It is an issue that can be overlooked in the well-meaning act of giving a stray dog a home, rather than forking out a big sum to buy one: the adoption process and its obligations.
The rights and obligations of taking in such a pooch are in the spotlight following the controversy over Tammy, the healthy, seven-month-old puppy that was put down by its adoptive owner last month.
Briton Alison McElwee euthanised the mongrel pup for being aggressive, claiming that the dog had bitten several people, including her four-year-old daughter.
The woman who initially rescued Tammy before giving her up for adoption, assistant project manager Ada Ong, said Ms McEl-wee had ignored her pleas to return Tammy. The Briton disputes this.
An upset Ms Ong has begun legal action against Ms McElwee for allegedly breaching their pet adoption agreement.
While lawyers for both parties debate the circumstances of the dog's adoption and death, animal activists and welfare groups have set their sights on preventing more "Tammys" from occurring.
The groups, and also independent pet rescuers, are looking at making their adoption agreements - signed between adopters and the groups - more stringent to better protect their charges.
Others, however, have called their efforts impractical.
Does the pet adoption process need to be reformed, and what is the best way to do it?