Years ago the greyhound
adoption community adopted the home visit as a standard to learn about the home
and family life first hand in order to ensure greyhounds were adopted into
good, safe homes. In reality the concept of the home visit started because a group
adopted dogs to a “home” only to find out later the “home” was not a home but
was a bogus address.
As time has gone by,
debate about adding additional checks (example: background check, financial
check, etc.) to the home visit.
What have we done, or
should do, to ensure the self-proclaimed hero’s, leaders, volunteers in our
organizations are on the up & up? Do we do anything to ensure the
individuals we give our dogs to are indeed the good individuals they say or
perhaps we determine the quality of the individual by their Internet
persona?
Would you place a
greyhound with an individual who has a history of using animals for
dogfighting?
Is it wise to elect an
individual in the position of group treasurer if they have been fired from jobs
due to embezzlement?
Can someone with an
unaddressed drinking problem truly be able to evaluate the personality of a
greyhound?
Should a convicted child
molester run meet and greets or have any participation in family friendly
greyhound outings?
If individuals are drug
tested as a requirement of their jobs, shouldn't those in the greyhound
adoption community or non-profit advocates who receive a salary or draw a
salary from donations also be drug tested?
Are there ways to
improve the knowledge obtained prior to placing a greyhound with an individual?
Will new procedures be enacted
to make sure group volunteers and leaders have no criminal backgrounds that
would present a liability to a group or event?
How can you claim to
truly know everyone you have never met that you friend in social media?
What risks are you
willing to take with someone you do not know?
No comments:
Post a Comment