[nagdu] Consumer or Beneficiary?

Fri Dec 30 16:48:55 UTC 2011

    I agree that most training programs have very paternalistic approaches 
and policies as it pertains to their relationships with consumers. Many 
programs view the blind people with whom they work as beneficiaries and seem 
to tell them they should be grateful for what they get from them. This 
sometimes not too subtle message is accepted by the blind person who feels 
indebted to what has been given them. Adding to this attitude is the fact 
that most programs do not charge a fee for their services.
    The reality, however, is that we are consumers. Guide dog training 
programs solicit funding from the public and from private foundations with 
the expressed purpose of providing these services to the blind. These donors 
support the work of the training program and those who work for the training 
programs are paid to provide these services. The Chief Executive Officers of 
guide dog training programs are paid 6-figure salaries to run these 
nonprofit organizations whose sole purpose is to provide guide dogs to blind 
people. As the recipient of these guide dogs, we are the consumers of these 
services, no less powerful than the consumers of the goods and services of 
any other for-profit corporation. Just as is true with any other company, 
blind consumers can shape the way a guide dog training program does business 
through our voices.
    A few training programs transfer ownership to the consumer upon 
completion of training; most do not. Some of those who do not condition 
their custody of the dog upon specific requirements, such as providing 
annual vetrinarian reports, and reserve the right to repossess the dog. To 
the best of my knowledge, none of those programs that retain ownership 
and/or the right to repossess the dog have any policies concerning due 
process. The failure to adopt due process policies can result in 
repossession without cause.
    Lest anyone believe a program would not do such a thing, please read the 
article in the April Braille Monitor about a Fidelco consumer who had this 
very thing happen. This story is only one of many about Fidelco consumers 
who have been treated this way and Fidelco is not the only program that 
engages in this sort of behavior. I know of consumers who have been 
threatened with and actually had their dogs repossessed because of anonymous 
complaints of abuse, neglect, or out of control dogs with absolutely no 
objective evidence of such issues. One program that has changed their policy 
from ownership to custody once repossessed the harnesses of a couple in 
Florida who obtained their dogs prior to the change in policy based upon the 
allegations of an administrator with the Division of Blind Services who 
asserted that the couple had been banned from the Orientation & Adjustment 
Center because of their dogs' behavior. In a conversation with the program's 
Director of training, I was told that, if they did not have ownership, the 
dogs would have been repossessed. When I contacted the Director of the O&A 
center to inquire why the couple was barred, the Director didn't have a clue 
what I was talking about. He told me the couple had not been barred and they 
had no issues with the couple's dogs. The administrator who filed the 
complaint was demoted. Due process policies would have prevented this unjust 
action.
    I am currently working on another such issue with a consumer from the 
same program. Anonymous complaints have been filed that the consumer is 
neglecting his dog. The vetrinarian has asserted the dog is healthy and 
there is no evidence of abuse or neglect. In spite of this, the program is 
attempting to remove the dog and has no due process for the consumer.
    The membership of NAGDU has endorsed a guide Dog Consumers' Bill of 
Rights to protect us from those who would attempt to deny us our basic 
rights without due process. I encourage each of you to read the Bill of 
Rights and ask the training program from which you received your dog to 
abide by it. You can read this Bill of Rights by going to

http://www.nfb.org/images/nfb/Publications/bm/bm11/bm1106/bm110609.htm

Fraternally yours,
Marion Gwizdala


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Doug Parisian" <eggmann at shaw.ca>
To: "NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users" 
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 11:03 PM
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Victim or Advocate?


> Lyn, I used to allow my dog the run of the place when I ran a business for 
> 13 years.  All my dogs new to either return to my office, or go to the 
> receptionist's station when folks came in.  There were only two of us in 
> the office and all my dogs knew the chain of command--the pecking order, 
> me, receptionist, and dog though the latter were reversible.  Most 
> customers, if they learned I had a dog guide, would ask to see him/her and 
> as long as all behaviours were unobtrusive, I would allow it.
>
> Doug: Just another happy tail!
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Lyn Gwizdak" <linda.gwizdak at cox.net>
> To: "NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users" 
> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 7:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Victim or Advocate?
>
>
>> The Executive Director of our blind center lets her dog wander around and 
>> it even almost went outside alone!  I was tempted to take the dog and put 
>> him in a room downstairs and wait for the ED to go nuts looking for her 
>> dog! Hahaha!  Meanie me!
>>
>> I keep Landon in harness and with me or tied to the table if I'm 
>> wandering around doing stuff.
>>
>> Lyn and landon
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Sheila Leigland" <sleigland at bresnan.net>
>> To: "NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users" 
>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2011 11:30 AM
>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Victim or Advocate?
>>
>>
>>> Doug actually i think you are right on this one. I know of someone that 
>>> would take a guide dog and let it walk around because oh It likes to see 
>>> everyone but I was told by an employee of a buisness that the dog took 
>>> off out of the door and she had to go catch the dog. They wondered why I 
>>> didn't let my dog wander and I told them it was improper behavior and 
>>> not to accept improper behavior like that.
>>>
>>> Sheila Leiglan d
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nagdu mailing list
>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>>> nagdu:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/linda.gwizdak%40cox.net
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nagdu mailing list
>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>> nagdu:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/eggmann%40shaw.ca
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nagdu:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/blind411%40verizon.net