Bill would forbid insurance discrimination by dog breed

AP ^ | 5.4.05

[HairOfTheDog]

Sounds great. Thanks for describing... it's a breed variation I am not familiar with!

[editor-surveyor]

Your Dutch Shepard looks structurally much like a German Shepard. Is that just illusion, or is the breed line related?

[editor-surveyor]

"A permanent resident of a park I visited in Myrtle Beach had a barking session between her Rotweiler and our border collies."

Border collies must have about twice the mental capacity of a Rott.

[Carry_Okie]

Your Dutch Shepard looks structurally much like a German Shepard.

The Dutch Shep is a touch lighter in build than the GSD (although some males reach 120# with that same lean look). The back is straighter and more level. The head is smaller. They are quicker and faster than the GSD, but probably not as strong. The coat isn't as long, which can be deceiving, but the dog does have an undercoat similar to a GSD (they shed).

Is that just illusion, or is the breed line related?

The latter. The Dutch Shep has some GSD in its older lines and definitely shares origins with the Belgian Shepherds. I have heard they also have a touch of great dane (which you can see in the head and is probably where the brindle comes from).

[Calpernia]

Did you know families are being turned down for adopting children if they own a german shephard?

Thanks for your information. Who is pushing these crazy bills into law and do you know of any opposition .org?

Thanks again!

---

Apologizes, I didn't see your post back to me.

Here you go: http://www.massfeddogs.org/Newletters/MassFedWntr03.pdf

And the NAIA is a dot org that researches and stays on top of these issues.

http://naiaonline.org

[Calpernia]

RE: to post http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1396906/posts?page=125#125

See page 3 of the PDF newsletter for the informatin on dogs/german shephard and adoption of children.

[Calpernia]

>>>Unfortunately, insurance is necessary.


Not if we name the Trial Lawyer Associations enemy combatants.


::giggles::

[E.G.C.]

BTTT!!!!!!

[KC_for_Freedom]

Border collies must have about twice the mental capacity of a Rott.

I don't know about that but they do learn a lot of words of english and want to work.

[technochick99]

I think that insurance companies should be able to issue exemptions on breeds. Wouldn't have bothered you at all since your dog was a gentle soul.

[technochick99]

My insurance company gave me a discount for an alarm system after seeing my Irish Wolfhound.

LOL. Were they able to see you past the dog? Those things are HUGE.

[technochick99]

I'm in love.... (shhh.... don't tell my min pins!)

[Carry_Okie]

I'm in love....

Yup, a more beautifully structured shepherd dog you will never see.

[I still care]

I changed to a company that just didn't cover dog. No problem, I knew my baby wouldn't bite anyone.

But she died last year, and finally I got two new puppies. You now have the pleasure of being the first to see my new babies on the web.

[Centurion2000]

Insurance is a private business, and they ought to be able to write their policies to weigh risk and customer need to keep rates the most competitive

Insurance is legally mandated in a lot of places, so they can feel how it is to be FORCED to do something with insurance that the companies don't care for.

[Melas]

Perhaps they should refuse coverage if the son is a tough-looking tall guy with body piercing. Or if the daughter is all Goth with creepy-looking eye makeup.

You're just being silly. Unless of course you have data that says that tall tough looking guys with piercings lead to greater and more frequent insurance claims. Even less likely that Goth Girl is an insurance risk.

The dog thing isn't arbitrary. Owners of certain breeds generate more claims, and the claims generated are more costly. There is no getting around that hard data. Owners of toy poodles generate almost no claims, because even if the dog tears into someone, the ER bill for the single or possibly double stitch is likely to be well below the deductable, so no claim. Pit bulls and Rots however, don't make ouchies when they bite. They sunnder and rend flesh making good work for trauma teams and subsequent plastic surgeons. In short, they create costly damage, and from the insurance company's point of view, cost is everything. All the other stuff is just PR to get you to buy the policy.

[Melas]

There is no comparison. Since I have children and am not gun savy, I own a dog. Our dog earned her status in our home by scaring off a man that tried to break in.

While that sounds sweet, you're getting incredibly anectdotal, and it's preventing you from seeing the basic facts of this discusion:

1) Certain Breed of dogs generate almost no insurance claims, period.

2) Certain breeds of dog generate a highly disproportionate number of insurance claims.

3) The same breed that generate the greater number of claims, generate more costly claims, when there is a claim.

4) Insurance is purely a numbers game.

I'm sure your dog is sweet. I'm sure your dog is a community asset, but that's not the question. The insurance company quite simply can't afford to evalaute every dog for risk, and keep rates where they are now. Instead, the insurance company is forced to take the second best route, and that is to create risk groups where the formula works more often than not, and pay out for the exceptions to the rule.

Unfortunately for you, owner of certain breeds simply by the numbers create a more troubling risk profile than owners of other breeds. Toy poodles don't generate a great deal of risk. They're simply not capable of doing a great deal of harm before they're kicked to the curb. Only an unattended infant would be at any serious risk. Pit bulls on the other hand have sent multiple adult victims to the hospital with grievous wounds in single incidents. From an insurance perspective, those suckers are potential money pits (pun intended).

[Calpernia]

I'm not missing a thing on any point. My dog is a pit bull :)