I too know several people who, for ridiculous reasons, failed their adoption interviews. They came to the agencies looking to give an animal a good home, and were rejected. Obviously the adoption agencies don't know my friends from Adam, and they have to draw the line somewhere. 

You can't just hand over an animal to the first person who asks, not if you care about that animal's welfare. I get that, I really do. But the interviews are getting longer, the policies and regulations are getting more strict, and the only effect is to keep more animals in the shelters.

 

Another friend recently backed out of the adoption process because he was put off by the agency's requirement that they visit his home first, and that they will perform a surprise visit at some point in the future. He didn't like the idea that they could show up at any time to pass judgment on his life and take his cat back if they didn't like what they saw. He didn't want to live his life looking over his shoulder for the kitty cat social worker to show up and ring the bell. (He opted to get a kitten free off Craigslist.)

 

It's a common cognitive mistake: we believe that more information will prevent problems. If only I had asked my then-prospective boyfriend, "Will you eventually break up with me, but we'll have to keep living together for two months, during which time you will bring home a parade of skanks and have noisy "relations" in the bedroom next to mine?" (True story.) If only I had known the right questions to ask, I could have avoided that fate, right?

 

The problem is, that's not how life works. At a certain point, you have to let go and let what happens, happen. If you ask someone "Will you one day abandon your foreclosed home and leave your dog inside to chew its way to freedom?" obviously they will say "No way!" But that is how my friend's beagle came into her life: she chewed her way out.