[nagdu] a Straw Argument: Freedom of choice?

Thu Aug 27 22:08:55 UTC 2015

				Right and in the U.K. and South Korea blind
people are pretty low on the food chain. That's not what we want over here,
believe me. 

-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Tina Thomas via
nagdu
Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 3:51 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%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

_______________________________________________
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