These responses have been quite interesting. I find it interesting that everyone keeps trying to compare a dog to a child or old person. A child who has not yet been potty trained or and old person who is incontinent will at least have a diaper to catch his or her messes. If anyone has friends who allow Junior or Grandma to wander the house diaperless relieving themselves in corners then I'd love to hear it. We don't treat Grandma the same way that we treat Spot-because she is a human and he is an animal. It is not the same thing.

I don't think that it is crazy that a woman would not want her small children living in a house that is reeking of dog urine or feces. I mean, that's completely sanitary and really pleasant for you and your guests too. By all means, let the baby crawl through it. Who wouldn't want to live like that?

I've never had nor wanted animals in my home. I find it amazing how so many people think that this woman should sacrifice cleaniless for herself and her children for the sake of a dog. And the people who are wishing ill upon her in her own old age perhaps need to get a life. Perhaps this story is a lesson to those of us who prefer to live in clean homes-avoid pet lovers at all costs.

The thing that is so remarkable about animal lovers is that they seem to think that everyone should be willing to sacrifice comfort and cleaniless in favor of the pet. And to the person who suggested putting the dog in the kitchen because of the possibility of the vinyl floors-Ew!!! That commment alone just demonstrates that pet lovers live in their own special universe. I would not want to eat in or see a kitchen that has become anyone person or animal's toilet. Even the suggestion of the bathroom was revolting, because people use the toilet, not the floor, and I cannot even fathom having to see and smell that. How backwards is it to let an animal control the state of your home? If it was possible for a small child to make the same kind of mess, I don't think that anyone would suggest that the behavior was acceptable or should be allowed to continue.

You can point out that the man had the dog when the couple married, but it hadn't lost bladder control yet then either.

Why is this woman a controlling harpy because she wants a clean house? Maybe the husband has issues, and is using the dog to avoid his responsibility at home, or because he can't quite let go of what the dog represents (his single life perhaps?) Why aren't people scornful of the fact that this husband is not keeping up with the dogs needs (clearly it is more work now that the dog is really, really old) and is possibly using it escape his daddy duties?

And I'm sure that none of these people write as scathingly when the subject of the story is a person instead of an animal. Were any of you as bothered by the woman who disliked her stepchildren (or have as many nasty comments); did anyone write about love and acceptance then?

I don't care how much you love your dog or cat. A person who is not used to the mess is not a bad person, and trying to equate it with the love that one person has for another is ridiculous. I'd love it if pet lovers could understand that those of us who prefer to live without the possibility of feces, urine, or hair being on our floors, near our food, in our kitchens, or permeating the air are not bad people.

Dogs and cats are not people!

P.S.-My hat is off to the pet lover with the cat who seemed to understand that her partner was more important than an animal. You seem to be quite rare among pet lovers.

My ex-wife wanted a little "mop" dog to go with our border collie mix. I really did not. We got her. She turned out to be slightly nuerotic with house training problems. She was abused before we got her from a rescue, and is a bit of an odd duck. I got both dogs in the divorce settlement, while the ex kept the house and yard. Having two dogs, especially the small one, in an apartment and condo is hard work. The little dog is not as neurotic and is much better, though not perfect, about going to the bathroom outside. The one thing I know more than anything in my life is that my little dog just loves me to death. My big one does as well, but the little one wants nothing more in life than to be on my lap, next to me on the sofa, or next to me in bed. It is complete unconditional love. I will tolerate her mistakes.

Nature's Miracle and other products are great for controlling the smell of accidents. I am a reformed smoker, and am very sensitive to any smell. These products are fantastic. The couple should try them.

This woman's assertion that, in the early years, her husband's dog walks didn't "interfere with his responsibilities" is a red flag to me. My understanding has always been that dog-walking IS a responsibility. I think it just wasn't a responsibility that she had delegated or considered part of her "married life." And I think that's weird.

It makes me curious about this dog. What does the dog mean to the husband? What other wives or girlfriends has the dog known? Is this the only remaining piece of the husband's former life that he continues to love? It sounds like the poor animal was screwed from Day 1 of this marriage, and that the wife's love was not big enough to include tolerance for the husband's beloved pet.

I think there are few marriages that couldn't be improved to some extent by the removal of some undesirable character from the spouse's life - a nagging mother-in-law, an overly demanding boss, an emotionally draining friend. Good marriages are not necessarily those that try to sweep the problem under the rug, or get rid of it altogether.