[Blindtlk] [nagdu] Guide Dog Handler Bill of Rights

[Steven Johnson]

Peter,

This is an interesting idea.  One thing that I don't believe you touched on,
or may have indirectly, is the issue of ownership which has been an ongoing
issue of discussion among the dog guide community and NAGDU for a very long
time.  This might be one way to at least bring this a little closer to
creating something that addresses this.

Again, an interesting idea.  I will be eager to hear what others think.

Steve


-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
Of Peter Donahue
Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2011 1:48 PM
To: Blind Talk Mailing List
Cc: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
Subject: [nagdu] Guide Dog Handler Bill of Rights


Hello everyone,

    The situation Marion posted about concerning Fidelco's removal of dogs 
from graduates without detailed bonified reasons for doing so along with 
other issues concerning the treatment of students in training and gradutes 
of guide dog programs is leading me to believe that perhaps the best way to 
address them is through legislation I'll refer to as a "Guide Dog Handler's 
Bill of Rights." Such legislation would require guide dog programs among 
other things to give valid reasons for the removal of someone's dog and an 
appeals  procedure to be put in place should a guide dog handler feel he/she

has been wrongly accused of mistreatment of the dog. Yes it's true there are

irresponsible guide dog handlers among us just as there are irresponsible 
individuals in our society. This is no reason to treat the blind like 
children.

The failure of Fidelco to give the graduate in question valid reasons for 
the removal of the dog is a situation we should not tolerate and need to put

a stop to. Leader Dogs has also behaved in a similar way towards its 
graduates. If memory serves me correctly a Leader Dog Graduate's dog was 
removed from them during a recent national convention. And as I recall there

was insufficient reasons for the removal of that dog from its handler.

    A Guide Dog Handler Bill of Rights could require all guide dog programs 
to give their graduates full ownership of their dogs upon successful 
completion of their programs. I emphasize the word "Successful."

        Another issue the legislation could address is communication between

guide dog handlers and puppy raisers. In most cases this isn't an issue. 
Sadly there is at least one U.S. guide dog organization that refuzes to 
offer their graduates and puppy raisers the opportunity to communicate 
directly with each other. The Seeing Eye only permits communication between 
the two parties through the school. It removes all contact information from 
correspondence from notes passed between the two parties. Such a custodial 
practice also subjects both parties to censorship of such correspondence by 
the school. Has this organization and others that may have similar practices

forgotten that they're dealing with adults who must learn to manage their 
life's affairs including how communication between themselves and their 
dog's puppy raiser will occur if it does at all. This decision should rest 
with the parties in question and not the dictates of a guide dog program 
that thinks it is doing the right thing when in reallity it is doing more 
harm than good.

    A guide dog handler's Bill of Rights would require guide dog programs to

establish procedures for facilitating direct communication between its 
graduates and puppy raisers and would prohibit the removal of contact 
information it may pass between them.

    A number of Seeing Eye graduates have discussed this matter with the 
school only to receive one excuse after another. And oh yes. As was told to 
Marion by Fidelco concerning the graduate who's dog was wrongly removed the 
same old fashion voodoo about confidentiality and privacy are touted 
concerning direct communication between puppy handlers and guide dog school 
graduates. Programs like the Seeing Eye and others with similar practices 
would do well to enter the new Milennium on this matter or face the 
possibility of a legislative mandate to do so. Guide dog handlers have a 
right to learn about their dog's up-bringing. Who best to provide that 
information than the dog's puppy raiser.

    One Seeing Eye Instructor told me that when one adopts a child contact 
information for the child's former parents is withheld. The same should be 
done in the case of guide dog puppy raisers and SE'S graduates. I wouldn't 
be pressed to want such information from an adoption agency in the first 
place. As the child becomes a part of the family and begins to share his/her

background I'd have a way to get the information I need to be a more 
effective parent. A dog is unable to communicate such information to its 
owner. I have had guide dogs from several guide dog schools and had no 
issues with communication between myself and the dog's raiser. I have very 
specific requirements any future guide dog program would need to me if I'm 
to seek training from them. Because all guide dog programs have one less 
then desireable practice or another switching schools to address the puppy 
raiser communication issue is not an option. No self-respecting blind 
individual should be put in such a predicament. Let's make sure graduates of

all guide dog programs have the opportunity to communicate directly with 
their dog's puppy family if they choose to do so.

    These are just two issues a "Guide Dog Handler Bill of Rights" could 
address. I'm sure folks on these lists can think of more. It's an idea worth

considering to help put an end to practices many of us find demeaning and 
offensive. Thanks for reading.

Peter Donahue

 


_______________________________________________
nagdu mailing list
nagdu at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nagdu:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/blinddog3%40charter.n
et