Ping: Phil

"Phil P." wrote in message
news

"Kiran" wrote in message
...
If not, I find your conduct far more shameful
than anything that couple did.

Whoa! I think you need to walk a mile in Sherry's shoes before you
criticize how she walks! There's nothing worse than going against your
gut
instincts by placing a cat and finding out later that cat lived a life of
misery and abuse or neglect. Sherry made the right call because she made
it
from her heart with the cat's welfare as her first priority. I would have
made the same call.

The view down on the field is a lot different from the view from the
bleachers.


I think that is a very good way to put it, Phil. By the same token, I
think some very good people in the pet rescue field go a little too far
in screening at times. The view from inside plus the view from outside
perhaps gives us a balanced view?

"misskitty" wrote in message
...

"Phil P." wrote in message
news

"Kiran" wrote in message
...
If not, I find your conduct far more shameful
than anything that couple did.

Whoa! I think you need to walk a mile in Sherry's shoes before you
criticize how she walks! There's nothing worse than going against your
gut
instincts by placing a cat and finding out later that cat lived a life
of
misery and abuse or neglect. Sherry made the right call because she
made
it
from her heart with the cat's welfare as her first priority. I would
have
made the same call.

The view down on the field is a lot different from the view from the
bleachers.


I think that is a very good way to put it, Phil. By the same token, I
think some very good people in the pet rescue field go a little too far
in screening at times.

When you see thousands of cats- some of which you placed yourself-
discarded or neglected for petty and absolutely ridiculous reasons, - I
don't think you would feel those rescuers go a little too far in
pre-adoption screenings. Placing a cat is an awesome responsibility- some
of us just take it more seriously than others.

The view from inside plus the view from outside
perhaps gives us a balanced view?

Difficult for me to answer because my view from the inside sees the results
of the view of those on the outside.

"Phil P." wrote

When you see thousands of cats- some of which you placed yourself-
discarded or neglected for petty and absolutely ridiculous reasons, - I
don't think you would feel those rescuers go a little too far in
pre-adoption screenings. Placing a cat is an awesome responsibility- some
of us just take it more seriously than others.

The view from inside plus the view from outside
perhaps gives us a balanced view?

Difficult for me to answer because my view from the inside sees the
results
of the view of those on the outside.


Also aptly put. I can see your heart and your mind are really in your work.
Kudos to you, Phil P. I wish there were more like you out there.

MaryL -OUT-THE-LITTER wrote:

: How do you define an "ok home"?

Shelter, food, some attention, no intentional abuse or cruelty. Could
be way short of excellence but still be ok. We all have to start
somewhere, learn and develop as we go along, and all will not have the
same spark or dedication, whatever area of life. Even an ok home gives
the cat a life and, even if abandoned later, a shot at another chance.

: There are worse things than death, even though I think it is heart
: breaking to think about those innocent cats and dogs that are killed.
: Haven't you seen any of the reports that have shown neglected
: and abused animals?

Just because some people rape women, I don't have to admire and
support those who have the policy of "protecting" them by
honor-killing. Always with the best intentions of course.

: Unlike you, I think it is an *obligation* of an organization that adopts
: out animals to interview potential adopters and review references.
: Those animals are in the care of these organizations...

Just remember, the "care" includes euthanasia, not for terminal illness
and like, but merely for staying too long.

: and there are many people who would adopt pets for less-than-humane
: motives.

As with all criminals, seek them out and punish them very very harshly.
But again, I would not want human children to be killed just because
some foster parents may be abusive. What is good enough for us is good
enough for our pets.

: Actually, bureaucracies are comprised of citizens. Most of us complain
: about bureaucracies when we are unhappy with the results, then we decry
: those same organizations when they fail to show up or intervene when we
: think that should be done.

Anyone who has actually dealt with a true bureaucracy knows the
difference. No one can pretend that "citizens" were running the show in
either Soviet Union or New Orleans (this is not to say the two are
same, only to highlight the impressive range of the bureaucratic
phenomenon).

But it is true that most people do not pay their democratic dues by
electing good representatives, creating good institutions, and ensuring
good policies.

Anyway, this is a philosophical debate more suited to political ng's,
so I'll stop here.

: To Sherry: I understand your good intentions but the road to hell is
: paved with those. There is nothing in your description to suggest that
: the couple would have been abusive or careless. Maybe they were new and
: nervous, or may be just chatty. If you had nothing but that to turn
: down an adoption, and if your shelter practices euthanasia, will you
: personally guarantee that that particular animal will not be
: euthanised, come what may, no matter what, as long as you have a single
: breath or dollar left? If not, I find your conduct far more shameful
: than anything that couple did.

Phil P. wrote:

: There's nothing worse than going against your gut instincts by
: placing a cat and finding out later that cat lived a life of misery
: and abuse or neglect.

Maybe we have a philosophical difference here, but I can think of one
thing that would be much, much worse for me:

To watch a cat being euthanised, and be able to remember a couple who
wanted to adopt her but I, on my rare stints at the desk, turned them
away against the judgment of regular staff and volunteers who ought to
know better.

: Sherry made the right call because she made it from her heart with
: the cat's welfare as her first priority...

I did ask her how deep her commitment was: "If your shelter practices
euthanasia, will you personally guarantee that that particular animal
will not be euthanised, come what may, no matter what, as long as you
have a single breath or dollar left?"

: The view down on the field is a lot different from the view from the
: bleachers.

Sherry is not the "field". She is a "Board Member" who descends down
from her ivory tower once in a while.

If you remember Sherry's post, you'd see that the real "field"
staff---workers who actually deal with the cats, and man the tasks
everyday---actually disagreed with her.

Anyway, perhaps the bleachers for whom and with whose money the field
functions should take responsibility and reorganize the field. :-)

Thanks for your thoughts.

"misskitty" wrote in message
...

"Phil P." wrote

When you see thousands of cats- some of which you placed yourself-
discarded or neglected for petty and absolutely ridiculous reasons, - I
don't think you would feel those rescuers go a little too far in
pre-adoption screenings. Placing a cat is an awesome responsibility-
some
of us just take it more seriously than others.

The view from inside plus the view from outside
perhaps gives us a balanced view?

Difficult for me to answer because my view from the inside sees the
results
of the view of those on the outside.


Also aptly put. I can see your heart and your mind are really in your
work.
Kudos to you, Phil P. I wish there were more like you out there.

If there were more of me- we'd rumble 'cause we'd never agree! LOL!

"Kiran" wrote in message
...
Phil P. wrote:

: There's nothing worse than going against your gut instincts by
: placing a cat and finding out later that cat lived a life of misery
: and abuse or neglect.

Maybe we have a philosophical difference here, but I can think of one
thing that would be much, much worse for me:

To watch a cat being euthanised, and be able to remember a couple who
wanted to adopt her but I, on my rare stints at the desk, turned them
away against the judgment of regular staff and volunteers who ought to
know better.

How would you feel if you went against your instincts and placed a cat and
found out the owner nailed him to a tree for scratching his sofa? (True
story)

We can play the "what if" game all day. Placing a cat boils down to going
by your instincts based on your experience.

Kiran wrote:
Phil P. wrote:

: There's nothing worse than going against your gut instincts by
: placing a cat and finding out later that cat lived a life of misery
: and abuse or neglect.

Maybe we have a philosophical difference here, but I can think of one
thing that would be much, much worse for me:

To watch a cat being euthanised, and be able to remember a couple who
wanted to adopt her but I, on my rare stints at the desk, turned them
away against the judgment of regular staff and volunteers who ought to
know better.

: Sherry made the right call because she made it from her heart with
: the cat's welfare as her first priority...

I did ask her how deep her commitment was: "If your shelter practices
euthanasia, will you personally guarantee that that particular animal
will not be euthanised, come what may, no matter what, as long as you
have a single breath or dollar left?"

: The view down on the field is a lot different from the view from the
: bleachers.

Sherry is not the "field". She is a "Board Member" who descends down
from her ivory tower once in a while.

If you remember Sherry's post, you'd see that the real "field"
staff---workers who actually deal with the cats, and man the tasks
everyday---actually disagreed with her.

Anyway, perhaps the bleachers for whom and with whose money the field
functions should take responsibility and reorganize the field. :-)

Thanks for your thoughts.

Phil P. wrote:

: How would you feel if you went against your instincts and placed
: a cat and found out the owner nailed him to a tree for scratching
: his sofa? (True story)

Pretty lousy.

: We can play the "what if" game all day. Placing a cat boils down
: to going by your instincts based on your experience.

Fair enough. Others can theorize later but an individual has no choice
but to go by his or her own best judgment.

It is easy to accept Mother Teresa and reject Adolph Hitler, the real
challenge is to make wise compromise calls when things are not black or
white. Why did you stop doing adoptions? Was it the emotional toll, or
did you feel that your experience and involvement, usually virtues,
were beginning to work against making wise compromises?

Just out of curiosity, if you deny an adoption, what is the probablity
of the same cat finding another home rather than be euthanised
eventually, either in your own shelter or whatever statistics you
happen to know?

Kiran wrote:
: There's nothing worse than going against your gut instincts by
: placing a cat and finding out later that cat lived a life of misery
: and abuse or neglect.

Maybe we have a philosophical difference here, but I can think of one
thing that would be much, much worse for me:

It is not a philosophical difference. You don't understand the content
of Phil's paragraph above. When you've seen enough adoptions go bad,
you develop a radar over time and the ability to pick up on nuances
that indicate this is *not* a good home. Never go against gut
instincts.
Animal abusers and neglecters do NOT have "abuser" stamped on their
foreheads. They look as normal as you and I, and they know exactly
*what* to say to gain your approval. For instance, a couple who begins
rattling off about all the pets "they used to have" is a red flag. A
couple who starts rattling off about the kitten they used to have, but
the Rottweiler killed it, is a red flag. I went against gut instincts
once, and adopted a sweet dog to a couple who wanted it "for their
son", who was actually didn't seem that crazy about the dog. They said
the right things. They didn't have a vet reference, but said this was
their first pet. Still, I had really bad vibes about them. They seemed
to have this Lassie/Timmy mold they wanted to cram their son into,
whether the son wanted to or not. We did a home check about 3 weeks
later. It was fine, but I still didn't feel that great about it.
Six months later someone called about a starving dog chained under a
walnut tree who couldn't reach the water, the chain was tangled.
Someone went to check, and it was the Lassie/Timmy family. The dog was
emaciated and dehydrated. We took it straight to the vet. The dog died,
and out of curiousity the vet did a necropsy. The dog's stomach was
full of walnuts, which he had eated to try to survive.
Whose fault was that? It was mine. I should have kept better track of
that dog and done further home checks. I had *bad* red flags, even
thought there was nothing concrete to base it on, and I ignored them.
It was a gorgeous Collie, and someone else would have taken it.
We are not out to find homes where kittens are tossed outside as soon
as the "new" wears off and it's no longer cute. I have other assorted
horror stories, the next time I climb down out of my ivory tower I'll
tell you another one.
BTW, there are worse things than euthanasia. Starving, suffering, being
thrown outdoors, or being killed by dogs are just a few.