The owner had her dog under control as she was holding it, the mother did not have her child under control because she was not even paying attention to anything but her phone call thus not worrying that pwecious was aggravating a dog. Etiquette wise, the dog owner was wonderful because I would have yelled at the kid and/or mother for upsetting my, heretofore behaved dog. Just because a child walks into a vets office does not mean CRUD MONKEYS! Muzzle the dogs, there is a child here!!!!! It is rude (trying to keep the etiquette thing going) to expect that everyone conform to your (general) standards. Just because you (general) feel all dogs should be muzzled in public to protect the children doesn't mean it is an accepted as a rule for anyone but you. I agree that a dog that comes in with attitude needs muzzled, and most dog owners do that, or in one case, the dog stayed in the car until a room was ready ( As God as my witness, I thought it was the tasmanian devil coming through) but I don't feel that at the vets free range children need protected from the dogs..it should be the other way around. Gen xer, you keep saying the child is more important and as a parent, yes, I would not want a roaming dog attacking my child, but again, this is a DOGS place, not a childs and it is important that the child respect the dog. Would you expect a dog owner to muzzle their dog in their own home if you bring your child over because it is easier to muzzle a dog than watch the child?