I noticed this comment:

"When we first got married, the dog was not too much of a problem -- the long walks in the evening didn't interfere with any responsibilities my husband had"

When they were first married, before any children were born, she decides whether or not the dog might "interfere with any resposibility?" This sounds like trouble right from the beginning. I'm not surprised his walks in the evening were long. Did it occur to her to put on her sneakers and join them instead of bitching about the man taking a walk with his own dog?

If the husband really is irresponsible, it is the husband's fault, not the dog. If the husband is not irresponsible, and the wife is overly demanding and just plain hates the dog, it's the wife's fault, not the dog.

As others have pointed out, she married a man with a dog. He loves the dog. She doesn't. The dog is aging. They both need to deal with it. Get doggie diapers. Get a steam cleaner for the rug. It's not likely the dog will live much longer, but the nastiness will be remembered forever.

Personally, anyone who couldn't accept my overburdened bookshelves and my motley collection of household pets would never make it to the second date with me, let alone marriage.

One of the important tests of a person's character is how they treat the elderly. Think of the dog, then, as a kind of living metaphor. One day we are all old, we are all incontinent, we all need the ministrations of those who love us (if we are granted that gift). A man who will take care of, and love, an old, incontinent dog, will more likely be there for you when you need his care, than a man who would put the dog down.

Think, also, of the good example set for your child -- and again, remember that one day, you too will be old. Having changed my mother's "diapers", and cleaned my mother when she was soiled, and more important, having seen my stepfather do it for her as well, I know how important that nurturing is.

Hate the smell, but love your dog. And your husband.

While I am, as the devoted owner of a very elderly cat, inclined to some mild feelings of hostility at the LW's tone when describing her plight, I feel no need to attack her. However belated and however misdirected her request for advice might be, it seems genuine and should be treated in that manner. How would a non-pet person know about the intricacies of animals, their problems, their psychology and most pertinent where to seek help for what might be anything from a behavioral disorder to a serious health issue? And who are we, on such limited information to make such sweeping judgements of the situation?

Anything could be going on behind the meagre black and white text we have in front of us. But with insufficient information, none of us can say what that anything actually is. It is entirely too easy to judge this woman either too harshly or too lightly when all we have to base her character upon are a few scant paragraphs that speak volumes about someone who while she might not place any value or concern on the animal in question, has still allowed the poor thing to stay in the house despite her distress with the smell and the time investment her husband makes in his pet. She expresses guilt at her resentment and articulates that she does not think that the all-too-easy option of euthanasia is actually an option she can live with. How does this qualify her as either a martyr or as is the more popular opinion here, the villain?

The information we have describes a very rough situation for everyone involved, she, her husband, her children and the dog are caught in a situation that is uncomfortable for everyone in that household. While for some of us, solid and easy solutions seem obvious, many are clueless about what one could do to create a viable and livable solution for all involved. This does not make the clueless heartless, cold or any other of the many unflattering terms that have been so lightly tossed around in the many pages of response here.

The saddest part of all of this is not the predicament painted by the original writer, but the troubling mosaic made in response. I see very little of the milk of human kindness here. What I see is an unsolicited and confusing torrent of cruelty, pettiness and in some cases outright viciousness which has given me pause and made me wonder about many of you. I am hesitant to judge you, the posters, on such scant information as YOU give, though your words paint a far bleaker and more sharp picture of the person behind the keyboard than we were allowed of the letter writer, with whom so many of you seem to have such a problem with.

Remember that if you decide to put someone on trial for their words that the same may and often will be done with you based on your words and the picture they paint of you.

Happy Holidays.