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?