers seem to take up more room and time than a large calm dog. If you live in an apartment or condo, look for a reasonably quiet dog — and practice techniques for avoiding separation anxiety from day one. (A dog with separation anxiety will often howl and bark, as well as destroy things out of fear, when left alone.)

    it’s in the “what dog is right for you” section.

  37. Lynn says:

    June, re your response at 10:38PM on 10/19/2007:

    “What does loving animals have to do with wanting to “let the world know who did it to me”…ME? How about caring about the dog or the kids? That proves my point that Ellen was very egocentric in making a media circus over the problem just because she had the power to do so.”

    If you had read the paragraph completely [”It wouldn’t be because I wanted to get the ratings up… would be out of my love for animals.”] you should have inferred my love efor animals and their well-being.

    And if you read any of my earlier responses you would know that I put the dog first. It’s NEVER about ME - it’s always about the animals.

  38. Lynn says:

    I think MandM changes rules at whim, which is their perogative, stupid as some of the rules may be.

    I’m curious about what the MandM premises look like. How many animals… they plan to find homes for them now…. And do they have a sales license?

    Where does the hairdresser live?

  39. Leigh-Ann says:

    I read some doubts in this thread about the rescue receiving death threats. If it helps to clarify the matter, a police report about the threats was filed, and answering machine messages and emails were provided as evidence in the filed report. I’m sure someone at a place like The Smoking Gun could get their hands on these things if they wanted to.

  40. Kitty Lady says:

    I know I’m probably going to tick off a lot of people with my comments but I have had enough. The rescue group DID offer to have the family come over and sign an agreement and informed them that they had to do a home visit. I guess Ellen and her hairdresser must have thought it was beneath them and refused to do so. Instead of calling this rescue group crazy, controlling, lunatics maybe you all should try gathering all of the facts first. Ellen went sobbing on national TV and the next day she said that she didn’t want to talk about it anymore. Hmmm, maybe it was because the founder of the rescue group decided that she had had enough of threat to her life -THREATS TO HER LIFE - and wanted to explain their point of view and went on the early shows. So then Ellen decides to cover her butt by saying that she no longer wants to talk about it.
    I’m a rescuer and a foster mom and reading most of these posts really tick me off. Most of you don’t know what we go through. We take care of “bottle babies” feeding them every two hours around the clock, stimulating them so they can go to the rest room because you’re their momma now, and then dealing with work because we get to pay the vet bills. Do you know the pain that we go through when we’ve given it our all to still have them pass away? Do you know the heartbreak we go through having a cat die in your arms because the medicine that it needed to stay healthy was $25 dollars a month but it was too much for the owners who happen to have the latest cell phone and a purse that costs a couple hundred dollars. Do you know what it feels like to have a FULL grown cat come to you weighting 4 pounds?!?!?!?! Do you know the anger of taking in a cat that has spraying issues because the owners declawed all four paws have a new dog who likes to chase it and don’t understand why after one week of trying he is still doing this? Or how about getting lovely messages from irate random people who want you to take their cat or dog and you should because you’re a rescue group. Trust me if we could we would take all of them but for space and finance issues we can’t. In the last two months I have personally spent close to three thousand dollars on vet bills alone (I get NO donations). Every week I spend around two hundred dollars on litter and food alone. So I apologize that I can’t take in your cat that you’ve had for 8 years and your new boyfriend doesn’t like him so you have to get rid of your cat. I apologize that I don’t have space to take in your cat that you are suddenly allergic to after 14 years. And I REALLY apologize that I cannot take in your cat who “just keeps on getting pregnant”. I’m sorry that you feel you can threaten me by saying that you’ll take her to the pound if I don’t take her. I wish to god I could take all of them because when I say no a little bit of me dies knowing what their outcome is likely to be - but because I have 5 cats who will NEVER be “adoptable” I cannot make more room right now. You see I now have 5 cats that will permanently be with me for their rest of their lives. These guys will never allow me to pick them up or pet them but I made a COMMITMENT when I took them. Even if they hiss at me and scratch me when I take them to the vet to get their shots an annual check ups (although they are all INDOOR cats) I promised them a good home no MATTER what.
    After all of this most of you have the gall to say that we are control freaks?!? You bet I’m going to make sure that my babies go to a good home because I have seen what a marginal home can do. We promised them from the day they came to us that we would make sure they went to a home where they were loved as much as they are with us. So I TRULY, TRULY apologize if I wouldn’t adopt to some of you but I hope that you all understand (although it seems that most of you don’t from these posts) that we are doing this for them NOT us like many of you think.

  41. CD says:

    Kitty Lady,

    For what it’s worth, I understand and appreciate the emotions and experience behind your post.

    I’m not a rescuer but have worked with them. For some reason, lots of animals find their way to my house , knock on the front door and ask if they can live there. I keep everybody I can and rescuers help us find permanent homes for the rest. (I live with many ‘unadoptables’ who are loving and affectionate too.)

    I do feel Mutts and Moms got caught in a celebrity fueled firestorm that did not accurately portray their side of the story.

    One bright person here posted a link to where Kate Milazzo does some good reporting on the Ellen story. Not to rehash the whole thing, but the fact that there was already a dog at the hairdresser’s house, that apparently was not neutered and not allowed in the house, was part of the problem. Plus they didn’t want to file an application, etc.

    In any case, just wanted to say some of us hear you and understand and appreciate what you do.

  42. shibadiva says:

    Kitty Lady, wouldn’t it be something if the folks who are one-sidedly ripping Mutts and Moms apart (and now, Toronto Humane Society and other rescues - not here, but over on the Globe and Mail comments section) could walk in the shoes of a rescue worker for a few days? Kudos to you all for the selfless and important work that you do.

    CD, thanks for the update on the affair at the hairdresser’s house. It would be good to see more news about what transpired at the home visit.

  43. PetMono says:

    Ellen Degenres brought “rescue” and “shelter” to the media. A good thing because when people talk, issues are better understood. It’s been a week.

    Public reaction
    The public response was swift, polarized, and far reaching. There were few surprise reactions with the exception of Craig’s List pet forum. Because this pet forum is an experienced, emotional, pro-adoption group, we expected the forum to attack the shelter for taking dogs away from a home. CL sentiment was that Ellen should have read the contract, not take this public. The shelter got death threats.

    The skinny
    The inevitable inaccuracies are identified. Ellen’s new dog mostly with a dog trainer. Mom’s & Mutts, didn’t go to the media first. Ellen has given away a pooch(es) before.

    Rearview mirror
    A fight between a star and an animal rescue group. The two sides on whether the animal be returned to shelter: The American Humane Association “recommends” a more open adoption process that does not require the animal be returned to shelter. Mom’s & Mutts are standing fast.

    On the Internet
    Because of Ellen’s story, adopting animals is on PM’s mind. Some things PM discovered when we searched “rescue, shelter, adoption.”

    A search for “top pet rescues” brings up 20 different dogs. Horses, cats, birds are the runner-ups.

    An adoption search in Chicago metro using “Walmart/pets” and “” brings up 750 dogs and 1,350 cats. Maybe big generic numbers, on display everywhere, are sometimes lost on me. Let people know what’s happening in your zip code!

    People vs pets
    This media event also provoked many comments saying it’s a shame that pets get more attention than kids when it comes to rescue and adoption. Maybe not. Do a similar search less “pets” and we find an assortment of breaking news, blogs. The reality: Write a story and they will come.

    The above is a summary to adhere to keep comment word count limited. A full story with links and details can be found at

E-mail It