[nagdu] My Thoughts and Perspective on the Resolution concerning Ownership

Tue Aug 18 22:35:20 UTC 2015

What school is it that does this Raven?

On Jul 13, 2015, at 5:04 PM, Raven Tolliver via nagdu <nagdu at nfbnet.org> wrote:

The schools always have their reasons for removing a dog from a
handler's possession, there's no question about that. But sometimes,
their reasons are rather trivial, or at least do not have the
handler's or the dog's interests in consideration. There is a guide
dog school that has been known to remove or threaten to remove a dog
from handlers' possession if the dog has ongoing or chronic health
problems. So rather than working with the client's veterinarian or
suggesting the client see a specialist, there response is to remove or
consider reclaiming the dog because the school doesn't want to have a
reputation of putting out sick dogs, or that their dogs are unwell.
Yes, that is what they said.
A buddy of mine has personal experience with this. All he wanted was
help from the school's vet resolving an ongoing health issue, and
instead, he was met with the suggestion that he should return his dog
to the school. Not temporarily to resolve the health issue, but
permanently, because they can't have a dog with a health condition out
there working. Wow. I think that's basically the school saying "Stop
frickin' calling, God!" But I digress.

Just cause or no, there should be a due process. There is not.
Each school has a protocol for different measures to take in order to
remove a dog, ranging from least invasive to most aggressive measures.
But regardless, there is not a standard procedure across the board for
all guide dog schools. When a school who doesn't grant immediate
ownership decides the dog needs to come back, the protocol only
involves removing the dog, and does not concern some sort of process
for resolving the perceived issue at hand, or for allowing the handler
to present their case against the school's case in the presence of a
third party. This is problematic.
If I have a case against the police, and the police charge me with
something, I don't go to the police to present my case, I go to a
judge. As guide dog handlers, who is our judge? Who is our unbiased,
disinterested party? Unless we have ownership, we don't have one.
-- 
Raven
Founder of 1AM Editing & Research
www.1am-editing.com

You are valuable because of your potential, not because of what you
have or what you do.

Naturally-reared guide dogs
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/nrguidedogs

> On 7/13/15, Marianne Denning via nagdu <nagdu at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> Marion, you have my full support on the issues you mentioned.  I
> believe there is a lot of work to do in educating all of the companies
> and organizations you mentioned about our rights as guide dog owners.
> 
>> On 7/13/15, Marion Gwizdala via nagdu <nagdu at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>> Dear all,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>                Since I disabled mail delivery while I was at convention,
>> I
>> have not read all the messages concerning the resolution for which I was
>> a
>> proponent. I have, however, received a number of telephone calls both in
>> favor and opposition of the resolution. I would like to offer my
>> perspective
>> on this issue.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>                As most of you know, I am in favor of training programs
>> transferring unconditional ownership to the consumer upon completion of
>> training. As the NAGDU president, I have fielded a number of calls from
>> guide dog users who have either been threatened with or have had their
>> dogs
>> removed without cause and without due process. The unfortunate response I
>> have for them is that there is nothing that can be done to protect their
>> rights if they do not own their dogs. I realize that most of you will say
>> your training program would never do such a thing without just cause;
>> however, the fact is that it happens and you will likely never hear about
>> it. It is not up to me to tell you about these cases, as it is protected
>> by
>> my ethical code of confidentiality. It is also sadly true that the people
>> to
>> whom this happens will likely never tell the list either, because they
>> fear
>> retaliation in the form of a negative report that could impact their
>> application to another program.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>                The one thing I regret during the consideration of this
>> resolution is that I failed to ask for the whole resolution to be read.
>> For
>> those who did not attend the convention, with twenty-nine resolutions
>> being
>> considered, the chair chose to only read the resolved section of the
>> resolution to save time unless someone asked for a reading of the whole
>> resolution. I don't know if the results would have been any different but
>> there may have at least been a little more awareness of the purpose of
>> the
>> resolution. After all, this was my primary purpose in introducing this
>> measure.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>                Though I am disappointed the convention chose to not pass
>> this resolution, the other purpose for introducing it was to hear from
>> the
>> membership in a democratic forum. As president of this Association, I
>> serve
>> at the pleasure of the membership and am charged with representing their
>> interests. This is true of each member of the Board of Directors, as
>> well.
>> My personal belief is that ownership affords certain protections and will
>> always express this opinion; however, my personal agenda is not that of
>> the
>> membership. My duty is to express the will of the membership and to be
>> their
>> voice.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> As for this resolution being introduced again, it may very well be. At
>> this
>> time, though, I have no plan to do so. We have a great deal of work to do
>> and I am dedicated to the work, not my agenda. There is much more that
>> unites us than divides us. We may not agree on the issue of ownership but
>> we
>> agree we must have the right to full and equal access to those places the
>> public is invited and we are creating collaborative relationships with
>> the
>> restaurant, lodging, health care, taxicab, and zoo industries to remove
>> the
>> barriers we face. I trust you will stand with us as we open the doors to
>> full participation in society on terms of equality. In the words of Dr.
>> Kenneth Jernigan, "come! Join me on the barricades and we will make it
>> all
>> come true!"
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Fraternally yours,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Marion Gwizdala, President
>> 
>> National Association of Guide Dog Users Inc.
>> 
>> National Federation of the Blind
>> 
>> (813) 626-2789
>> 
>> (888) 624-3841 (Hotline)
>> 
>> President at nagdu.org
>> 
>> http://www.nagdu.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> High expectations create unlimited potential for the blind!
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/marianne%40denningweb.com
>> 
> 
> 
> --
> Marianne Denning, TVI, MA
> Teacher of students who are blind or visually impaired
> (513) 607-6053
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/ravend729%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/jem4ever%40icloud.com