[nagdu] EXTERNAL:Re: contact with puppy raisers/walkers

Thu Dec 16 19:17:23 UTC 2010

Here, maybe this will help. While it doesn't address puppy raisers specifically, it does address the philosophical reasons generally, I think.

From "Dogs Against darkness", by Dixon Hartwell, circa 1942:

     What the new applicant must do, however, is to assume the
responsibility for eventually repaying the sum of $150 for
everything that The Seeing Eye provides for him - dog, board and
lodging, equipment, tuition, etc. - when and as he becomes able
to do it.  The Seeing Eye is not concerned whether it takes him
two years or five years.  It believes any man whom it has
investigated and accepted as eligible is entitled to a credit
rating.
     For some of these blind people it is the first time in their
lives anyone has given them financial trust.  That fact alone has
been a powerful factor in the rehabilitation of not a few who
have come to The Seeing Eye.
     Under its first plan, The Seeing Eye permitted a contributor
to propose the name of a prospective student for whom his
contribution was to be used. Today The Seeing Eye revolts at the
very thought of such a practice.  A contributor may certainly
suggest the name of an individual whom he thinks ought to have a
dog, but he cannot contribute directly to aid that man, only
indirectly by contributing to the school's general budget, from
which all expense is paid.
     This policy has far-reaching significance.  It was
determined upon as the result of extensive experience and its
value has been demonstrated in many instances.  It was indicated
by observation of several members of the first groups of men and
women who came to The Seeing Eye, each "sponsored" by someone who
had donated a scholarship for him.
     One such man was a pianist of moderate ability.  He needed a
dog, and a service club to which he belonged, in the spirit of
good fellowship and with the best intentions in the world,
underwrote the cost of his training at The Seeing Eye.  Members
of the club gave him a big send-off and a month later when he
returned, ready to enjoy his independence, an appropriate welcome
home.  He told the club members he wanted to do something to
repay them for their kindness to him.  They said such spirit was
fine and he could provide the piano music at their weekly
luncheon meetings. 
     Grateful for what they had done, he readily assented, and at
the next meeting of the club showed up eager and willing.  He
showed up every week thereafter for ten years, playing without
compensation and without it once being suggested to him by his
benefactors that he might in that time have fulfilled his
obligation to the club.  Even if they had considered his service
worth only $5.00 a performance, the value he returned to them was
something over $2,500, which was not a bad rate of interest on
the club's original investment of $375.
     But this disproportionate return on the investment was not
all that made such an arrangement wrong.  The blind man might
have been glad to play at the club luncheons every week for the
rest of his life, had it been considered his contribution to the
club. What was wrong was something else much more serious.
     Never a day passed in that community as this man, appearing
on the streets with his dog, went about his business, without
some person pointing him out and saying, either mentally or, as
was more usual audibly, "There goes the Men's Club dog." That man
was, and is, reminded every day of his life that he was a
recipient of charity.  He can never free himself from the fact
that a group of people chipped in to buy him something because he
was blind.  In many desperate confidential letters to The Seeing
Eye, that man has declared that, if personal conditions had
permitted, he would long since have moved from his home town just
to escape the stigma which he felt was forever on him.
     So today The Seeing Eye allows neither clubs nor individuals
to enjoy the doubtful privilege of pointing to any of its
graduates and saying, "That man's dog is the one I bought him."
At least fifty times a year someone asks the organization if he
may buy a dog for a particular blind man. Every such request is
refused, but rarely are the individuals convinced of the value of
The Seeing Eye's policy.  The urge to bask in the glory of
personal charitable deeds and to have the personal gratitude of
the recipient is still a very strong one.  But The Seeing Eye
sticks to its guns.  It firmly believes that no one who has the
real interests of a blind person at heart will want to buy him a
dog merely to get personal credit for it, knowing that by doing
so he would rob the blind man of a golden opportunity to do
something for himself which he greatly needs to do.
     The privilege enjoyed by the early scholarship donors, of
keeping in touch with the blind person either directly or
indirectly through The Seeing Eye, is today equally abhorrent to
the organization.  From time to time it informs people who
contribute more than a small sum annually of progress made by
individual graduates, although names and identifying places are
usually changed.  But that is as far as the organization goes.
     If a contributor were in touch with a blind person, there
would be temptations on both sides.  First the contributor would
naturally be anxious and interested to meet his beneficiary.  If
the blind student were not in as good financial circumstances as
he would like to be, the contributor might be moved to make
personal contributions, the receiving of which might undermine
the strength of character the blind person was struggling to
build within himself.  On the other hand, the blind person, being
in direct communication with a "sponsor" deeply interested in him
- a person possessing greater means possibly than required for
individual comfort - might be tempted to accept help now and then
to ease himself over a difficult spot.  In either case there is
serious risk of the blind person getting the worst thing he could
have - outright charity.

--
Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV - Erie, PA
Phone: (814) 860-3194 or 888-75-BUDDY

On Dec 16, 2010, at 2:06 PM, Pickrell, Rebecca M (TASC) (Internet) wrote:

> Right, but why did they as far as I know set the precident that "we trust these blind people to manage their dogs, and to pay for them, but we don't trust them to deal with their fellow humans"?
> Still not understanding the logic.
> 
> 
> From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Buddy Brannan
> Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 2:04 PM
> To: NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users
> Subject: EXTERNAL:Re: [nagdu] contact with puppy raisers/walkers
> 
> 
> You're not missing anything I'm not missing, because I basically agree with you. I'm just saying that this is historically where the no contact thing comes from. And, like I said, there's a lot of difference between not encouraging contact and actively blocking it. That the Seeing Eye is the oldest guide dog school in the world is one of those good news/bad news things. Good because they have that 80-odd years of experience. Bad because sometimes they are slow to change. Sometimes even slow to change is good, because change isn't always great, and doing the latest thing because it's the latest thing isn't always a good idea, but at other times, well, not so much.
> --
> Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV - Erie, PA
> Phone: (814) 860-3194 or 888-75-BUDDY
> 
> 
> 
> On Dec 16, 2010, at 1:54 PM, Pickrell, Rebecca M (TASC) (Internet) wrote:
> 
>> I'm not sure I really understand Seeing Eye's position.
>> Why can't or won't they trust everybody to be adults. If a raiser or handler has an issue with a type of contact, why can't it be sorted out via the legal system or in all the myraid ways unwanted contact is made to stop.
>> It seems like that is only logical given that Seeing Eye places such trust in the grads' abilities to manage their dogs.
>> I'm not sure I'm buying the "But what if" senario. I also don't understand why Seeing Eye can't place the same trust in appropriate contact and use the same resolution plan for when contact is inappropriate it uses for dog issues.
>> What am I missing?
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Buddy Brannan
>> Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 1:36 PM
>> To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] contact with puppy raisers/walkers
>> 
>> Oh goody! Another hot button issue! Yay!!!!
>> 
>> I completely understand the reasons for the TSE puppy raiser contact policy. I understand the historic significance, and also the other reason, i.e. you're raising a dog for the school, not for a specific person, doing something for the greater good as it were, a wider cause than one specific individual. And that's all fantastic, and I agree with the motives and the reasoning. Do I wish that the policy would be modified? Certainly; I'd love to have contact with Leon's raisers. Will I lose sleep over it that I don't? Not especially. While I understand not actively facilitating contact, the practice of editing letters between the parties is something I have issues with, even though I understand why. I think, basically, it's one thing to not encourage contact, but quite another to block it between consenting parties. Assuming of course both parties are consenting. It's certainly not as easy an issue as we might like to believe.
>> 
>> I had contact with my first dog's raiser, from a school that isn't the Seeing Eye. The Ripkens are wonderful people, and we still stay in touch some even today, over 13 years later. Many relationships are like this. Not all, though; there are cases such as Jenine has mentioned. There are others where raisers in one way or another interfere with the team. Conversely, I'm aware of cases where handlers inappropriately relate to their dog's raisers, some in the ways Jenine has outlined, other times inappropriately imposing upon the raiser in some way. So it's definitely not always great, either. Does that mean that the schools need to chaperone these relationships because some might e inappropriate? Again, this isn't nearly so easy and clear cut as some would have it.
>> --
>> Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV - Erie, PA
>> Phone: (814) 860-3194 or 888-75-BUDDY
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Dec 14, 2010, at 4:59 PM, Jenine Stanley wrote:
>> 
>>> Although GDF does allow contact with puppy raisers/walker, I do feel the
>>> need to defend TSE's no-contact policy. It has nothing, absolutely nothing,
>>> to do with you being an adult. It's about the principle of anonymous giving,
>>> selfless giving.
>>> 
>>> I've been in a workshop where a puppy raiser actually said "I raised these
>>> dogs. I'm entitled to pet them whenever I want. You people are too mean to
>>> them, never write back and don't deserve them."
>>> 
>>> The man who said this totally embarrassed his family and does not represent
>>> all puppy raisers/walkers, but his opinion, or variations thereof, are out
>>> there and make up the wide reasons people do raise puppies.
>>> 
>>> Also, not everything your dog does now is a result of things it did as a
>>> puppy or was illegally allowed to do. I've heard from puppy walkers who were
>>> crushed when hearing about their dogs' behavior as guides and were berated
>>> by the handlers for allowing X, Y or Z when they did no such thing.
>>> 
>>> I think those who have issue with TSE's puppy contact policy should read in
>>> the literature exactly why it was established. It screams respect for the
>>> adult nature of blind people.
>>> 
>>> 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/buddy%40brannan.name
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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%40tasc.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/buddy%40brannan.name
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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/buddy%40brannan.name