[nagdu] schools and abuse

[Jenine Stanley]

OK, couldn't resist chiming in on this discussion. 

At GDF we let people know that we do not take anonymous reports and will, in
most cases, tell the person in question the name of the one doing the
reporting. The only times we might not do this would involve violence, the
one being reported possibly threatening the reporter. This is extremely rare
though and I can't think of any circumstance when we've used it as a defense
against telling the name of the person calling in an abuse report. 

That said, as others have noted here, most of the reports we receive are
from people, blind and sighted, who either do not understand guide work or
correction, or who have some axe to grind with the handler. We gently but
firmly explain to these people about how guide dogs are trained, etc. we
assure them that we understand their concern but that we also know, in most
cases, that this graduate is capable. As a matter of record, we will call
the handler to let him/her know about the complaint. If it's something
totally spurious we won't waste our collective time, but if it's someone,
say, who works with or claims to have close contact with the handler, we
will often call to let him/her know. We also ask whether the complainant has
spoken with the handler at all about the issue. As you can imagine, most
people have not, are reluctant to do so, etc. 

We also do not take formal reports from people who have not directly
witnessed whatever it is they are complaining about. Second and third hand
accounts don't cut it. 

I always tell those making complaints to imagine themselves in the shoes of
the handler. What would they want to happen? If it was someone complaining
about their children, housekeeping, lawn or whatever thing I think, based on
the conversation with that person I've been having, is valuable to him/her,
how would he/she want someone else to handle it? 

Talking to someone who is doing something you don't agree with isn't easy
but if you feel that strongly, it's a must. 

Before I was affiliated at all with any guide dog school I did report
someone without talking to her. The school handled it just as I do now,
taking all the particulars and noting that I was not a first-hand observer
of any of the things I'd called about. I was calling because first-hand
observers had called the agency I worked for about this person. The school
said to have them call directly if it was such an issue. 

I then took their advice an called the woman to let her know that her
coworkers were reporting her and what I'd done as a result of my supervisor
telling me to "fix this." 

It turned out that the  woman was having a lot of trouble accepting her new
dog. She'd had that perfect first dog and the new one was, well, not
perfect. I felt like a jerk for reporting her. I called the school back and
told them about our talk. They subsequently gave her some ways to handle
things in her yearly visit. I don't know if it got better or not but the
next time her coworkers called us, I sent them directly to the school, after
giving a speech about how they should really talk to her first. 

I do have a question though for everyone here. I think it's very fair to
note that the schools should screen applicants closely to avoid those who
might become abusers. What tools might we use to do such screening? 

What if someone refuses to disclose that he or she has been to several
schools and has not received a dog due to being asked to leave their
programs? 

Conversely, how do we handle people who have had a run of dogs, more than 3
in, say, a five year period, or a number of very short-term matches, 2 years
or less, due to health or behavioral issues in the dogs? Sometimes these are
legitimate issues and have absolutely nothing to do with the person's
abilities. Sometimes though there are other factors involved. 

How would you feel about schools contacting each other about applicants? 

Right now due to HIPPA and other privacy laws we cannot really do so, at
least we at GDF choose not to do so. This puts us in a bind at times with
applicants who are less than truthful with us. 

If there's anything I can beg of you all, it's to please tell us the
absolute truth on an application. If you've had 6 dogs in 6 years from a
school, tell us and if we ask, explain why. That's better than us finding
out at some point along the way. Trust me, people tell us about applicants
all the time. We also read a number of handler email lists, because we just
like to do so and interact with everyone. 

"Don't ever let Mr. X have a dog. I read on email that he did Y with his
last dog."  

If I had a dime for every time our office got an email or phone call like
this, I could retire from GDF easily. 

We here on this list are, I'm assuming, responsible handlers and honest
people. That's not the case though, as we all know, of everyone out there.
There have been some stellar cases of fraud, the man who wasn't even blind
who got a dog from a school then used it and his supposed blindness to scam
several women out of their life savings. This man faked doctor's reports and
everything, including fooling a very knowledgeable and capable guide dog
school staff. 

The man who killed his guide dog had gone through training without a hitch
and even managed to look good on an after-care visit shortly before the
incident. Later we all learned of his domestic abuse of his family along
with his dog. 

Then there was the woman whose dog was removed and was denied future
training because of mental health reports about her young adopted daughter
and animal abuse. The school in question demanded reports from all manner of
mental health professional. She went on to train and work successfully with
a dog from another school. 

How can we as schools screen people without making everyone suspect or
completely invading everyone's privacy? 

What should we do if we do receive a complaint of true abuse, neglect or
simply poor handling? 

Most things that fall under these categories are so far from local
legislation covering animal abuse that the authorities will either laugh at
complaints, say they don't handle that, or call the nearest school, or the
school they know about. 

I've been involved in trying to reclaim a dog who was being neglected by a
grad. The grad owned the dog and we were trying to go through local
authorities to reclaim it. The family wanted us to have the dog but each
time they tried to send it back, the handler claimed he owned it and they
could not do so.

The authorities were very professional about what they could and could not
do. They could not, for example, go to the person's home and take the dog
based on our, and others' reports. The "neglect", person not feeding the
dog, not working it, then allowing it to gain weight significantly, weren't
enough to merit reclamation. We needed a court order for them to do so. The
person was finally persuaded to return the dog by family, who had been
caring for it anyway. 

So, reporting to local authorities often isn't the answer either. Talking to
the person should always be in this program and believe me, we tried that.
Sometimes it doesn't even work. 

I know that all of us here hate to see someone misusing his or her dog.
Whether it's a dog who is overweight, inappropriately corrected, never
corrected, or always left at home, we feel as if we need to do something
because allowing these things goes against what we know as responsible
handling. When I start thinking that way, I then remember the following
story about a dear friend and how she chose to work her dog and the
consequences. 

My friend attended a convention. She went into the exhibit hall and to keep
track of her place, she taught her dog to take her to the wall at the end of
each row so he didn't automatically round a corner without her realizing it.
This can happen so easily in a crowd. She would have him take her to the
wall, praise him then turn and calculate her position to give him more
appropriate and meaningful commands. This helped him not to get stressed in
there too as he understood what she wanted. 

Well, what I heard later about my friend's technique while talking with an
instructor from her school was this: 

A handler comes up and begins talking to me, not knowing that the instructor
is there. 

"There's a woman in there whose dog is running her into the walls and she's
praising it. Can you believe that? I knew School X taught some weird things,
but come on. She even uses that stupid clicker when the dog does this. That
makes no sense at all. I wonder if her school knows that she doesn't realize
what she's doing with the clicker, reinforcing the dog running her into the
walls? I'm going to go to their booth and tell them to help her." 

The instructor was snickering silently and punching my arm. I didn't know
about my friend's exhibit hall navigation methods yet. All I could say was,
"Oh, well, the exhibit hall is a crazy place." I was stunned. Looking back,
I know what I should have said, but hindsight and all that. 

When the person left, the instructor told me about what my friend was doing.
I wanted to go grab that other handler and throttle her. <grin> 

I've also been reported to an instructor for "punching my dog in the face." 

What actually happened? 

I was using my right hand as a target, as many of you have learned to do. I
was showing my dog that it was OK to come right up to the edge of a table to
show it to me and was using my target hand, with treat properly enclosed. He
happily all but slammed his nose into my fist, tail wagging madly. This was
interpreted as me dragging him up to a table and punching him in the face.
The instructor explained what I'd done and the person was still a bit
incredulous but I wasn't going to demo it for her. We both just shrugged and
went on our way. 

My point? People can witness things and totally misunderstand what's
happening. 

I would really appreciate though knowing what you all think we as a
community can do about those among us who are indeed truly not responsible
handlers, in whatever fashion. What makes a responsible handler? At what
point does peer counseling become peer pressure, eliciting the opposite
result of what we'd wanted? 

Just some things to think about. 
Jenine Stanley
jeninems at wowway.com