Quote:
Originally Posted by scoobymom  MyFairLacy,
Your response does not answer my question... Which was how do you know? I checked with the AKC and Hendrick's House has had great inspections, so I am not questioning them. I am asking the question, how do YOU know that these other great and perfect breeders have never had health issues with their puppies? How do we blame a breeder for a congenital defect? Those are my questions. I think your response possibly belongs to another thread because I never asked for "red flags". |
So you are ONLY concerned about the past health issues that their dogs have produced? You're not concerned at all with the other issues that make this breeder unethical?? I would think anyone looking into buying a puppy from a breeder would consider ALL things.
While it's great that a breeder passed an AKC inspection, that honestly does NOT tell me a breeder is reputable. I know a lot of USDA breeders & puppymills pass AKC inspections so that doesn't necessarily tell me in itself that a breeder is a good one. AKC has stricter guidelines than most other registries but they are pretty lax compared to what a lot of us would expect in a breeder.
With that being said..the answer to your question is that just because a breeder has a health issue in their line does not make them a bad breeder in itself. You have to look at the situation surrounding that health issue. Did the breeder breed dogs that they knew the history of and did they health screen prior to breeding? When the health issue occured, how did they respond? Did they stop breeding the lines that produced the problem, investigate the situation?? Or did they continue breeding dogs in that line and sell the sire of the puppy with the health issue as "breeding stock" so that it can continue to produce potential health issues? How did the breeder respond to the buyer of the puppy with the health issue??
In this case, this breeder only offers a replacement puppy or partial refund for "life threatening" genetic health issues. I HATE when breeders throw in "life threatening" because it can always be argued by the breeder on what is and is not life threatening..it's a loophole to protect to breeder and screw over the buyer. Instead, reputable breeders guarantee against all genetic and congenital health issues. In my opinion (and from talking to breeders I respect) offering a replacement puppy is NOT the right thing to do. What pet owner is going to replace the puppy that they have already fallen in love with? Instead a good breeder would pay for treatment UP TO the full price of the puppy and be there for support.
So no you can't necessarily fault a breeder for having one health issue in their lines...that could happen to anyone. It's what the breeder does after that that shows what kind of breeder they are. And you have to look at other details of their breeding program. In this case, the breeder violates many of the YTCA's rules which makes them an unreputable breeder.