Demand for small, round-faced “teddy bear” designer dogs such as cockapoos, cavapoos and goldendoodles has surged, but veterinary specialists and behaviourists say the trend has produced behavioural problems, health risks and welfare concerns that inexperienced owners may be unprepared to manage.
In a recent Daily Mail column, writer Liz Jones described the proliferation of lightly groomed, Instagram-friendly dogs and blamed image-driven ownership for some of the problems. Jones recounted rescuing a sick dog from a Romanian shelter and contrasted that animal with the stylised, commodified pets she sees in British villages and on social media.
Designer crossbreeds typically pair poodles with other breeds to produce small, curly-coated dogs that are marketed as low-shedding and “cute.” The category includes cockapoos (cocker spaniel × poodle), cavapoos (cavalier × poodle), goldendoodles (golden retriever × poodle), maltipoos and a variety of other mixes. The trend accelerated through the 2010s, driven in part by social platforms where pet accounts can accumulate millions of followers and lucrative sponsorship deals.
The column cites social media examples that illustrate the trend’s commercial pull: a sheepadoodle called Bunny with 8.6 million followers that reportedly earns about £30,000 per sponsored post and a goldendoodle, Brodie, with 7.2 million followers. It also cites market data showing the number of dogs in the United Kingdom rising from about 7.5 million fifteen years ago to roughly 13 million today, and states that designer crossbreeds now account for 25 to 30 percent of puppy sales.
Veterinary surgeon Dr. Rory Cowlam told the Daily Mail that poodle crosses are not "entry-level" pets. He said the dogs are highly intelligent and energetic, and that many owners experience neuroses, high-energy behaviours and reactivity that can be difficult to manage. "First-time owners have bought a dog for the cute factor, but it’s a high-level dog," Cowlam said.
Dog behaviourist Victoria Stilwell, quoted in the column, said social media often presents a sanitised perception of these breeds and warned of misinformation from unqualified trainers online. Stilwell and other specialists cited in the piece highlighted behavioural issues including separation anxiety, resource guarding, excessive barking and destructive chewing when the dogs’ physical and mental needs are not met.
Health and husbandry concerns are also raised. The column notes that poodle-cross coats can mat quickly and require regular grooming, and that some breeds marketed as "hypoallergenic" can still shed or trigger allergies. It cites reports of separation anxiety and inherited conditions such as heart problems and eye disease in certain crosses. A cited veterinary estimate puts the average price for a puppy at about £1,500, while premium goldendoodles can cost £3,000 to £5,000 or more; the column says cockapoo prices rose 168 percent between 2019 and 2020.
Welfare advocates say the demand for designer puppies has fuelled unscrupulous breeding and a market for so-called puppy mills, where breeding bitches are kept in poor conditions and repeatedly bred. The column links rising prices and demand with an increase in thefts of valuable-looking dogs.
Observers and experts quoted in the piece urged prospective owners to research breed needs thoroughly, to prioritise long-term suitability over aesthetics or social media status, and to consider rescue or adoption. The column also noted a legislative comparison, pointing to Sweden’s rule limiting the time dogs may be left alone, as an example of policy aimed at protecting animal welfare.
Writers and specialists emphasised the commitment required for long-lived pets. Jones described her own long-term care of older dogs, including an 18-year-old border collie with mobility and sensory challenges, as a counterpoint to choosing animals for their immediate visual appeal.
The debate over designer dogs underscores broader questions about how social media, commercialisation and rising pet ownership alter standards of care. Experts quoted in the article said that without adequate training, exercise, enrichment and veterinary oversight, trends driven by aesthetics can have lasting negative effects on animal welfare.