Should An Assistance Dog Ever Need Rescue Help?

[Brierley]

It all sounds very strange as I imagine that there are many prospective owners out there for this type of dog. Most are retired around the age of seven, so still in their prime as far as pet dog ownership goes.

 

I've attended talks given by quite a couple of the assistance dog charities and they always assure that retired dogs are found homes by themselves. If what you are saying is correct, it appears that there may have been some 'porkies' told along the way if it is one of the charities concerned.

[Ian]

This is why things should be out in the open so we know who not to gift dogs to.

Its a terrible thing to do to a loyal dog.

The charity if it had morals would inform the rescue it came from so they would have the choice. You would think that a trained dog could be offered to someone else waiting or something.

 

Perhaps a letter writing campaign asking policy may persuade them to take responsibility might help future dogs.

 

 

On this one I do largely agree with you (I'm told that this dog didnt come to the charity from rescue but was sourced by the client) and it's in part why I started the thread. Although I have not identified the Charity here my letter informed them of action I have already taken (a complaint to the Charity Commission that this is in contravention of their stated purposes and the basis on which people have given donations) and others I was intending - including advising every rescue I could find of the story.

 

I have had three messages today and spoke to the Secretary to The Trustees this evening who tells me that there has been a certain amount of mis-information about this dog and the circumstances however all dogs are now (unlike at the time this one was trained) signed over to the Charity and hence this could not happen again.

 

I will not post the full details at this point as I have suggested that they provide a formal / public statement on the discussion and postings which have previously been made (both here and on DP) which she has said she would try & do. Something may therefore appear in the next few days.

[Abigailj]

Whilst on holiday recently, I spent the last night in the bar with a family who had a lab bitch just coming into season. They had a poodle lined up to play 'Daddy'. They thought their dog would be upset if it didn't have any pups. they wanted a labradoodle and they wanted their bitch to be the mother because they would know where the pup had come from. I bit my lip most of the night, did mention it could be awkward if pups were sold to the wrong people, returned to them if no longer wanted, bitch got pyrometra etc...

 

At the end of the night I suggested if they wanted to avoid all the hassle, worry and risks of having a litter they could contact the assistance charities because I'm sure one of them (can't remember which) does use labradoodles.

 

Anyway that was just a long winded way of saying I don't think that the scenario you describe is acceptable but I'm not suprised that it does happen

[Ian]

Thankfully "Heidi" - she was signed over to rescue under a "pet name" has thanks to the efforts of The Ark now found her new home.

 

You must judge the integrity of the Charity for yourself - no statement I see and the thread "mysteriously" disappeared from another forum.

[jane-f]

To be honist none of this suprises me,

i was talking to a lady who fosters pups for a well know Charity,

she was recently informed of the death of one of her old foster dogs,

it was placed with a client, who constanly took it out walking for hours,

in the middle of summer in the boiling heat, the Charity never removed the dog from that placement,

needless to say the dog died, after being out walking for hours under the boiling sun,

the foster was deverstated over this as nothing was done about it,

and the dog died through neglect.

[gremlin22]

On this one I do largely agree with you (I'm told that this dog didnt come to the charity from rescue but was sourced by the client) and it's in part why I started the thread. Although I have not identified the Charity here my letter informed them of action I have already taken (a complaint to the Charity Commission that this is in contravention of their stated purposes and the basis on which people have given donations) and others I was intending - including advising every rescue I could find of the story.

 

I have had three messages today and spoke to the Secretary to The Trustees this evening who tells me that there has been a certain amount of mis-information about this dog and the circumstances however all dogs are now (unlike at the time this one was trained) signed over to the Charity and hence this could not happen again.

 

I will not post the full details at this point as I have suggested that they provide a formal / public statement on the discussion and postings which have previously been made (both here and on DP) which she has said she would try & do. Something may therefore appear in the next few days.

 

 

ah.." not signed over to the charity"

so they didn't own the dog in question then..

[Ian]

ah.." not signed over to the charity"

so they didn't own the dog in question then..

 

I have no objection to people quoting me but please ensure that you do so in a full and proper context and do not attempt to skew my words for your own purposes - there is no mention of these words in the quote you have actually cited.

 

The point you refer to however appears to have been in question - dependant upon whether you listen to and believe the Charity or other people involved. Either way you appear to miss the point that the Charity issues the jackets, that both the owner and Charity would know when the dog is due for retirement and could therefore encourage and work with the owner to ensure appropriate care for the existing dog -well before placing a new one. If they have concern for the dogs - as both parties were entitled to do after years of service to them - then who owned the dog did not need to be a point of contention in terms of arranging proper foster care with one of the Charities approved homes after making a mess of the rest of it rather than leave this poor dog distressed in Kennels!

 

The interest from the charity seems to have become far stronger after it became apparent that they were getting (and could quite possibly have been about to get much more) bad publicity and therefore lose out on donations.

 

Whether or not they did own this particular dog did not of course stop them issuing the promised public statement that all dogs today are owned by the Charity and would never be left to an uncertain fate in future.

 

The Charity does after all raise it's money from the public and in failing to take appropriate steps to discourage an owner from these actions could be argued to have breached the basis upon which they do so. That is a matter for the Charity Commission to consider.

Edited May 13, 2007 by Ian