[nagdu] a Straw Argument: Freedom of choice?
Cindy Ray
cindyray at gmail.com
Fri Aug 28 12:55:43 UTC 2015
I don't think it is yours to argue the point the moderator is making if
someone was rude, and I agree with Marsha's response. I think we need to be
very sensitive in what we are saying here because first of all, some people
here were once from these countries, but more important the internet reaches
here the countries mentioned and people from all over the world come to
visit us. It serves no purpose to say things that can be hurtful.
Cindy Lou Ray, Moderator
cindyray at gmail.com
-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Howard J. Levine
via nagdu
Sent: Friday, August 28, 2015 7:47 AM
To: 'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Cc: Howard J. Levine <WB2HWW at earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [nagdu] a Straw Argument: Freedom of choice?
Hi I don't think she was rude, she was just telling it like it is. We may
not like truth but that way it is. I have many months over in Europe and as
blind people we have it much better here in the United States. I rather have
sistem of guide dog schools that we have. I rather have private school then
have the government run then.
-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Marsha Drenth via
nagdu
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 6:28 PM
To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
Cc: Marsha Drenth
Subject: Re: [nagdu] a Straw Argument: Freedom of choice?
Rebecca,
Um, people from UK and Asian countries are not on the bottom of the food
chain. Your comment is rude and uncalled for. Please try to remember to be
nice.
Thank you,
Marsha drenth, NAGDU List Moderator
email: marsha.drenth at gmail.com
Sent with my IPhone
Please note that this email communication has been sent using my iPhone. As
such, I may have used dictation and had made attempts to mitigate errors.
Please do not be hesitant to ask for clarification as necessary.
> On Aug 27, 2015, at 6:08 PM, Star Gazer via nagdu <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
wrote:
>
> 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%40gmai
> l.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%40gmai
> l.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%40g
> mail.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/marsha.drenth%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/wb2hww%40earthlink.net
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.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/cindyray%40gmail.com
More information about the NAGDU
mailing list