The Increasing Challenges of Pet Adoption: Are Rescue Organizations Too Strict?
The desire to welcome a furry companion into one’s home is often met with a surprising obstacle course: the pet adoption process. While driven by a noble intention – ensuring animals find loving and permanent homes – rescue organizations are increasingly facing scrutiny for their rigorous and, at times, seemingly excessive adoption procedures. Stories like Shannon Novey’s, who sought to adopt a poodle after the loss of her beloved Coco, are becoming increasingly common and highlight the complex challenges inherent in the rescue landscape.
Novey’s experience began with a willingness to try adoption, a departure from her previous experience with breeders. However, her attempt was quickly soured. “I came away thinking that the rescue people are a little too militant for my taste,” she recounted to USA TODAY. The intensive application process culminated in Callie the poodle joining the Novey family for just over two weeks, only to be reclaimed by the Carolina Poodle Rescue after a disagreement concerning the adoption contract. The core issue stemmed from a clause in the contract that granted the rescue ongoing authority over aspects of the dog’s care, even after the adoption was finalized, including the right to conduct lifelong in-person checks.
The rescue defended its actions, claiming Novey attempted to renegotiate the contract and signed it under duress. They asserted that an administrative error led to Callie being placed in Novey’s care before the contract was fully settled. “We care deeply about these dogs and want to see them protected for life. Our adoption contract reflects this high level of care,” stated Donna Ezzell, CEO of Carolina Poodle Rescue, in an emailed statement.
Novey’s experience is not an isolated incident but reflects a growing trend across the United States. Potential pet owners are frequently encountering adoption procedures that are described as arduous, invasive, and even heartbreaking. A review of various rescue websites by USA TODAY revealed a consistent pattern: applications, interviews, adoption fees, in-home visits, reference checks, and pet meet-ups are all standard components of the process. Questionnaires often delve into extensive pet ownership histories and demand detailed family information.
Some organizations take their screening to an extreme. Peke A Tzu Rescue in Michigan, for example, maintains a lengthy list of individuals deemed ineligible for adoption. Their restrictions include households with children under 10, prospective parents, homes with existing pets weighing over 30 pounds, individuals without prior pet ownership or a relationship with a veterinarian, renters, those lacking fenced yards, and individuals under 25 or over 70 seeking to adopt a dog under eight years old.
While the intent behind such stringent rules is often to prevent pets from being repeatedly rehomed, critics argue that they may inadvertently deter qualified and loving individuals from adopting. According to experts, these strictures may ultimately discourage prospective pet owners from considering adoption altogether.
Dr. Sandra Newbury, director of the University of Wisconsin Shelter Medicine Program, emphasizes the importance of balancing stringent measures with accessibility. "What we want is animal sheltering organizations to maximize their life-saving potential, and also to help the community help them with their mission,” she stated.
Rachel Dreyer’s experience echoes the sentiment of a complicated and potentially frustrating process. Determined to rescue a dog in 2023, she thoroughly researched organizations in New York City, ultimately finding Waldo’s Rescue Pen on Instagram. Despite being taken aback by the lengthy application, virtual home visit, and hefty adoption fee, Dreyer, who works in e-commerce, adopted Georgia. The application, she described, felt like "when you apply for a job and you submit your resume, and then they want you to fill in all of your job history, and you’re like, ‘I just did that.’" Despite the hurdles, she added, “It was more complicated and more expensive than I expected. I don’t regret it – I mean, she’s amazing.”
Emily Dyson, the founder of Waldo’s, defends her application process as relatively simple within the rescue community. She sees it as a means to understand potential adopters and initiate a conversation, rather than as a tool to disqualify them based on rigid criteria. Her primary goal is to ensure a harmonious match between a family and a dog, taking into account both their lifestyles.
Andra Turner, of Denver, shared a similar experience when adopting her cat, Betty, a few years ago. “I felt like I was applying to college or something,” she recalled, describing the application’s hypothetical scenarios and questions about responsible pet ownership.
Rescue organizations maintain that their strict rules are designed to protect animals from harm and prevent time-consuming returns or, worse, placement in overcrowded shelters where euthanasia is a reality. Peke A Tzu Rescue, with its extensive list of restrictions, asserts that the absence of such rules “could cost the dog his/her life.”
In 2023, over 6.3 million dogs and cats entered shelters and rescues in the United States. According to Shelter Animals Count, shelters are overcrowded, and hundreds of thousands of animals are euthanized each year. This crisis underscores the importance of finding responsible and loving homes for these animals.
Katy White, president of the Shetland Sheepdog Placement Services of New Jersey, emphasizes the importance of getting to know each dog before placing it in a home. This allows volunteers and fosters to ensure the animal is placed in the best possible situation. This dedication, however, can sometimes lead to disappointment. She recalled a recent instance where a dog was not placed with a qualified family due to concerns about a family member’s demeanor and disagreement about transport. “The dogs needs always come first,” White stated in an email.
The invasive nature of some applications is further highlighted by the questions asked: preferred pet food, restricted areas within the house, disciplinary methods, and even provisions in the applicant’s will for the pet’s future. Wait times and unanswered applications compound the frustration.
While the intentions behind strict requirements are often noble, aimed at minimizing returns and protecting animals, Dr. Newbury advocates for an "open" adoption policy. This approach emphasizes trusting people and recognizing that perfection is unattainable. Instead of seeking the perfect home, she suggests focusing on finding a "good enough" home.
A rejection from a pet rescue can have a profound impact on an animal lover, according to Jennifer Sinski, a sociology professor at Bellarmine University. Sinski, who conducts research on pet adoption policies, found that overly invasive processes can deter potential adopters, pushing them towards breeders or pet stores that source animals from mills.
Sinski emphasizes the deep bond humans form with their pets. “Weve incorporated animals as kin; theyre our family. So we identify very strongly as dog or cat people, it’s part of our identity,” she said. “So when you apply to an organization and you cant pass whatever bar they have set for you, that is a statement about your identity, and when its such a large part of your identity, it is a very hurtful process.”
The desire to prevent negative experiences can lead rescues to create increasingly strict policies, according to Newbury. However, excluding entire groups of people from adopting can border on discrimination. For example, refusing adoption to renters or those without fenced yards can automatically disqualify wonderful potential pet owners who may not be able to afford a house.
James Evans of Baltimore, who is Black, and his wife Jen, experienced repeated rejections from rescues. The 13th time, he was asked to provide his criminal record. Evans, who runs the advocacy group Companions and Animals for Reform and Equity (CARE), believes that bias is at play. “There’s bias at the core,” Evans told the outlet. “If Jen and I lived in Beverly Hills, would we have a better shot?”
In a particularly troubling case, a dog rescue in Canada was ordered to pay a family $20,000 for discriminating against their 11-year-old autistic son. The rescue owner cited previous negative experiences with autistic children injuring dogs.
“These kind of policies come from an intention to protect the animals,” Newbury said. “What we hope is to support organizations in making change and finding ways to trust people in their community more, because its better for everyone.” The need for a more balanced approach, one that prioritizes both animal welfare and accessibility, is increasingly apparent.
