[nagdu] On Ownership

Steven Johnson blinddog3 at charter.net
Mon May 5 00:42:24 UTC 2014


Alicia,

I have not chimed in on any of this thread, but do agree with you with the credit check.  If we are going to be responsible owners, we should also be able to afford that costs that come with owning a dog.  If one purchases a car, they certainly don't go back to the dealership or manufacturer when they need gas or funding to fix that vehicle that in the end, they can't afford, and the same could hold true for dog guides.  As an owner, I also should have access to all of the records of my guide and therefore know about my dog's history, and therefore believe that being able to contact and communicate with the puppy raiser should be a part of the larger ownership platform.  Unfortunately, not all schools do this, and although the training staff at the agency may know certain things about that specific dog, the puppy raiser can probably give a lot more insight.  So, before we continue to dwell on the practices of one agency and their ownership policy, we really need to step back and look at how all of those things that go into ownership need to be made black and white and not hidden because of a so-called incident or two of a potential puppy raiser stalker forced the agency at one time *key and important definition here once again* forced the training program to implement such a policy.  
JMO,
Steve



-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Alysha
Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2014 7:28 PM
To: 'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'
Subject: Re: [nagdu] On Ownership

Hi Darla,
I didn't mean to suggest that people who have had financial difficulties aren't fit to care for a dog. I think a credit check should only be one piece in the application process. But especially for first-time handlers who may not understand the possible expenses of food, vet care, etc., I think the school should be responsible for making sure the applicant has a realistic plan about how they will cover these expenses. Maybe this plan includes some financial assistance from the school for medical care, but I think the issue of ownership is a little more complicated in that case since the school would probably want to be involved in health decisions for the dog. So finances are an important issue that I think should at least be discussed as one part of the application process.

Alysha
-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Darla Rogers
Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2014 7:38 PM
To: 'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'
Subject: Re: [nagdu] On Ownership

Dear Alicia,

	I agree with most of what you say, but people whose only income is social security or disability may have little to no credit equals bad credit--so a credit check would weed out some very deserving handlers.

	If it came to food here, my dogs would eat before I do, or I'd find a good home for my retired guide, but for now, thank God, I can--and co care--for both of them, and my retired guide has been great for my husband's physical health, as he can walk her on the trail through our subdivision--no vehicles allowed--in safety, so they both get exercise, and she doesn't feel left out of life here.
Darla


-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Alysha
Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2014 5:56 PM
To: 'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'
Subject: Re: [nagdu] On Ownership

Hi all,
I haven't been on this list for a while, but I recently re-joined and couldn't resist throwing in on this debate. :) I absolutely, 100%, think that we should own our dogs after graduating from a school's training program. I also absolutely, 100%, think that both criminal background checks and credit checks should be part of the application process. After all, we aren't just receiving a service from these programs. We're receiving a living, breathing being. I can't imagine having to give my dog to a stranger, but if for some horrible reason I did, I would want to know that they were a good person with the financial stability to properly care for him. Many dog rescue organizations require detailed home interviews, criminal background checks, vet references, and proof of income before they will allow someone to adopt one of their dogs. Why should we be held to lesser standards? I would think that training programs should be just as serious about where they place the highly trained dogs they have spent so much money, time, and effort to prepare for guiding as the organizations trying to place pet dogs. When I applied for my dog as a college student, I remember the application focusing a great deal on my O&M skills without touching on how I intended to pay for the dog's care without an income, how I would keep a dog safe and happy in a dorm environment, my knowledge of local veterinarians, etc. These are all questions I would ask if I was running a training program. I think I did a pretty good job with my dog, but there are others who may not have done so in that situation. I think sometimes we get so caught up in defending our personal rights that we forget the dog's "rights" have a huge part to play in the debate as well.

After I bring a dog home, I strongly feel I should be the sole person making decisions regarding his health, life, and well-being with the possible exception of a situation where the school is still financially supporting the dog's vet care, food, etc. If I am proven to be incapable of this or at all abusive, then the dog should be removed from my care just as a pet dog can be removed from someone's home in those circumstances. If this happened, I would hope no training program would trust another guide to my care for quite some time if ever.

I've encountered many handlers over the years who are responsible and wonderful with their dogs. But unfortunately, I've encountered just as many who have no discipline, no control, and no common sense when it comes to the appropriate way to care for their dog. The schools are using these examples as excuses for their unwillingness to grant ownership, completely ignoring the fact that the schools accepted these people to begin with. So I think the best solution is stricter application criteria along with full ownership.

Whatever you want to call people who attend training programs (clients, consumers, etc.), the bottom line is that we are receiving something for nothing. When an organization spends a great deal of time and money to train a dog and then gives that dog away for free or for a small fee, that is the definition of charity. Most of us do not have the time or expertise to train a guide from puppyhood for ourselves, so we rely on the schools to provide this service. The work my school did in training my guide is something I am personally quite grateful for. But I do not feel that having gratitude toward the school makes me a lesser human being or unworthy of expressing my opinions (don't get me started on the whole guide dog = dignity line!). I'm not convinced it is our right to own these dogs, but I do know that it is mandatory for me personally. Luckily, there are several good programs across the nation to choose from, and those of us who feel that ownership is a must will continue to support the schools who share this philosophy. No one is being forced to attend a specific school. So if this issue of ownership is important to enough people, hopefully it will become apparent by the programs that people are choosing to attend.

Anyway, sorry for writing a novel!

Alysha
-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of sheila
Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2014 5:23 PM
To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
Subject: Re: [nagdu] On Ownership

I am not in favor of background checks of any kind. It doesn't seem reasonable that we need more regulations to prove that we are able to be responsible citizens  especially in regards to receiving services intended to be used to enhance our lives as blind persons when other consumers aren't subjected to this stuffff.
On 5/3/2014 5:27 AM, Marion Gwizdala wrote:
> 	I would also assert that a criminal background check should not be the only information used to arrive at a decision. The information gleaned should be used in perspective and other mitigating or aggravating information should be considered. I don't know if I am in favor of background checks of any kind.
>
> Fraternally yours,
> Marion
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Star Gazer
> Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 8:53 PM
> To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] On Ownership
>
> I was only suggesting that a criminal background check is not the only 
> check worth doing
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On May 2, 2014, at 6:36 PM, Cindy Ray <cindyray at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I’m kind of confused about criminal checks leading to financial ones. Maybe it is because I didn’t read Rebecca’s message?
>>
>> Cindy
>>
>>> On May 2, 2014, at 3:02 PM, Daryl Marie <crazymusician at shaw.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>> But then how far would those financial checks go?  Even though Jenny is my responsibility, I am married to someone who historically has had credit problems.  Would a guide dog school checking in to my financial background also breach his confidentiality and deny me the chance to train with a dog because of it?  Does that seem fair?
>>>
>>> Daryl and Jenny (who is a little on edge today)
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Star Gazer <pickrellrebecca at gmail.com>
>>> To: 'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'
>>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>>> Sent: Fri, 02 May 2014 13:47:33 -0600 (MDT)
>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] On Ownership
>>>
>>>     Criminal background checks only "get" people who have found heir 
>>> way into the criminal justice system. Many many people commit crimes 
>>> and are not caught. And, an arrest means absolutely nothing.
>>> I wonder if the schools also do finantial background checks as 
>>> finantial stress can make people act in ways they normally wouldn't.
>>> Not to say that a person under finantial stress would or wouldn't 
>>> abuse a dog, just that criminal background checks aren't the only 
>>> background checks in town, and may not give a full picture.
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Julie J.
>>> Sent: Friday, May 2, 2014 1:49 PM
>>> To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] On Ownership
>>>
>>> Do any of the programs do criminal background checks?  What about 
>>> the references?  Is a reference letter submitted or are these people 
>>> called and asked questions?
>>>
>>> I feel that the programs should use whatever means necessary to 
>>> assess the suitability of a particular person to have a dog and then 
>>> let them have the dog.  If there is some concern that the person 
>>> won't properly take care of the dog, then that person shouldn't get one.  Once the person has the dog,
>>> it's too late to prevent abuse or neglect.   Ownership or no ownership isn't
>>>
>>> going to change the condition of the dog.
>>>
>>> The only way that ownership can influence how people act toward 
>>> their dog is if it's used as a threat.  If you don't do what we say, 
>>> then we'll repossess your dog.  the thing with this approach is that 
>>> it only works on folks who would have taken proper care of the dog regardless of the ownership policy.
>>> People who do bad things are going to do bad things regardless of the rules.
>>>
>>> An ownership policy isn't going to prevent abuse, any more than domestic
>>> abuse laws stop spouses from hitting each other.    People who don't commit
>>> abuse don't do it because of a law, they are non abusers because 
>>> they feel it's the right way to act.
>>>
>>> I'd really like to know what the actual reason is for the various 
>>> schools ownership policies.  I've heard obesity, abuse, better 
>>> follow up, being able to place the dog after retirement, better 
>>> service and all other manner of nonsense.  It doesn't make any sense 
>>> to me.  How does the ownership policy affect the school's ability to 
>>> provide good service?  It smells like an excuse to me.
>>>
>>> It would be interesting to see solid statistics comparing things 
>>> like obesity rates, abuse, time between a follow up request and the 
>>> provision of service and overall success rates between programs that 
>>> retain ownership and those that don't.  My hunch is that there is no 
>>> correlation between ownership and these items.  I think the better 
>>> indicator is the quality of the applicant screening process, and the 
>>> quality of the training at the program
>>>
>>> Julie
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/pickrellrebecca%4
>>> 0
>>> gmail.c
>>> om
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/crazymusician%40s
>>> h
>>> aw.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/cindyray%40gmail.
>>> c
>>> om
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/pickrellrebecca%40
>> g
>> mail.com
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/sleigland%40bresnan
> .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/alyshaj%40comcast.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/djrogers0628%40gmail.com


_______________________________________________
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/alyshaj%40comcast.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/blinddog3%40charter.net





More information about the NAGDU mailing list