[nagdu] a Straw Argument: Freedom of choice?
The Pawpower Pack
pawpower4me at gmail.com
Wed Aug 26 01:01:50 UTC 2015
Rebecca,
exactly.
The programs which I could attend pending acceptence would be GEB, Leader, and GDF.
None of the others will accept students who are Deafblind using ASL for communication.
I will neither attend Leader, nor GEB because I'm not willing to accept anything less than full ownership upon completion of said program. I know people in wheelchairs face similar issues.
I think Leader is a good program, as is GEB, but I will not be in a partnership with a program who doesn't trust me and who has custodial policies reflecting their view on blindness.
Good thing I like dog training. I just hope things have changed before I'm about 70. Dunno how up to it I will be at that age! lol
Rox and the kitchen Bitches:
Mill'E, Laveau, Soleil
Pawpower4me at gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 25, 2015, at 7:52 PM, Star Gazer via nagdu <nagdu at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>
> Maybe your average consumer does have a
> choice. I'm thinking of folks like Sheri and Rox because you both have
> posted about your circumstances. It's my take that Sheri can't go to a
> program other then GDB due to her fused knee and a few other problems. Rox
> it seems can't go to a program at all.
> These women are locked into the models they're in.
> How would consumer choice work for them?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Tina Thomas via
> nagdu
> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 7:42 PM
> To: 'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'
> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
> Cc: Tina Thomas <judotina48kg at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] a Straw Argument: Freedom of choice?
>
> Yeah exactly! I'm sorry but consumer's have the choice to attend any guide
> dog program they wish. Now, if ownership is a make it or break it deal for
> individual's then stands to reason that folks would choose a program that
> has that policy. Also, I don't subscribe to the notion that consumers own
> the dog but the school pay for all flea and tick medication as well as all
> vet costs associated with the dog. I'm sorry folks, that is not
> unconditional ownership. I know that I am the lone wolf when it comes to
> this topic, but that is how I view this topic. Now, with that said, it
> doesn't mean that I won't continue to work to insure that all guide dog
> users rights are protected. Another issue I am having with this whole
> ownership policy is the notion of people having their dogs taken away based
> on either the school's evaluation and or some busy body calling the school
> complaining about a handler and the treatment of the dog. I have not heard
> of any case where the school has just come in and taken the dog without
> probable cause in a longtime. Now can there be errors on both sides, the
> answer is yes! However, in the cases I have come across in recent years,
> the school was justified in taking the actions they deemed necessary for
> the safety of both the handler and dog. Maybe its time for NAGDU to put out
> a survey asking about the policies' and practices of all schools and if
> people are honest, then we would have some statistical data to support the
> ownership argument. JMTS.
> Tina
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Marion Gwizdala
> via nagdu
> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 3:47 PM
> To: 'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'
> Cc: Marion Gwizdala
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] a Straw Argument: Freedom of choice?
>
> Aleeha,
>
> I understand that this may be the message; however, I am trying to
> understand the logic of the "freedom of choice" argument. If there is no
> difference in the practical implementation of ownership vs. probation, what
> benefits are gleaned by the policy. If I buy a house, I am responsible for
> the upkeep of the house, paying the taxes, cutting the grass, and repairing
> items. If I rent the house, generally someone else maintains the physical
> plant, cuts the grass, and makes necessary repairs. It may cost more to rent
> than own, but there is a benefit in doing so. There is also the reality that
> my investment in the property does not increase my asset, only the assets of
> the landlord. Likewise, I am at the mercy of the landlord who could
> arbitrarily decide to evict me if I do not have a binding lease or refuse to
> renew my lease without just cause.
>
> If the training program treats its consumers the same whether they
> own their dog or simply have custody, what is the advantage to the parties
> for not transferring ownership? In the cases of custody, there is no benefit
> to the consumer, as the guide dog user is just as responsible for the care
> of the dog as if they owned the dog. On the other hand, should the training
> program arbitrarily and capriciously decide to take the dog away, the
> consumer has no recourse. This arrangement is very one-sided and the
> consumer has no protection. The challenge is that most consumers would
> assert their program would not do such a thing. And they may be right, as it
> stands today. Contracts spell out specific conditions under which the
> parties agree to conduct themselves and anything less than ownership puts
> the consumer at risk of interference. This is the very thing that has
> happened at Fidelco. The new administration does not have the same respect
> for the consumer as the previous administration. Fidelco's CEO, Eliot
> Russman, is proud of the section of the agreement that gives Fidelco the
> right to repossess the dog at any time and for any reason. I also believe he
> likes the fact that this absolutist statement is, in his own words, "section
> 'd', like dog!" He made a specific emphasis of this fact when we spoke about
> it. What an oxymoron! And then he went on to share that, politically, he was
> a Libertarian. Well, so much for individual liberty! In fact, the current
> administration has categorically stated on the record that, in the words of
> their COO, Julie Unwinn, consumers have no rights because they do not pay
> for the dog!
>
> One may trust the current administration of the program from which
> they receive their dogs but that, too, could change overnight! Ownership
> agreements protect both parties equally. Custody agreements are unilateral.
> Consumers have no rights under such arrangements; all the rights are on the
> side of the program. And this is freedom of choice?
>
> Fraternally yours,
> Marion Gwizdala
>
>
>
> Fraternally yours,
> Marion Gwizdala
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Aleeha Dudley via
> nagdu
> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 6:01 PM
> To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
> Cc: Aleeha Dudley
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] a Straw Argument: Freedom of choice?
>
> I think what she meant was that we have a choice to go to whichever school
> we choose. This means that if we want ownership, we should go to a school
> that offers it. While I do not agree with this sentiment, I do believe that
> that was the meaning behind the message.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 5:40 PM, Danielle Ledet via nagdu
>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
> wrote:
>>
>> Marian, agree with regards to Sandra's story. OMG, that the GDB
>> representative would publicly state that at convention and then,
>> totally back out one-on-one over the phone! I wonder if Mike was
>> dismissed for allowing your voice to be heard? I think tina meant that
>> it was her choice to vote either way on the resolution.
>>
>>> On 8/25/15, Sherry Gomes via nagdu <nagdu at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>> I wonder why the schools that don't give ownership immediately seem
>>> to think that a blind person is more likely to abuse, neglect or
>>> misuse a dog than a sighted person who goes down to the humane
>>> society, fills out a few papers and walks off with a new pet. T me,
>>> that's what conditional ownership implies. We don't trust you to take
>>> care of your dog in the best way, so we're going to withhold
>>> ownership until we decide you are worthy. And yes, I have gotten all
>>> my dogs from GDB, so I attend a school with conditional ownership.
>>> and I don't like it. I have other reasons for going to GDB, but I
>>> don't like their ownership policy and have been trying to get on
>>> their alumni board, specifically so I can try to argue for a policy
>>> change. Not that I really think it will do any good.
>>>
>>> Sherry
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Michael
>>> Hingson via nagdu
>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 2:06 PM
>>> To: 'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'
>>> Cc: Michael Hingson; 'Tina Thomas'
>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] a Straw Argument: Freedom of choice?
>>>
>>> Actually Tina,
>>>
>>> There is more than one school in each of those countries. However,
>>> people from both of those lands have traveled to the U.S. as well as
>>> other countries to get their guide dogs.
>>>
>>> The freedom of choice issue notwithstanding the schools offering
>>> conditional ownership and/or no ownership continue to hold in one
>>> form or another to old ideas of guide dog ownership and the
>>> "obligations" of the schools. You are right that they don't get on
>>> board, but that is because they don't want to and often this is
>>> because they do not value blind people the way we do.
>>> While they might deny this their arguments are the same ones we have
>>> heard many times before.
>>>
>>> Let's turn it around. You receive your guide dogs from a school that
>>> does and always has granted ownership right from the start. You see
>>> the value of this. Why are you not fighting harder to insure that all
>>> guide dog users who go to all guide dog schools here get the same
>>> opportunity? Isn't that what the fight for civil rights is all about?
>>>
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>>
>>>
>>> Michael Hingson
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Tina
>>> Thomas via nagdu
>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 12:51 PM
>>> To: 'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'
>>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>>> Cc: Tina Thomas <judotina48kg at gmail.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] a Straw Argument: Freedom of choice?
>>>
>>> Marion- If my argument of freedom of choice is as thin as you make it
>>> out to be, then why haven't the schools who have conditional
>>> ownership got on board with you and others on this list way of
>>> thinking. Also, in the UK and South Korea there is only one guide dog
>>> school covering those respective countries and the consumer's
>>> residing there either adhere to the policies of those schools or they
>>> don't get a dog.
>>> Tina
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Marion
>>> Gwizdala via nagdu
>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 10:55 AM
>>> To: 'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'
>>> Cc: Marion Gwizdala
>>> Subject: [nagdu] a Straw Argument: Freedom of choice?
>>>
>>> Tina,
>>>
>>> I know you assert you voted against the resolution on the grounds
>>> of freedom of choice. I am confused, though, on what choice of the
>>> consumer is limited by affording unconditional ownership upon
>>> completion
> of training.
>>> Is
>>> it the choice to be protected from unwarranted interference by the
>>> training program? Is it the choice to have the dog removed
>>> arbitrarily and without cause? Is it the choice to be fearful that
>>> the program might get a call from someone who decides to retaliate
>>> against and individual by filing a false report of abuse? Is it the
>>> choice of being hesitant to contact the training program to seek
>>> assistance on a behavioral or safety issue because the program may
>>> think the user is incompetent and might take the dog away from them?
>>> Can you please explain what freedom is impinged upon by transferring
>>> unconditional ownership upon completion of training? Asserting that
>>> ownership denies guide dog users freedom of choice seems illogical to me!
>>>
>>> I am of the opinion that providing ownership upon completion of
>>> training does not compromise this freedom of choice; rather, it
>>> enhances it.
>>> Let me give you a specific example from the agreement I have with the
>>> guide dog training program from which I received Sergeant. I guess I
>>> am a bit at fault for not reading the agreement more closely;
>>> however, within the agreement, it states that I will not let anyone
>>> else use my guide dog. I suppose writing this message could
>>> compromise my relationship with GDF, but I am confident in my ability
>>> to make choices about what is best for my guide dog and what are
>>> acceptable practices.
>>>
>>> As many of you know, my wife, merry, is an experienced guide dog
>>> user who is now between guide dogs. Last week she attended a business
>>> function in an area in which she was unfamiliar. She asked me if she
>>> could use Sarge for the day and I had no problem with that. Now, if
>>> GDF wanted to, I guess they could say I breached their contract and
>>> take my dog away from me; however, I also feel that, in the spirit of
>>> ownership, I have the right to allow my wife to work my dog, if I
>>> wish.
>>>
>>> Now, I suppose it could be argued that the resolution limits
>>> freedom of choice by not giving consumers the option of owning their
>>> dog
> or not.
>>> If,
>>> as the training programs assert, there is no difference in the way
>>> one is treated or the services offered during and after the
>>> probationary period why do the programs still have such a
>>> paternalistic policy? The answer came from the representative of
>>> Leader dogs for the Blind during our panel discussion, and
>>> explanation that, like the assertion of freedom of choice, is a
>>> questionable explanation: The donors want it! Really? Are donors
>>> really conditioning their support of a training program on this
>>> policy or is it an explanation that sounds good but has no merit? I
> contend it is the latter.
>>> In fact, I would venture to guess that a vast majority of donors do
>>> not even know what Leader's ownership policy is, let alone make
>>> donation decisions based upon it!
>>> Asserting that the resolution limits freedom of choice is that it
>>> sounds good on the face of it but holds no water. Those programs that
>>> transfer ownership upon completion of training offer no fewer
>>> services than those who retain such ownership. Furthermore, those
>>> programs that transfer ownership after a probationary period do not
>>> offer any more limited services to their consumers once ownership is
>>> transferred than they do prior to the transfer. The major difference
>>> is that one voluntarily signs away their rights to the dog with which
>>> they will form an emotional bond, an investment that, in my opinion,
>>> is far greater than any the program has in the dog.
>>> Rather than the resolution limiting one's freedom of choice, it
>>> actually enhances that freedom by allowing blind people to choose
>>> what they feel is best for them and their dogs, rather than
>>> subjugating them to the custodial policies and practices of a
>>> training program that asserts they know what is best. How is such an
>>> assertion congruent with the philosophy of self-determination held by
>>> the
> National Federation of the blind?
>>>
>>> Fraternally yours,
>>> Marion Gwizdala
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Tina
>>> Thomas via nagdu
>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 11:28 AM
>>> To: 'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'
>>> Cc: Tina Thomas
>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Cause for Concern was Naming names
>>>
>>> Hello Everyone- I want to reiterate that I voted no on the
>>> unconditional ownership resolution because of freedom of choice. As
>>> I've said, there are schools in this country that offer unconditional
>>> ownership and it is up to the consumer to decide what program suits
>>> their needs the best. Now, I'll go back under my rock and work on
>>> cagdu business. *smile* Have an awesome day everyone! Oh and for
>>> those of us who are experiencing hot weather, stay cool and give you
>>> dogs
> water.
>>> Tina
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Marion
>>> Gwizdala via nagdu
>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 7:46 AM
>>> To: 'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'
>>> Cc: Marion Gwizdala
>>> Subject: [nagdu] Cause for Concern was Naming names
>>>
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> I think Susan's story is less about what happened 40 years ago and
>>> more about what could potentially happen now if guide dog training
>>> programs do not grant unconditional ownership upon completion of
>>> training. When I sat on Southeastern Guide dogs' Graduate Advisory
>>> Council, I was a lone voice advocating for ownership. Coincidentally,
>>> I was the only officially appointed consumer representative. Though
>>> most other members were affiliated with the ACB, none of them sat on
>>> the GAC as an official representative of that organization. Those
>>> affiliated with the ACB, especially one person, said "We don't want
>>> to hear NFB rhetoric in these meetings!" Mike Sergeant quickly
>>> intervened to say that my voice would be heard and asked some
>>> questions about my stand. I was eventually able to help others
>>> understand that my position was not a reflection of the current
>>> administration of SEGDI but a desire to create sound, long-term
>>> policies to protect consumers from interference should a less
>>> responsive administration be seated in the future. During the
>>> following meeting, the GAC proposed unconditional ownership upon
>>> completion of training.
>>>
>>>
>>> Only a few short years later, Mike Sergeant was dismissed and
>>> consumers voiced their dissatisfaction with the decision. We
>>> protested outside the gates of SEGDI and asked to be heard. SEGDI
>>> called the Sheriff's office to make us leave; however, we were on
>>> public property and could not be forced to disband. We have it on
>>> excellent authority that SEGDI videorecorded the protest and created
>>> a blacklist of those who expressed their dissatisfaction. I often
>>> wonder what might have happened if we had not been given ownership of
>>> our dogs.
>>>
>>> Though many opposed the resolution concerning ownership, I believe
>>> the opposition was less about the terms of the resolution and more
>>> about loyalty to those programs that do not grant such ownership.
>>> Some argue that the program must have a good reason for their
>>> policies, though the only reason we have been given is that their
>>> donors want it. With all due respect, I don't believe the donors have
>>> really weighed in on this nor that they have the understanding to
>>> make such a decision. Others contend it is in the best interest of
>>> the dog; however, those programs transferring ownership do have
>>> processes available to them to protect the dogs from abuse or neglect
>>> without reserving such power and influence over their consumers'
>>> lives.
>>>
>>> I believe the resolution will come up again and, when it does, it
>>> will pass. For the time, though, there are more important issues with
>>> which NAGDU is focused. Also, we will be more apt to make our
>>> membership aware of the instances in which training programs insert
>>> themselves without just cause. I do believe, though, there will
>>> always be those who will assert there must be a good reason and
>>> defend the paternalistic attitudes of the training programs.
>>>
>>> We would like the programs to comply with our requests for new
>>> policies and will continue to advocate for such policy changes. We
>>> will also continue to educate our members about how such policies are
>>> incongruent with our philosophy and overcome the objections raised.
>>> Lastly, we will continue to press those who have publicly stated they
>>> are willing to discuss these policies but privately tell us they have
>>> no interest in doing so. Such was the case when Christine Benninger,
>>> Executive Director of Guide Dogs for the Blind stated during our 2014
>>> meeting she would discuss this with us. When I spoke with her on the
>>> telephone, she told me GDB had no desire to discuss this with us and
>>> no intention to change their policy. Such unprincipled behavior
>>> demonstrates lack of integrity and is cause for concern.
>>>
>>> Fraternally yours,
>>> Marion Gwizdala
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Debby
>>> Phillips via nagdu
>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 8:44 AM
>>> To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users;
>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>> Cc: Debby Phillips
>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Naming names
>>>
>>> Just a thought about names. If I went to a great restaurant, but it
>>> was forty years ago, I probably wouldn't share the name, because 1.
>>> the restaurant might not even be there. 2. If the restaurant still
>>> exists, it might not be the same great place.
>>> So why would I share a bad experience with an instructor that I had
>>> forty years ago? I admit that I have done so, but hopefully not
>>> publicly as in email. If I have, I apologize. It's not fair
>>> to that person. Debby and Nova
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/judotina48kg%40gma
>>> il.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/judotina48kg%40gma
>>> il.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/mike%40michaelhing
>>> son.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/sherriola%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/singingmywayin%40g
>>> mail.com
>>
>>
>> --
>> Danielle
>>
>> Email: singingmywayin at gmail.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/blindcowgirl1993%40
>> gmail.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/judotina48kg%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/pickrellrebecca%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/pawpower4me%40gmail.com
More information about the NAGDU
mailing list