[nagdu] a Straw Argument: Freedom of choice?
Marion Gwizdala
blind411 at verizon.net
Wed Aug 26 01:07:01 UTC 2015
Tina,
I agree that consumers have the choice to attend any school they
wish. What I do not understand is how the ownership policy or lack thereof
impacts that choice. Though you may not have heard of issues related to a
program removing a dog without cause, this does not mean it doesn't happen.
These issues have come to my attention but I am not at liberty to discuss
them. What I will share is that, when Mike and I left the Resolutions
Committee meeting after presenting our resolutions, someone did come to us
in tears relating how his dog was removed without cause and under
questionable pretenses.
I will do what I can ethically do to encourage others to allow me to
share their stories; however, many times the best way for me to help them is
to ensure their confidentiality. I know this doesn't help the cause of
advocating for ownership but ethical principles supersede other issues.
Those who entrust their stories to me on the condition of confidentiality
cannot have their trust breached for the sake of supporting this cause.
However, I will share a story I am able to share under separate cover in
which the outcome could have been very different if the consumers involved
did not own their dogs. For now, though, it is late and my family takes
priority!
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 7:42 PM
To: 'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'
Cc: Tina Thomas
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/blind411%40verizon.net
More information about the NAGDU
mailing list