snarlingcoyote
<font color=blue>I know people who live in really
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2008
- Messages
- 5,938
Her not wanting the other child to feel bad harkens back to the way people were raised to have consideration of other people, even if the "other people" owned an animal that may have harmed your or your child.
This woman obviously takes being a good neighbor seriously. It's likely that she's already worked things out with the other child's parents (and probably the police or neighborhood animal control since the incident involved an ER visit) and feels that the altercation or incident is no one else's business, therefore there's no need to discuss who is to blame for what. When neighbors want details about the incident, she's found a graceful answer (I don't want the other child to feel bad) to respond with instead of coming out and telling them it's none of their business.
There's really no need to force her to blame someone publicly. If the neighborhood is worried that there's some kind of bad dog in their vicinity, then they should worry no more. The authorities have been notified and they'll make the decision as to whether or not the animal should be removed.
This is how good neighbors behave.

If my child was bitten by a dog and required an ER visit I would assume that I knew the facts well enough to speak to others about it, so I have no idea what you are implying here. You can't control what others will talk about, and like I said, teh safety of any of my friend's children would be more of a concern than the neighborhood gossip.
He had sharp needle puppy teeth and I was being goofy and letting him nip at my heels...youch.