[NAGDU] Ownership comments South east situation

[Jimmy]

Dear Mike,
 Thank you for your info. Yes, it was told the resolution would be proposed right before convention. But there was no discussion from the board  or input taken from all other members as to if they felt the same. It was just a couple of individuals , as you said, that wanted this pushed in the resolutions. I believe, and I am sure many others, that if  Nagdu or any other organization wants to represent a issue a certain way , it should at least be discussed by all members and all members given the opportunity to give feedback, not just being told this is what we are going to do. Further, there has been no factual proof and full disclosure as to the reasons for any of the other instances. No actual number has been given as to how many other times this was happened. Actually, in 2015 this was asked. The reply was  " I am not certain exactly how many." We are thus assuming that these instances were not justified. There are instances where dog users abuse and do not treat their in animals appropriately. I have heard and others have commented at our conventions how some treat their guide. I feel sorry and are concerned about some of the dog's safety as well. So, without the facts, is it really a blind issue  or is it  a poor care issue. Animal abuse is not limited to the sighted population. And just because a person is addressed by a guide dog school  does not automatically make the actions discriminatory. Without any proof, facts, and stats, we are just assuming.If there is a pattern, where are the numbers? Where are the circumstances for each one of those situations. Every situation is also different. We cannot assume one situation is the same as every other. 
Now saying that, I again feel having a universal board/committee that
If you do not agree with the contract of the guide dog school  regarding ownership, then why do you sign the contract? As mentioned in my previous email, it is foolish to sign a contract that you have not read or agree to. If you do not agree with the school, go somewhere else.If a school. Like SOutheastern, noticed that it's consumers no longer applied for their school because of their ownership policy, they would have to take a look into their policies . This, however is not the case. Many of the schools, including Southeastern, have waiting lists as long as six months.Personally, I like having choice as a consumer. I do not want all model cars to be required to look the same and have the same features. I do not want all clothing to be one particular color,material, or design. As consumers and living in a free country, we have the right to choose what works for us.FInally, alienating ourselves from the schools, constantly attacking and disrespectfully addressing guests at our Nagdu seminars will not improve the situation either. That is why you see most of the visiting guide dog schools elsewhere during our program and the majority of NFBG guide dog users elsewhere during our meetings. If we are going to accomplish any changes, we first need the voices of all members to be heard and respected. The body should be the voice, not the top leaders of the organization.Next, we need to rebuild the relationships with the schools. If we cannot even have a dialogue with the schools and try to work together, how do you expect change? 
James Alan Boehm
Phone: 901-483-1515
Personal Email: jimmydagerman80 at gmail.com
Refer NFB correspondences to:
secretary at nfb-tn.org

"Blindness never limits- Low expectations do! Live the life you want!"

> On Jan 18, 2017, at 9:44 AM, Michael Hingson <mike at michaelhingson.com> wrote:
> 
> Jimmy,
> 
> Actually the board and thus the membership was informed that individuals
> were presenting a resolution in 2015. The original resolution did not come
> from the board but from two people. NAGDU did hear the resolutions at our
> first convention meeting that year.
> 
> Nagdu is not, as such, a judge nor a jury. We will not get all the facts
> about cases where schools remove dogs from their handlers. Nevertheless
> there is a pattern, when such cases occur, that seems to show that schools
> act in a high-handed way and do not have the best interests of their
> graduates at heart. 
> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> 
> Michael Hingson
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NAGDU [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Jimmy via NAGDU
> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 4:49 AM
> To: National Association of Guide Dog Users Gwizdala <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
> Cc: Jimmy <jimmydagerman80 at gmail.com>
> Subject: [NAGDU] Ownership comments South east situation
> 
> Regarding the ownership issue, it seems this subject has been going on for a
> long time. I've believed that this  has been resented to the resolutions
> committee in 2016 and possibly in the past conventions and has not passed.
> When the resolution was presented to the resolution committee, the Nagdu
> board and its members were not informed that this would be presented to the
> resolution committee or given the opportunity to discuss the proposition to
> the resolution committee before the convention. I would think if NAGDU would
> want to present a resolution, all board members, including all other
> members, should have the opportunity to voice their opinions and vote as to
> if the majority feel a resolution is needed.
> Keep in mind these points. There have only been a few instances of what
> happened to the Southeastern graduate. In the other cases, and I am sure it
> will be claimed there have been numerous occurrences, we have not been given
> all the facts of each instance so that a informed decision or full
> understanding is made.Theoretically, one of those instances may of been
> justified; but then to say without providing facts on each case that all the
> other situations were discriminatory and improper without facts and proof of
> each case is not compelling. If you want to claim all the other situations,
> we need the facts on those cases as well.As far as the situation in Florida,
> we still have not heard indisputable facts as to all aspects of the
> situation. What has been presented are assumptions, hear  say,and lack of
> indesputable fact. A person should not assume or make an claim without all
> of the facts. Unfortunately, the individual ,regardless of the
> circumstances, signed documents from someone they did not really know and
> did not read the writing. That is a horrible idea.
> Next point: This point has been mentioned so many times. As in choosing a
> university or place of employment, choosing to rent or lease a home or car,
> you do your homework and choose which  program/university, or financial
> program works bests for you. If  ownership is important to you and you are
> weary of losing your dog, do not go to that school. There are schools that
> offer complete ownership. YOu have options. If you don't like it, then you
> should consider the $50,000 the school paid and invested in that dog, and I
> am sure they will provide you ownership.I understand that some say it is the
> whole perspective and precedence of just not being able to own your own
> dog.It is assumed that the schools must be undoubtedly not giving ownership
> because of low expectations etc.BUt let's do some math. You have a school
> that has 12 classes a month with 25 students. This gives you about 300
> students you are training and providing dogs to each year. Multiply this by
> $50,000 of the total cost of each dog in the program and you get $15
> million. SO, my point to consider, if you investing and spending $15 million
> a year, you want to make sure the dogs are in good  hands, cared for, and
> that your product is being used in such a way the customer is benefiting and
> your organization is being reflected positively.Now, my consideration is to
> , instead of trying to force a company/organization to change their policy
> because you assume they have bad intentions, take a different perspective.
> Approach the issue from a different angle. What if we tried to work with the
> schools, rather than constantly criticize and ridicule them. Why do you
> think  fewer and fewer schools and their representatives attend our meetings
> and are not willing to participate? So instead, what if we worked on our
> relationships with the schools. Then, propose schools  put into place a
> committee or have a universal committee that all the schools implement. This
> committee could review and investigate any claims or reports of abuse or
> poor treatment of their guide dog.; then, they could report to thee involved
> school with the full investigative findings.This may not change all of the
> schools policies to give full ownership, but it would put into place a
> universal process to ensure just due process and investigation.That way,
> there  are no doubts or question if a dog was taken for no reason.
> In summary, I think we need to not let our emotions and our own agenda get
> in the way of what is factual and true.If there are countless other removals
> of dogs from their owners, I want to see the proof of each of those
> instances, and not just hearsay. I want numbers and facts.I want better
> relationships with the schools.I want us  to consider alternative approaches
> to the ownership issues if the body and board feel this is important.More
> so, we should consider alternatives to ensuring that due process takes place
> when a report is given to a school and not automatically assume the school
> is a bad guy trying to take every opportunity to repossess their
> dogs.Finally, If one of us invested $15 million a year to a product,  most
> of us would not give it away, no questions asked. And it not because we
> don't trust our customer. It is because we invested a lot of time and money
> into our product and we want what is best for the product and the customer.
> The way the dog and client team work and demonstrate themselves reflects on
> the blind community, us as federationists, and reflects on the school where
> the dog guide came from. This is not a black and white issue. There  are
> many facets to this issue. The federation body has spoken as to how they
> feel based on the failing of the resolution. But if this issue wants to be
> proposed again to the federation  body, the whole Nagdu body, including
> board and members, should have an opportunity to voice their opinions and
> decide together if we want the issue to go to resolutions once more.That did
> not happen in the past, and that is probably part of the reason why the
> resolution fell on it's face.Those  are just my thoughts and do not reflect
> on the board or the whole body's opinion. As a board member, I think all of
> our members should sound out their thoughts.We could also consider putting
> together a  accessible poll or survey to see  where the whole  NAGDU body
> stands on this issue.    
> Phone: 901-483-1515
> Personal Email: jimmydagerman80 at gmail.com Refer NFB correspondences to:
> secretary at nfb-tn.org
> 
> "Blindness never limits- Low expectations do! Live the life you want!"
> _______________________________________________
> 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%40michaelhingson.com
>