[nagdu] Devil's advocate on ownership

Mon Apr 27 15:55:47 UTC 2009

And to add to this, has anybody determined the difference in the
ammounts each group (if we can even divide into groups) provides? 

-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of Marion & Martin
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 5:16 AM
To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Devil's advocate on ownership

Sherri,
    The Lighthouses for the Blind, Division of Blind Services, and other
rehabilitation agencies operate on ublic funding, as well. Would you
propose that we allow them to treat us in an arbitrary manner without
any accountability to the consumers and their elected representatives?
If the Division of Blind Services had a Consumer Advisory Council and
refused to seat a member of the National Federation of the Blind because
they believed we would not agree with their positions, should they be
allowed to do so?
    I am of the opinion that the primary stakeholder of a guide dog
school is the consumer, not the donors. Each school raises monies with
the premise that they are "helping the blind". Most even assert (though
I disagree) that they give the blind "dignity". If it were not for us,
the blind, they would not be providing their services. Furthermore, many
dedicated graduates raise funds for the programs from which they have
graduated, so we are stakeholders in that sense, as well!

Fraternally,
Marion Gwizdala-Schoch

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sherri" <flmom2006 at gmail.com>
To: "NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users" 
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2009 10:13 PM
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Devil's advocate on ownership

> Janine, I totally agree that your points are very well-taken. for most

> people, ownership of the dog is probably a good thing, but there are
those 
> people. Then you have to consider that most guide dog schools operate
and 
> exist because of the donations of private entities. Therefore, looking
at 
> the issue from both sides of the desk is a valid and worthwhile thing
to 
> do.
>
> Sherri
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Jenine Stanley" <jeninems at wowway.com>
> To: "'NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users'"

> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2009 3:35 PM
> Subject: [nagdu] Devil's advocate on ownership
>
>
>> Before I pose this question, or series of questions, let me say that
I am
>> very in favor of full ownership, if not for everyone directly upon
>> graduation, very soon thereafter. I recall in the 1990's, a number of
>> schools did change their policies to afford full ownership upon 
>> graduation.
>> I know GDF did so.
>>
>> That said, why have some schools changed their policies back to some
type 
>> of
>> custody or arrangement by which the school has legal title to the dog
and
>> hence the ability to take the dog back without other entities being
>> involved?
>>
>> I think things began to get a little tense, and I have no citations
for
>> this, just a gut feeling, when the man in Pennsylvania killed his
guide 
>> dog.
>> Sorry, can't remember off the top of my head when that took place.
>>
>> Over the years, even Seeing eye has had some grads who have abused
their
>> dogs to the point that legal intervention was necessary. I would hope

>> that
>> no one sets out to abuse a dog. Many habitual abusers can fake it
well
>> enough to get through training and aftercare visits though. The man
in
>> Pennsylvania certainly did this. He had a host of other issues, as
I'd 
>> wager
>> do most people who abuse their dogs to the point that the dog must be

>> taken
>> away.
>>
>> This percentage of abusers is minuscule in terms of applicants and
>> graduates, but who do you remember? The big question about the man
who
>> killed his dog, beyond how could someone do such a thing, was,  how
did 
>> this
>> person get a dog to begin with?
>>
>> That's not really fair to Leader as he looked fine to them up until
he
>> killed the dog. In fact, an instructor did a home visit a month
before 
>> the
>> incident. Leader got a lot of bad press and questions, I'd wager,
from 
>> their
>> donors and others over the incident though.
>>
>> Did they over react by changing their ownership policy?
Professionally, 
>> I'll
>> reserve opinion on that one, but I fully understand their reasoning.
>>
>> It is disturbing to hear such revisions couched in language about
>> "protecting the dogs." If I am that bad and the dog needs protection
from
>> me, why have I been accepted for training?
>>
>> That said, if you ran a guide dog school, how would you handle
situations 
>> in
>> which you saw people abusing or neglecting dogs that they legally
owned?
>>
>> Often the local animal cruelty laws have conditions well above what
we 
>> would
>> consider cruel or neglectful for a working dog. This means that the 
>> animal
>> control officers or courts often won't touch guide dog abuse
allegations,
>> even when they are legitimate.
>>
>> Let's face it. There are people for whom working and caring for a dog
is 
>> too
>> much. There are people who may treat a dog the way they were treated
as a
>> child and that may not be kindly.
>>
>> What would you do if someone from the public called in a complaint
about 
>> a
>> grad?
>>
>> We all know that most complaints are simple misunderstandings or over
>> reactions to appropriate corrections. There are that small percentage

>> though
>> of complaints that are valid.
>>
>> How would you investigate such a complaint? What would you then do if
you
>> found that the dog was being abused or neglected?
>>
>> I often hear guide dog handlers say after publicized abuse events
that 
>> the
>> schools have the right to protect the dogs. See my opinion above on
that
>> one. <grin>
>>
>>>From a school's point of view, another dynamic is occurring that may 
>>>cause
>> policy changes. Many people are no longer accepting any dog and are
>> returning or retiring dogs that are not suitable for them. Many of
these
>> dogs may truly need to retire from guide work for one reason or
another.
>> Some of them are just not good matches for that particular handler.
Yet, 
>> if
>> the person owns the dog, he or she can do with it whatever he or she 
>> wants.
>> Some people choose to retire a dog who might be reevaluated and
placed 
>> with
>> another person.
>>
>> How would you handle this situation, short of making better matches,
>> something we all hope happens but something that can change for any
team
>> over time?
>>
>> Understand I'm not challenging anyone's position here, just posing 
>> questions
>> as to how you might handle things if you were on the other side of
the 
>> desk.
>> Many of us have been in a class with people we questioned. Sometimes 
>> those
>> people are changed by having a dog. Sometimes they sadly are not.
>> Jenine Stanley
>> jeninems at wowway.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/flmom2006%40gmail
.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/swampfox1833%40ve
rizon.net 

_______________________________________________
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/rebecca.pickrell%
40ngc.com