17/11/2025
The longer I do this work, the more I think “behaviour modification” is a slightly misleading phrase. Most days, the behaviour that needs to change first is ours.
We talk a lot about training plans, protocols, and skills for dogs, and those absolutely matter. Building fluent, flexible skills is a huge part of how dogs can experience real agency and predictability in their lives. But somewhere along the way, we quietly absorbed the idea that dogs should be the ones making most of the compromises and we should be the ones deciding what skills they get to have.
“I want to live my life the way I always have, in the environments I prefer, with the routines I like. My dog will just need to adapt.”
When that is the starting point, the dog’s behaviour becomes the problem to solve rather than a conversation partner to listen to.
For me, this is about two main things: a)expectations and b) bodily autonomy. A dog’s body is not public property and it is not an extension of ours. Access to that body, to their movement, to their space, should not be assumed as a default. When a dog says “no,” that is communication about their boundaries, not a malfunction in need of suppression.
Skill building matters here because it can support autonomy rather than erase it. Teaching dogs reliable behaviours that actually open and close access to touch, procedures, social interactions, and the environment can give them meaningful control over what happens to their body. Consent signals, start-button behaviours, opt-outs that are honoured, and well-rehearsed exits are how we operationalise the idea that the dog’s body belongs to the dog.
The harder part is on the human side. It means questioning our expectations instead of treating our lifestyle, schedule, and social habits as fixed and asking the dog to absorb all the cost. Maybe the way we socialise changes. Maybe certain visitors meet us elsewhere for a while. Maybe our sport ambitions soften, or we choose different environments altogether. If we make the choice to bring a dog into our home, we have to be prepared to do some of the compromising.
It also means learning how to hold a genuine dialogue. Treating so-called “problem behaviour” as feedback about the conditions we have created. Listening when a dog says “this is too loud, too close, too fast, too rough” rather and changing the situation, not just the cue or the reinforcement schedule. Taking seriously that sometimes the ethical answer is not “train more” but “ask for less.”
The way we negotiate all of this with one dog in one household is not separate from the bigger picture. The same story scales up. In our private lives we often expect dogs to fit around human routines. At the societal level, our systems do much the same thing.
We still tend to see dogs in human homes as dependants in our possession, sometimes even as extensions of ourselves/their humans. That framing runs through everything. It underpins laws about “dog control,” shapes who is welcomed in public spaces and on what terms, and colours what “dog-friendly” really means. Often it translates to “dogs may be present as long as they stay quiet, invisible, and tightly managed for human comfort.”
A dog-centred lens would start somewhere else. It would ask, when we write bylaws or design parks, footpaths, and shared spaces: what does this look like from the dog’s side. Where can they move freely, sniff, rest, and step away from pressure. How do we protect their right to be in public without turning their body into public property for strangers to touch.
This is not a call to let dogs run loose in traffic. It is a call to write rules and build infrastructure that assume dogs belong in public life; that they have a right to education and support to navigate it; and that their “no,” their choices, and their bodily boundaries still matter once they leave the house.
For those of us working professionally with dogs and their caregivers, behaviour support and teaching will always be part of what we do. But if we take agency and bodily autonomy seriously, then the central question shifts from “How do I get this dog to stop doing X?” to something more honest and more collective:
👉 What would it look like to change ourselves, and our systems, so dogs don’t have to give up so much of themselves just to be allowed in?