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

Thu Dec 16 19:20:44 UTC 2010

Rebecca, 

I think the original thought about keeping contact anonymous was that
people, such as service clubs would exploit the blind person, not leaving
him or her alone. This has happened, unfortunately, more among sponsor
organizations than raisers, but it does happen. There was also the principle
of raising a dog for the program, not one specific blind person. 
Jenine Stanley
jeninems at wowway.com

-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
Of Pickrell, Rebecca M (TASC) (Internet)
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 2:06 PM
To: 'NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users'
Subject: Re: [nagdu] EXTERNAL:Re: contact with puppy raisers/walkers

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%40ta
sc.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%40ng
c.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/jeninems%40wowway.com
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 9.0.872 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3318 - Release Date: 12/15/10
14:34:00