[nagdu] Ownership continued
melissa R green
graduate56 at juno.com
Sun Aug 30 01:10:59 UTC 2015
I believe that if more
handlers would come forward
and share their stories, it
may change views of ownership.
It will still give people the
freedom to choose a guide dog
program. As I have stated,
many people were hooked on du
process and how schools would
be threatened with a lawsuit
for refusing to give a dog to
someone or for taking a dog
away. It is a complicated
issue.
Warmly,
Melissa R. Green and Pj
It is 'where we are' that
should make all the
difference, whether we believe
we belong there or not.
-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu
[mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.o
rg] On Behalf Of Sherry Gomes
via nagdu
Sent: Wednesday, August 26,
2015 5:58 AM
To: 'NAGDU Mailing List, the
National Association of Guide
Dog Users'
Cc: Sherry Gomes
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Ownership
continued
I absolutely agree with you
Dan. I just never looked at
the big picture and
thought of all the other
implications of conditional
ownership until about
ten or so years ago. There's a
much bigger picture and it
really has nothing
to do with what kind of a
handler I or anyone else may
be.
Sherry
-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu
[mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.o
rg] On Behalf Of Dan Weiner
via
nagdu
Sent: Wednesday, August 26,
2015 5:35 AM
To: 'NAGDU Mailing List, the
National Association of Guide
Dog Users'
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Cc: Dan Weiner
<dcwein at dcwein.cnc.net>
Subject: [nagdu] Ownership
continued
Hi all.
I will quote you, Sherri, not
to flame you but just I wanted
to use a quote
from your post to illustrate
something. You said you
weren't worried about
ownership and I quote:
I was confident they'd never
take away my dog arbitrarily
because I knew I
was a very good handler and my
dogs received the best of care
and love and
work I could give.
So many times during ownership
discussions I've had either
with different
schools I was attending or
fellow grads it is assumed
that if the schools
try to take away a dog or
reclaim the dog it is because
the handler did
something wrong and of course
everyone is convinced that
they wouldn't have
that happen to them because of
the quoted reason above.
I think guide dog users I've
met over the years, by and
large, ninety
percent or more do the best to
keept heir dogs healthy and
happy so
therefore a school may indeed
have another reason to reclaim
a dog than
supposed abuse or misuse.
When I've gone to schools that
held ownership
even for say 2 years there was
alwaysys the concern in t
hback of my mind
that if I in quotes "didn't do
things right" that something
would happen so
you did tend to be careful
what you said about things to
your school. Just
consider this, guys when
thinking about ownership. A
school retaining
ownership grants the
organization power over you if
nothing else
psychological power.
I know we've beaten this to
death but I thought I'd weigh
in.
Yours most sincerely,
Dan the man with Parker the
hound dog
-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu
[mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.o
rg] On Behalf Of Sherry Gomes
via
nagdu
Sent: Wednesday, August 26,
2015 5:20 AM
To: 'NAGDU Mailing List,the
National Association of Guide
Dog Users'
Cc: Sherry Gomes
Subject: Re: [nagdu] a Straw
Argument: Freedom of choice?
Yes, that's it for me. When I
applied for my first dog, in
the seventies,
GDB was the only school who
would give a person with my
physical conditions
a guide dog. I was seventeen
and not thinking then about
issues like
ownership, and for years I
didn't think about it. I was
confident they'd
never take away my dog
arbitrarily because I knew I
was a very good handler
and my dogs received the best
of care and love and work I
could give.
Eventually, after some other
life issues and some things
that happened in
regard to GDB and me and GDB
in general that made me want
the security of
ownership. So, I started
getting ownership as soon as I
could, which as
after a year. Last time, I
applied at several schools,
which was the first
time forty years I'd ever
considered it. The other
school that would
probably have accepted me
wanted to put me in a special
needs program and
told me it would take at least
two years to get a dog,
whereas GDB had
already accepted me for
retraining and had a dog in
mind. GDB had never put
me in any kind of special
needs program, and they had
forty years of finding
me the right dog, even as my
physical condition grows worse
as I get older.
So, I felt that getting the
right dog for me without
having to wait two
years had to take precedence
over other considerations. I
would have been
very happy if I could have
gotten ownership upon
graduation, as I believe we
all should, but getting the
right dog was most important.
This will probably
end up being my last dog, as
I'm not sure I can make it
through training
again, and I have ownership of
her now, but even if this is
my last, I won't
stop working for the rights of
all guide dog handlers,
including ownership.
Sherry
-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu
[mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.o
rg] On Behalf Of Star Gazer
via
nagdu
Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015
6:52 PM
To: 'NAGDU Mailing List, the
National Association of Guide
Dog Users'
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Cc: Star Gazer
<pickrellrebecca at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [nagdu] a Straw
Argument: Freedom of choice?
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.o
rg] 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.o
rg] 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.o
rg] 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.o
rg] 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.o
rg] 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.o
rg] 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.o
rg] 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.o
rg] 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.o
rg] 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/list
info/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your
list options or get your
account info for
>> nagdu:
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/opti
ons/nagdu_nfbnet.org/blind411%
40verizon
>> .net
>>
>>
>>
______________________________
_________________
>> nagdu mailing list
>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/list
info/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your
list options or get your
account info for
>> nagdu:
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/opti
ons/nagdu_nfbnet.org/judotina4
8kg%40gma
>> il.com
>>
>>
>>
______________________________
_________________
>> nagdu mailing list
>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/list
info/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your
list options or get your
account info for
>> nagdu:
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/opti
ons/nagdu_nfbnet.org/blind411%
40verizon
>> .net
>>
>>
>>
______________________________
_________________
>> nagdu mailing list
>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/list
info/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your
list options or get your
account info for
>> nagdu:
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/opti
ons/nagdu_nfbnet.org/judotina4
8kg%40gma
>> il.com
>>
>>
>>
______________________________
_________________
>> nagdu mailing list
>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/list
info/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your
list options or get your
account info for
>> nagdu:
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/opti
ons/nagdu_nfbnet.org/mike%40mi
chaelhing
>> son.com
>>
>>
>>
______________________________
_________________
>> nagdu mailing list
>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/list
info/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your
list options or get your
account info for
>> nagdu:
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/opti
ons/nagdu_nfbnet.org/sherriola
%40gmail.
>> com
>>
>>
>>
______________________________
_________________
>> nagdu mailing list
>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/list
info/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your
list options or get your
account info for
>> nagdu:
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/opti
ons/nagdu_nfbnet.org/singingmy
wayin%40g
>> mail.com
>>
>
>
> --
> Danielle
>
> Email:
singingmywayin at gmail.com
>
>
______________________________
_________________
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/list
info/nagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your
list options or get your
account info for
nagdu:
>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/opti
ons/nagdu_nfbnet.org/blindcowg
irl1993%40
> gmail.com
______________________________
_________________
nagdu mailing list
nagdu at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/list
info/nagdu_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your
list options or get your
account info for nagdu:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/opti
ons/nagdu_nfbnet.org/blind411%
40verizon.net
______________________________
_________________
nagdu mailing list
nagdu at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/list
info/nagdu_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your
list options or get your
account info for nagdu:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/opti
ons/nagdu_nfbnet.org/judotina4
8kg%40gmail.com
______________________________
_________________
nagdu mailing list
nagdu at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/list
info/nagdu_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your
list options or get your
account info for nagdu:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/opti
ons/nagdu_nfbnet.org/pickrellr
ebecca%40gmail.c
om
______________________________
_________________
nagdu mailing list
nagdu at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/list
info/nagdu_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your
list options or get your
account info for nagdu:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/opti
ons/nagdu_nfbnet.org/sherriola
%40gmail.com
______________________________
_________________
nagdu mailing list
nagdu at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/list
info/nagdu_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your
list options or get your
account info for nagdu:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/opti
ons/nagdu_nfbnet.org/dcwein%40
dcwein.cnc.net
______________________________
_________________
nagdu mailing list
nagdu at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/list
info/nagdu_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your
list options or get your
account info for nagdu:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/opti
ons/nagdu_nfbnet.org/sherriola
%40gmail.com
______________________________
_________________
nagdu mailing list
nagdu at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/list
info/nagdu_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your
list options or get your
account info for nagdu:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/opti
ons/nagdu_nfbnet.org/graduate5
6%40juno.com
More information about the NAGDU
mailing list