Foster homes

[Soleil]

I would prefer to have a "foster home" apposed to selling a puppy outright, because I want to be part of the puppies.  Not selling a show prospect for someone to prospectively finish then they are completely their Boxer, I am just their breeder (which in itself is wonderful- don't take that wrong).... I want to be part of the showing of them, and enjoying them...

I guess i am not understanding the difference bt a "foster home" and a "show prospect" then since i myself do not sell my show prospects outright (mainly done so that i can keep the ability to show in the BBE class, not because i don't 100% trust my homes).  I also do not sell my "show prospects" w/ the thought that i am just their breeder, and i will have no part in the showing or enjoying of them in the future. 

Foster homes (in human terms) means you are just housing the child and providing the daily needs for him/her right?.. no legal guardianship.. and when the right parents come along, the child is adopted right?  so are u saying this is different when it comes to fostering a puppy?  Why not just call it a co-ownership for a show prospect?  (Because that's what it sounds like) 

[RocketBoxer]

Keri, I mean outright own the dog... meaning a co-ownership.... 

Regardless of the term, it is in fact a fostering situation.  They are the dogs parents in every way but AKC ownership. 

Ummmmm, I don't get this at all. Fostering implies they do not own the dog - per your words in the quote above. But your subsequent posts tend to suggest that they will in fact co-own the dog with you - so no foster relationship.
It sounds to me like you are simply looking for people who will buy the puppies from you as pets - and you get to stay on as a co-owner, and have show/breedings rights.......correct?

You want to "co-own" - right? I don't see how this is the same as to foster? Terminology is important because fostering implies to people that they have no ownership of the dog.

[RocketBoxer]

I suppose you have to be of the mind set to enter into this type of relationship and dog ownership to get it. I would have a real hard time with one of these arrangements. If I'm going to treat a dog like a family member I just could not have all those strings attached......just my opinion. I'm sure folks closer to the show world get it, but not me.

Well, to be perfectly honest I don't get it either - and I don't like strings attached to my dogs. I have bought 2 show prospects and I don't have any strings on either of them. It does seem to be done more often in the show world, but most people buying pets don't want strings attached either.

Whether I co-own a dog I bred or not - does not change one thing about the way that I feel about the dog or the amount of input that I am willing to put into it. Regardless, I bred the dog so I feel responsible for it - no matter what happens - and I feel the joy when the dog does well. My name doesn't have to be on it - that makes no difference to the way that I feel.

[fairview Boxers]

Well, Keri you are lucky in that area then... I haven't had the joys of a dog I bred being placed in a home that I didn't co-own it and it was done right by.... This goes back to my distrustfulness from my start in the breed I expect. 
I placed a show prospect with "no strings attached", expecting because they were supposed to be my friend, that our agreement would be upheld... It was not.. so, truthfully I have the right to be skeptical about things...and where my puppies are placed...and I think I have the right to want to attach strings on them! Granted I was talked into the placement without co-ownership, and I didn't follow my gut and should have, nonetheless I can't change that now! 
A show prospect (TO ME) is one I place with someone that WANTS to show, and is buying a show prospect.  A foster is a home that wants a companion and is willing to allow me to show/health test/breed that companion..... I doubt there are many homes that want this type of "agreement", but I know there are SOME out there!

[Bumpy]

In my un experianced opinion, it seams this is a matter of semantics. Wording. If I was looking for a Show prospect, I think I have learned enough to know that that dog would be co-owned or the like. Understandable. However if I was to take a dog as a pet only to realize I was not truly in control of the decision process of said animal there would lie the problem, for me. I guess this would not be a surprise as it would have been discussed but I'm not so sure I could get my head around that. Expected to care for and provide for and make part of my family, yet not have a final say in decisions of care etc.  I think where I get hung up as a pet owner is in the wording more than anything. With a show prospect most folks understand what they are entering in to.

[fairview Boxers]

The reason I differentiate the two:
I can't seem to call a puppy that I sell to a person that intends to show themselves, the same as a puppy that I give to a family to care for but want to pay to show and health test.... 
With a show prospect, I expect to place in a home that intends on handling the dog or having a handler on the dog.  I expect them to enter in a certain number of shows, and I expect them to health test the dog prior to the decision it should be bred... 
I don't know if a Foster home is the right term, but it seems to fit better (TO ME) than a show prospect.  For one, if it were a local home and a good one (which is all I would place in anyhow).... I probably wouldn't charge them for the dog, or it would be miniscule.... so how is it right they own or co-own the dog. 
Now, keep in mind.... I have co-owned two of my puppies... Rippley and Penny, and Heather and Denise had the say of their care, I was just there to be sure they didn't do anything bad with my girls..... I was an insurance policy.  Now Penny, I had more say than Rippley.... because Penny was placed with Denise and not sold.  So, the situation was very different than with Heather, plus I was a LOT closer to Denise than Heather... Penny's original purpose was for Denise's daughter to show, but  kids change their minds.
Does that make sense to anyone??? I am not saying I will even implement this, I am just throwing it around!

[Bumpy]

That explanation DOES make more sense to me. 

[Hanna Banana]

See that is what is confusing me. 

I can't seem to call a puppy that I sell to a person that intends to show themselves, the same as a puppy that I give to a family to care for but want to pay to show and health test.... 

A puppy regardless of who is paying for its testing/showing/ etc is still in my eyes a "Show Prospect".    Why short the pup a title of what it is based on the type of home?     

You can have different contracts depending on the home, hence is one agreement is more "foster" like Kat's Bru, and or another type of contract if one was going to another breeder as a show prospect.   All show prospects go on co-ownerships  with different agreements based on the home they are going to.

If you want to use "Foster Pup", then that is fine, but I think the term to *me* is not as professional, and used way to much in breeders who are again less than stellar, but again your decision!  Hope you find the homes you are wanting for these pups!!!!   

Thanks for the discussion everyone! 

[Sophia Sadeyes]

I also wonder about the legal implications when using the term "foster" for ownership. Would the person have to buy this pup but not technically own the pup?
To me I would NOT be comfortable buying a dog that I did not legally own or have the rights to.

Co-owning a dog is different and makes sense. I get it and I do not have an issue with it.

[fairview Boxers]

See that is what is confusing me.

I can't seem to call a puppy that I sell to a person that intends to show themselves, the same as a puppy that I give to a family to care for but want to pay to show and health test....

A puppy regardless of who is paying for its testing/showing/ etc is still in my eyes a "Show Prospect".    Why short the pup a title of what it is based on the type of home?     

You can have different contracts depending on the home, hence is one agreement is more "foster" like Kat's Bru, and or another type of contract if one was going to another breeder as a show prospect.   All show prospects go on co-ownerships  with different agreements based on the home they are going to.

If you want to use "Foster Pup", then that is fine, but I think the term to *me* is not as professional, and used way to much in breeders who are again less than stellar, but again your decision!

Yes it is, but in placement, the TYPE of home is how it gets it's "title"... not that I understand WHY a puppy has to have a title anyhow!   I am sorry but I do think how is paying to show the puppy and health test it makes a big difference in the title of the home! 

As for me deeming ANY of the puppies a "Foster Pup" I didn't say I was, I opened this up for discussion, not advice!   
As for professionalism of terms, that is your opinion of course, but I consider marking every puppy that I want to "watch grow" a show prospect to be slightly over the top as well!  At 8 weeks my choices were made as to who I thought was high enough quality to watch grow.  I don't take the puppy in a breed ring seriously until over 2 years of age....or until I think they are mature; it is all SIMPLY for fun then.. fun and learning!

[BranwenBoxers]

I get what you are saying , but I think there has to be alot of give on both sides with a very carefully written contract .

 This is what I would do if it was my pup that I thought of  placing .  I would not sell the pup but I would place and co-own the pup and not just on the contract it would be on the reg. papers as well .  I would say you pay for the food , shots , and regular visits to the vet if needed .  Then I would pay for the health tests , shows , breeding fees and whelping if it ever gets to that point .  If the dog does not turn out for the ring , or not a good dog to breed off of I would sign the dog over to the family once the dog is fixed  . 

 This is what I would do if I thought I had more show prospects in my litter and I didn't have room for all to watch them grow  .   I would also have to feel real comfortable with the idea  before I would even think about doing this kind of a contract  .   I think the I would only do this with very close friends and or family.       

   

[BurningRiver]

I have to agree with much of what's been said. Keep in mind, this is only my personal opinion, and whatever you decide is up to you.

Personally, I hate the word "foster home" as it pertains to breeders. It's probably about the one thing that gets an instant eye roll from me whenever I go onto an otherwise responsible breeder's site and see the words. Just one of those things, I guess.

I worked in rescue for a good 5 years, and there, a foster home was a temporary home. One that was designed around giving more to the dog than the previous owners did and, many times, rehabilitating the dog from neglect and/or abuse. Then, after anywhere from 2 weeks to a couple months, the dog would go to his/her forever home.

To me, for a breeder to use this term to describe a situation where they gain benefit from leaves a poor taste in my mouth.

To be honest, in this situation, you're essentially leasing their bitch back for a breeding, so I have to agree with the others--the fairest situation all the way around is to maintain co-ownership and sell the dog for a pet price. With that comes the understanding that they're getting a show prospect at a pet price, but that you, the breeder, retain limited breeding rights as your portion of the co-ownership agreement. And, yes, I do feel that these breeding rights should be limited. They came to you seeking out a pet. You're potentially talking them into something that they wouldn't otherwise agree to. You need to have skin in the game too.

With that said, I think that we need to think long and hard about these types of agreements. If the prospective home really didn't want a breeding animal to begin with, can you really trust them to do everything that it takes to properly and responsibly maintain a breeding animal? Can you trust them to keep her off HW meds while pregnant? Can you trust them to feed appropriately to maintain pregnancy? Is it fair for you to expect them to do these things? Is it fair for you to expect them to give up their bitch for 3 months of her life (or more, depending on your agreement)? Is it fair for you to send their beloved pet back to them balding and skinny after feeding a litter of 9? Is it fair for you to expect them to deal with seasons, and driving her up for her health testing and tolerating the holter, or driving her to you so that you can have it done for them?

What I can tell you is that I know people who routinely use these "breeding prospect in pet homes" types of situations on a routine basis and they almost NEVER turn out well. Many times, the home drops off the face of the map. They cut off all contact with the breeder because they don't feel like allowing their dog to be used in that manner and they don't want to tell the breeder "no". Many times "oops's" happen when less than vigilant owners make mistakes. Personally, I'd prefer to go with the home's wishes and place the dog in a situation that suits their family.

And I agree that these dogs should be shown. If they were the best in the litter, why wouldn't you want them shown?

I, personally, feel that these dogs should be maintained as show prospects and placed in show homes, but I also understand the other side of the coin in that you put all of the work, blood, sweat and tears into a breeding and that you can't keep them all. And then there's the risk of your keeper not turning out, or passing his/her health testing. . . What then?

It's a tough situation all around, but back to the OT, the term "foster home" is one of my bug-a-boos.

[Vintage Boxers]

I have to agree that yes it all lies in terminology, but for me...  foster/adopt= rescue situations. If you have show prospects, they are show prospects no matter what home they are in.  For me personally, yes i would like to grow one out if i cant keep both, but it would have to be something spectacular, and even then, is the amount of risk worth it?  I have to agree with jess, when i see a breeder say that their puppies have been adopted or fostered, it leaves a bad taste.  But to each their own!  JMO         Pardon my spelling hubbies new phone is confusing...lol

[fairview Boxers]

Jess out of all of your responses yours made the most sense to me!!  I don't pay much attention to terms that breeders use, mostly because I have had the the misfortune of being taken in by fancy words and terms.... and ended up hurt and lied to!!!

Like I said, I was trying to open a discussion.... not saying I was looking for advice...