[nagdu] contact with puppy raisers/walkers

[Julie J]

This wasn't very nice.  It directly violates rule #1. I'm sure Ginger said 
what she meant.  Feel free to disagree with it, but please refrain from 
personal attacks.

thank you,
Julie
NAGDU list moderator

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Peter Donahue" <pdonahue2 at satx.rr.com>
To: "NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users" 
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 10:15 AM
Subject: Re: [nagdu] contact with puppy raisers/walkers


> Hello Ginger and everyone,
>
>    Hmmmm! I was never asked to fill out any consumer satisfaction survey.
> Perhaps what you meant to say is that graduates whom you knew would give 
> you
> the views you wanted were asked to fill out this survey. I experienced the
> same behavior with GDB. NAC and other agencies for the blind have also 
> given
> us this same horsepuckey. From having met Ogden's raiser and her family I
> know that learning something about his past helped us become a great team.
> Had I been able to dig in to Tim's background perhaps some of the problems 
> I
> had with him could have been avoided.
>
>    All this dribble about charity and such isn't an issue with me. If I
> wish to show gratitude fore something done for me I do it. Otherwise if I
> feel that someone's actions over-step the bounds of such I feel it my
> responsibility to address it appropriately. We in the federation work hard
> to teach blind persons how to interact with the public to teach them when
> assistance and such are appropriate and when they are not. Policies like
> this do nothing to instill this in graduates. As long as the choice to
> communicate or not to communicate directly with puppy raisers is respected
> that's where it should begin and end. I really get tired of the same old
> garbage that "It's not as simple as you think." Se is not the only agency
> for the blind that has given us that line of junk. Se graduates may have 
> one
> view. The organized blind has another and will act in time.
>
> Peter Donahue
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Ginger Kutsch" <gingerKutsch at yahoo.com>
> To: "NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users"
> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 8:07 AM
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] contact with puppy raisers/walkers
>
>
> All,
>
> There is a question about The Seeing Eye's policy regarding
> raiser contact on the consumer satisfaction survey that graduates
> are invited to participate in after they have been home with
> their dogs for nine months. When I worked on the consumer
> satisfaction committee, the majority of respondents,
> approximately 80%, were satisfied with the current puppy raiser
> contact policy.
>
> As a graduate of The Seeing Eye, I have no strong feeling one way
> or another about puppy raiser contact. I've written a thank you
> note to my puppy raisers for each of my three dogs and have never
> received a response. Whether I am able to have direct
> communication with my puppy raiser or not has no bearing on my
> dog's ability to guide me safely and effectively. Therefore, it
> is not part of my decision making process when I consider a
> school.
>
> There are, however,  several graduates who attend The Seeing Eye
> because there is *no contact. Whether we are all "adults" or not,
> people are generally brought up to feel obligated in some way to
> those people who offer us assistance, give us gifts, etc. How
> many times have you done something simply because you feel
> obligated?
>
> The fact is that, whether we call ourselves "consumers" or not,
> when we attend a guide dog school and receive a dog, we are
> accepting charity. Those people who raise puppies for a guide dog
> school are performing a charitable act. If you consider the
> definition of charity for a moment, it may give you more insight
> on the philosophy of The Seeing Eye. Charity is defined as 1),
> generous actions or donations to aid the poor, ill, or helpless;
> And 2), something given to a person or persons in need.
>
> Early on, The Seeing Eye created policies that supported its
> belief that blind people deserved respect and dignity. Now I know
> there are some on this list that dislike the word dignity, but
> when applied correctly, one realizes that The Seeing Eye's tag
> line  is not saying that dogs provide independence and dignity;
> but rather  it's saying that the organization firmly believes
> that independence and dignity is a right that everyone deserves.
>
> That said, many of the policies that The Seeing Eye upholds
> support this belief.
>
> 1. There is a charge for the dog. Seeing Eye does not advertise
> that a blind person can come get a dog for free. This smacks of
> "charity".  The fee hardly covers the true cost of the dog and
> may only be symbolic, but it enables the organization to promote
> its belief that blind people are not looking for a hand-out but
> rather a hand-up.
>
> 2. The Seeing Eye does not accept funding, or ask its graduates
> to seek funding, for any one individual's  specific training
> needs. I think Buddy's post adequately explained the reason for
> this policy.
>
> 3. The Seeing Eye does not facilitate puppy raiser contact. This
> policy is in keeping with the organization's belief that blind
> people who receive a dog from The Seeing Eye are not charity
> cases but rather individuals who are looking to enhance their
> lives. This policy switches the focus of puppy raising from
> raising a dog for any one blind individual to raising the dog for
> an organization that provides dogs for the blind. This makes the
> organization obligated to the puppy raisers, rather than placing
> that burden on the individual blind person.
>
> Years ago when graduates expressed a desire to be able to
> personally thank their puppy raisers if they so chose, The Seeing
> Eye responded and created a system so that graduates might do so
> while still preserving anonymity. Since the majority of Seeing
> Eye graduates are satisfied with the current policy on puppy
> raiser contact, it's highly unlikely that the organization will
> seek to change it at this point.
>
> Anyway, I'm not speaking on behalf of the organization, just
> offering my two cents for what its worth!
>
> Ginger,
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/pdonahue2%40satx.rr.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/julielj%40neb.rr.com
>