To Ellen DeGeneres’, Marina Batkis, owner of the dog adoption agency, became a difficult person.  To Marina, Ellen DeGeneres’ became a difficult person.  So who was the difficult person?  They both were; and they both weren’t.  As you know already, Ellen made a mistake.  She forgot about the contents of her contract with the adoption agency which clearly stated that she could not give the dog, Iggy, to anyone else.  If Iggy didn’t fit in with Ellen’s household, Ellen should return him to the agency.  In retrieving Iggy from the other family, Marina and the agency did nothing wrong.  In fact, they merely upheld the contract. 

Ellen realized her mistake and apologized on her show, admitting that she messed up.  Unfortunately, Ellen then tried to get the adoption agency to absolve her of the guilt she felt for having Iggy taken from the children.  She pleaded and reasoned that the concern should be for the dog, (and possibly the children) not for the rules.  Ellen’s implication was that if Marina and the agency cared about Iggy, they would give him to the family Ellen selected.  Ellen said, “It should be about the dog.” 

What Ellen failed to recognize was that for Marina, it WAS all about the dog.  Why else would the agency have the new pet owners sign those contracts?  It’s clear that Marina and Vanessa Chekroun, owners of the adoption agency, love the dogs they adopt out.  If fact, they love them so much that they, through the contract, maintain some control over the dog’s life even after they are adopted.  Ellen DeGeneres’ saw Marina as cold-hearted, when in fact, she was doing exactly what Ellen wanted her to do:  making it about the dog! 

If Ellen could have set aside her emotions and guilt for a short time she might have seen Marina’s love and concern for Iggy even though that love was exhibited differently than Ellen wanted it exhibited.  Then she might have seen that her concern was as much for the children, who would now be without a dog, as it was for Iggy himself.  When Ellen saw this, the entire situation could have occured differently.  She could have accepted the entire responsibility, apologized to Marina for not seeing that the rules Marina enforces is her way of showing how much she loves the dog, and then apologized to the children for causing their heartache. 

Then Ellen could have made it right for the children by taking them out to find another dog to adopt.  They could have had a wonderful day together as they embarked on the adventure of finding a new friend. 

And Iggy, would soon be in a new home, approved by the agency, being loved and cared for.  Marina would have made sure of it.

If Marina, instead of seeing Ellen as an “unfit owner,” had seen Ellen’s giving Iggy to the children as her way of loving him, Marina might have met with Ellen, had a conversation about Iggy and how the rules apply and maybe agreed to “check out” the new home (or not).  Of course, if Marina did agree to check out the children’s home, Ellen would have to understand that if the home did not meet the agency’s standards, Iggy would have to be returned to the agency.    Marina could even have had Ellen go get the dog and explain it to the children.  Then there would be no “bad guys” and no “victims.”  It would be all about the dog, and integrity.

So who was being difficult?  Each of them became a difficult person to the other when they saw the other person’s actions as getting in the way of what they wanted, intended, or needed to have happen.  In reality, they both wanted the same thing:  Iggy in a home where he would be loved and cared for.  Unfortunately, that got lost in the emotion and the issue became about how that should happen, instead of that it should happen. 

Maybe if now they both realize that they actually, all along, wanted the same thing for Iggy, not only will Iggy soon be happy and move on, but Ellen and Marina will be too.