Cat Forum / Cat Anecdotes / June 2007
A Rant. (TW maybe)
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Sherry - 09 Jun 2007 06:29 GMT I just have to get this down into words to people that might understand.
I popped into the shelter today, intending to quickly take some photos for the newsletter and leave.
They apparently had just gotten in a 2 or 3 week old kitten and was telling me about it in the office. About that time a volunteer (probably mid-twenties, not a kid)....burst into the front office with the kitten. Its little head was swiveling around and it was completely limp and moaning. The girl said she had dropped it on the concrete. I said, HOW do you DROP a baby kitten? Someone else spoke up and said, she was carrying it around on her shoulder.
I completely at that point lost control of my mouth and pretty much verbally tore her up and took the kitten to euth-ed, and made her go with me. It got much worse after that. As the tirade was winding down I saw a Mason jar full of frogs on the desk, who didn't look like they were doing so hot either. For crying out loud. This is supposed to be a humane society. Whoever caught the frogs wasn't about to admit it to the crazy woman, so I turned them loose and figured I'd better leave before I had a heart attack.
This wasn't even a real volunteer. She was one of those people who's gotten in some kind of trouble, usually hot checks or DUI, and the judge hands down a community service sentence that has to be served at the shelter. In retrospect, ALL these losers should be put through an animal handling class before they're allowed to serve their sentence. But for God's sakes, you'd think a grown woman would have enough SENSE not to do what she did. They're already not allowed to handle the dogs, because we're afraid of someone getting hurt. I never dreamed one would be stupid enough to kill a kitten.
In retrospect, I handled this so badly. What I should have done is called *all* the volunteers in and calmy and rationally given them a lesson in handling infants. But no-o-o-o-o-o. I"m sure they're still talking about the bitch-shrew board member from Hell.
Well, thanks for listening. :-(
Sherry
Stormmee - 09 Jun 2007 07:03 GMT I am sorry, for your upset and the death of the kitten, Lee
> I just have to get this down into words to people that might > understand. [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > Sherry Marina - 09 Jun 2007 07:07 GMT > In retrospect, I handled this so badly. What I should have done is > called *all* the volunteers in and calmy and rationally given them a > lesson in handling infants. But no-o-o-o-o-o. I"m sure they're still > talking about the bitch-shrew board member from Hell. > > Well, thanks for listening. :-( {{{{Sherry}}}} Hind-sight is always 20-20, isn't it. I don't blame you for getting so upset. Don't beat yourself up about it. I'm sure at least that volunteer learned her lesson, and maybe she'll pay it forward.
 Signature Marina, Miranda and Caliban. In loving memory of Frank and Nikki.
MaryL - 09 Jun 2007 07:08 GMT >I just have to get this down into words to people that might > understand. [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > Sherry In this case, I think a rant was called for. I suspect that your very real -- and very justified -- anger may have had a much larger impact that the calm and reasoned group session you describe. If nothing else, it may inspire discussion that will lead to a type of communal learning. Incidentally, this is one of the reasons why I think a sentence of community service sometimes is *not* a good idea. Those who work with animals should be people who love them and will try to give them the best care. At the very least, people who are working under court order should be carefully monitored. Unfortunately, in this case it sounds as if there were witnesses who *also* did nothng to stop what happened. The one "somewhat" comforting aspect is that this clearly was not an act of deliberate cruelty -- it was more an act of stupidity and lack of knowledge.
MaryL
Sherry - 09 Jun 2007 07:22 GMT On Jun 9, 1:08 am, "MaryL" <stanco...@yahoo.comTAKE-OUT-THE-LITTER> wrote:
> >I just have to get this down into words to people that might > > understand. [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > > MaryL- Mary, it is so chaotic there right now that I don't know what to do. The shelter manager (bless her, she is an angel.)...she is out with foot surgery. The assistant manager is good, but she is only one person. She must be the one to greet the public and work the front desk, so she can't be in the back, and in the front at the same time. The kennelmaster is a hard worker, but he is not a "thinker", to say it nicely. That's all the employees, just 3. I feel really bad for not helping out more than I do, but physically I just cannot do it anymore.
Here's my second pet peeve, while I am on a roll. Parents have started just dropping their children off to volunteer! Some of these kids are only 13 or so. BAsically what the shelter employees are doing is free babysitting. They are there to horseplay, not work. Young teens are wonderful for things like socializing kittens and puppies, or walking the dogs. But these kids don't want to work. Their parents don't even bother providing them a means for lunch. That's another situation that has got to change. But it has to be done carefully.
Sherry
Sherry
MaryL - 09 Jun 2007 07:26 GMT > On Jun 9, 1:08 am, "MaryL" <stanco...@yahoo.comTAKE-OUT-THE-LITTER> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 90 lines] > > Sherry The shelter really needs to set a policy to govern volunteers (their qualifications, the work they do, and the training they need before "volunteering" at the shelter), and be firm with it. I realize how important public relations are to a shelter, but there are two *big* reasons why the need to do it -- (1) those animals are their responsibility, and their welfare should come first; and (2) they could be open to a big lawsuit if a child of that age is left unsupervised and is then injured. Personally, I don't think they should accept anyone under the age of 16 unless a parent is willing to stay and work alongside the child. That could be good training, but shelter staff should not be expected to act as babysitters.
MaryL
Sherry - 09 Jun 2007 07:34 GMT On Jun 9, 1:26 am, "MaryL" <stanco...@yahoo.comTAKE-OUT-THE-LITTER> wrote:
> > On Jun 9, 1:08 am, "MaryL" <stanco...@yahoo.comTAKE-OUT-THE-LITTER> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 107 lines] > > MaryL- Hide quoted text - You're right; public relations are *everything* to a shelter. That's how this thing ballooned. First, it was one or two, and they bent the rules because these were children *of* dedicated volunteers and were honestly a great help. Then it just mushroomed in the last week since school let out and I don't think any of the board members had any idea that 8-10 kids were being dumped out to "volunteer" by their parents. Believe me, I worry about liability issues constantly. I think the "parents too" with under-16 yr. old kids is an excellent idea. And even the 16 year olds need to be "scheduled" for certain days, not just when they feel like coming. I need to work on a letter to send home with them.
Sherry
Stormmee - 09 Jun 2007 08:45 GMT and since its public relations you can say something like: since so many of our youth are willing to do such good work we are going to schedule so the whole day is covered, Lee
> On Jun 9, 1:26 am, "MaryL" <stanco...@yahoo.comTAKE-OUT-THE-LITTER> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 126 lines] > > Sherry CatNipped - 13 Jun 2007 22:11 GMT > On Jun 9, 1:26 am, "MaryL" <stanco...@yahoo.comTAKE-OUT-THE-LITTER> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 143 lines] > > Sherry I'm really surprised that they allow "volunteers" under the age of 18 since children can't legally sign a waiver of liability. Does the shelter's legal advisors know this is going on? If not, someone should let them know thast their services will probably be needed shortly to defend the shelter against a parent's lawsuit when one of the kids gets too rough with an animal and is either clawed or bitten (if it is a bad injury, and especially if it involves the face, it could cost the shelter millions above and beyond what their insurance would pay - and the insurance might not pay a cent if they contended the shelter was negligent!). This might be an easy solution to the problem without pissing off the public (blame it on the big bad lawyers, "It's not our fault, we don't have a choice, we can't allow minors on the premises!").
Hugs,
CatNipped
Stormmee - 09 Jun 2007 08:42 GMT the teens can be fixed like this... maybe... before a teen is allowed to volunteer parents and teens must attend X hours of orientation together, during that orientation, say something about lunch hour is provided but parents must provide lunch as there are no funds for such... HTH, just brainstorming, Lee
> On Jun 9, 1:08 am, "MaryL" <stanco...@yahoo.comTAKE-OUT-THE-LITTER> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 83 lines] > > Sherry Jack Campin - bogus address - 09 Jun 2007 19:22 GMT > Here's my second pet peeve, while I am on a roll. Parents have > started just dropping their children off to volunteer! Some of > these kids are only 13 or so. BAsically what the shelter employees > are doing is free babysitting. They are there to horseplay, not > work. In the UK that would be *wildly* illegal. The adults involved in working with kids of that age would need police clearance and the kids would not be allowed to do a damn thing without having been shown systematically through the health and safety issues and having signed each page of the safety manual to verify that they've read and understood it. (I work for a charity. I have done this with teenage volunteers. My arse would be grass if I hadn't).
You wouldn't get much more police attention for showing porn movies at a petting zoo filled with live cobras.
Getting the parents to sign a disclaimer waiving responsibility if their little darlings get rabies might lose some of the unwanted "help". Any workplace in the UK has to do a risk assessment; you would have to mention risks like animal bites, fleas, contact with urine and faeces, toxoplasmosis, violence from antisocial owners of savage dogs, psittacosis from caged birds, terrapin salmonella, anaphylactic shock from peanuts in bird food, all that fun stuff. Most firms just file it away but it has to be available on request, in theory so that anybody working there can know what they might be getting into. With a bit of application you could easily make the health and safety manual so long that any kid applying would need a month to work through it and sign it off.
============== j-c ====== @ ====== purr . demon . co . uk ============== Jack Campin: 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 4760 <http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/> for CD-ROMs and free | fax 0870 0554 975 stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, & Mac logic fonts | mob 07800 739 557
Karen - 09 Jun 2007 21:41 GMT > Here's my second pet peeve, while I am on a roll. Parents have started > just dropping their children off [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Sherry Well, I would say that any kid goofing off must immediately leave the premise. That should be standard.
MaryL - 10 Jun 2007 00:05 GMT >> Here's my second pet peeve, while I am on a roll. Parents have started >> just dropping their children off [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Well, I would say that any kid goofing off must immediately leave the > premise. That should be standard. The problem is, once the shelter permits a minor to be left in their care, they have accepted a considerable level of responsibility. They can't simply require that child to leave, unaccompanied by an adult -- both legal and ethical responsibilities enter the picture.
MaryL
Jack Campin - bogus address - 10 Jun 2007 00:54 GMT >>> Here's my second pet peeve, while I am on a roll. Parents have >>> started just dropping their children off to volunteer! Some of [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > can't simply require that child to leave, unaccompanied by an adult -- > both legal and ethical responsibilities enter the picture. The adult has almost certainly violated some serious laws by leaving the kid there in the first place - with animals of unpredictable temper and unknown illnesses on the premises, it's about as responsible as leaving them to play in a car crushing plant. (And, in the UK, it is flat illegal for adults to have charge of kids that age without passing a police check and having a disclosure certificate to prove it).
The legally appropriate response would probably be to call the emergency social work number and have the kids taken into care on the spot. Treat them as abandoned by deadbeat parents (which they have been).
Any response that even BEGINS to look like the shelter taking on a responsibility they legally can't do is asking for either the civil or criminal law to come down on them like a ton of bricks. It's nuts.
============== j-c ====== @ ====== purr . demon . co . uk ============== Jack Campin: 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 4760 <http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/> for CD-ROMs and free | fax 0870 0554 975 stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, & Mac logic fonts | mob 07800 739 557
MaryL - 10 Jun 2007 02:15 GMT >>>> Here's my second pet peeve, while I am on a roll. Parents have >>>> started just dropping their children off to volunteer! Some of [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > social work number and have the kids taken into care on the spot. Treat > them as abandoned by deadbeat parents (which they have been). Unfortunately, that would probably generate such a violent backlash that funding for the shelter would plummet. Thus, it is the animals that would suffer the consequences.
> Any response that even BEGINS to look like the shelter taking on a > responsibility they legally can't do is asking for either the civil > or criminal law to come down on them like a ton of bricks. It's nuts. Exactly. That's why the shelter will probably have to set up some stringent procedures so they can refuse to accept unaccompanied minors. That's a lot easier said than done (and will also result in some negative public relations -- and possibly unkind media attention), but it's better than the alternative.
-- MaryL
> ============== j-c ====== @ ====== purr . demon . co . uk > ============== > Jack Campin: 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 > 4760 Lesley - 10 Jun 2007 14:34 GMT On 9 Jun, 16:54, Jack Campin - bogus address <b...@purr.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> The adult has almost certainly violated some serious laws by leaving > the kid there in the first place - with animals of unpredictable > temper and unknown illnesses on the premises, it's about as responsible > as leaving them to play in a car crushing plant. (And, in the UK, it > is flat illegal for adults to have charge of kids that age without > passing a police check and having a disclosure certificate to prove it). Yep we had this at our games club. One rather loud oboxious guy was delighted that his little boy liked "Hero Clix" and we had a hardcore group of players, he would leave the kid with us and then go to the other bar and get drunk and start fights. Yes the kid was probably safer with us (He was a nice polite kid as well but the father.....I remember one night Mike (the kid) was sitting down to play and the father stormed and annouced he wanted to be somewhere else so Mike would have to go home to his mother and Mike was almost in tears because he really wanted to play so what does this delightful specimen of "Humanity" say to his 8-year old son? "If your mother doesn't love you enough to come down here and keep an eye on you then you have to go back"- punctuated with a fair bit of swearing and suggestion that his mother was in fact a female dog)
Anyway some people started moaning about having a small boy present (or perhaps about the father) and we asked one of our members who's mum works on the legal side of child protection to look into our legal status...
What a shock! We'd been innocently letting Mike play and we were laid wide open to any number of legal problems...
We now have a policy that anyone over 16 can only come if they have a parent with them who will stay all night with them and not leave them to our tender mercies. When this was raised some people objected on the grounds that as a gaming club we're supposed to encourage new gamers. It was amusing how many dropped the subject when our chairman pointed out that if we did that, then we'd all have to have criminal record checks
Lesley
Slave of the Fabulous Furballs
Adrian A - 10 Jun 2007 16:26 GMT > On 9 Jun, 16:54, Jack Campin - bogus address <b...@purr.demon.co.uk> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > > Slave of the Fabulous Furballs Since christmas I've been doing a few hours per week voluntary admin work at the CAB, I discovered when I started that anyone that works for a charity in this country, paid or not, has to have a criminal record check.
 Signature Adrian (Owned by Snoopy and Bagheera) Cats leave pawprints on your heart. http://community.webshots.com/user/clowderuk
Sherry - 10 Jun 2007 16:46 GMT > Since christmas I've been doing a few hours per week voluntary admin work at > the CAB, I discovered when I started that anyone that works for a charity in > this country, paid or not, has to have a criminal record check. > -- > Adrian (Owned by Snoopy and Bagheera) > Cats leave pawprints on your heart.http://community.webshots.com/user/clowderuk- Hide quoted text - That's a good policy. Similar policies are also in place here for most larger charities. For instance, there's a very stringent screening process on charities that deal with children, as well there should be. I'm sure the larger, national H.S.'s also do. The internet makes it so much easier to do background checks these days. One of the projects in my head is to start a state-wide "do not adopt" database for people who should not be allowed to adopt animals. As it is, it's each individual shelter who bans people. It's easy for them to just go to another county.
Sherry
Lesley - 16 Jun 2007 17:13 GMT . One of the projects in my head is to
> start a state-wide "do not adopt" database for people who should not > be allowed to adopt animals. I would like that done in the UK I always wonder when someone is banned from keeping an animal for life how it can be enforced? Surely they jist go to a pet shop (and any pet shop selling live animals, (I'd like that banned as well- our local decent pet store will put people in touch with rescue services but refuses to sell live animals- it's not the nearest store but whilst the nearest one doesn't sell live animals they have another branch, which is called something like "East London Puppies"and openly sells puppies and kittens) wouldn't give a damn) or respond to the "free to good home" ads...Okay all my Furballs have been "free to good homes" but at least in most cases the person knew us and in the other one I didn't know the woman very well (I was temping in her office) but after I helped her contact swan rescue she decided I "liked animals" (all the same, she didn't know me that well but I think if you asked the Furballs if they were happy, they would say "No. Not enough ham" but at least that would be all they could find to fault- spoken by a Hoomin who had to just make the special trip for their Hills)
I do sometimes wonder, (looks round at rather messy flat..okay some of the mess is cat toys) if i did go to a shelter whether after a home visit they would refuse to allow me to adopt?
Lesley
Slave of the Fabulous Furballs
Sherry - 16 Jun 2007 20:33 GMT > . One of the projects in my head is to > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Lesley Oh, pffft. Of course not! It would take about 1 minute of watching you interact with your cats and they'd be talking you into taking five cats, not one. I'd trust you with *mine*, just judging from your posts over the years. You have a good heart. A good heart trumps a clean house, every time. In fact, I'd worry about adopting to anyone with spotless black clothing or a pristine clean house. I'd worry they weren't cat-hair-friendly enough.
Sherry
Jack Campin - bogus address - 10 Jun 2007 23:16 GMT > Since christmas I've been doing a few hours per week voluntary > admin work at the CAB, I discovered when I started that anyone > that works for a charity in this country, paid or not, has to > have a criminal record check. Depends on what you're doing there. Somebody not in potential close contact with children doesn't need it (e.g. a warehouse worker for a charity that recycles furniture). The CAB has to be a bit fussier since its workers will be handling confidential information.
============== j-c ====== @ ====== purr . demon . co . uk ============== Jack Campin: 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 4760 <http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/> for CD-ROMs and free | fax 0870 0554 975 stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, & Mac logic fonts | mob 07800 739 557
Adrian A - 11 Jun 2007 10:43 GMT >> Since christmas I've been doing a few hours per week voluntary >> admin work at the CAB, I discovered when I started that anyone [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > charity that recycles furniture). The CAB has to be a bit fussier > since its workers will be handling confidential information. Well I am dealing with confidential information but I was told that police checks apply to everybody whatever they do.
 Signature Adrian (Owned by Snoopy and Bagheera) Cats leave pawprints on your heart. http://community.webshots.com/user/clowderuk
jofirey - 09 Jun 2007 22:58 GMT > Here's my second pet peeve, while I am on a roll. Parents have started > just dropping their children off [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > got to change. But it has to be done > carefully. Sherry, I don't remember where you are located. But while volunteers who are of an age to be responsible and have some idea what they are doing are a very good thing, even those volunteers need some sort of supervision.
If the shelter is under county control, a letter, phone call or email to the members of the county board of supervisors would be a good idea.
I can't imagine parents in anything approaching their right minds dropping their kids off in the same place that court mandated offenders are working.
Our county jail inmates work at our shelter all the time. If they are properly screened and supervised there is no harm in that. But it doesn't mean they should be working with 13 year old kids.
The other routes for getting some action would be to contact the local newspaper, radio or TV and or to contact the current grand jury. In most states they are charges with overseeing the way the county is run and have to check out any complaints they get.
I doubt you are going to be any happier about the situation once you calm down. I sincerely hope you can find a way to make things better, or to light a fire so to speak under someone who can.
Jo
Sherry - 10 Jun 2007 01:07 GMT > > Here's my second pet peeve, while I am on a roll. Parents have started > > just dropping their children off [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > Jo This isn't a shelter like the ASPCA, or shelters in larger communities. We get zero dollars from the governnment, it is completely run on private donations, grants. It is a completely private shelter, built in 1999 and I was there from the beginning. That's why I have a tremendous emotional investment in the place, and I don't take criticism very well. I have to work on that all the time, because there are always people in the community who want to tell you what you're doing wrong without lifting a finger to help. In 1999, nine people raised $250,000 to start the building. Two ladies (one was me) were the original staff until it could get off the ground. In those days, we thought we were crowded if we had 12 dogs and 6 cats. We made so many mistakes, I just cringe when I think about it but we did have a lot of zeal. I'll never forget the day the other lady looked at me said, "I don't know anything about dogs. I thought you did." In those days, it took $30,000 a year to run the place, bare bones. That was for water, electricity, food, insurance premiums, food, vet bills. Oh my things have changed. You kind of have to understand the mentality of a rural community toward pets. There was *no* shelter in the entire county. The city pound did not serve the people in the country, and so their solution was to dump unwanted pets. Even for the city people, the "dogcatcher" only held animals 72 hours, no exceptions, and they were euthanized. The original low goal was to give the lost or abandoned animals at least enough time to find their owner, or be adopted. We thought, even if had to euthanize some, it was better than them starving dumped on a county road. The city agreed to do our euthanasia in the beginning. The other lady got certified to euthanize, but I never could bear to do that. Eventually people got on board who were knowledgeable in grant- writing, and the community was fairly generaous with their money if not their time. For such an humble beginning, it really is amazing how many people/animals that place has helped. I think I am most proud of the free spay/neuter program that is funded by grants. I'm also proud of the free boarding they do for elderly folks in the hospital and women in crisis. It is so easy for me to run that shelter "on paper". I can come up with so many ideas about how it should be run. Unfortunately, it takes manpower to do everything. There is never enough. There is a constant stream of people bringing animals in, looking for lost dogs, the phone rings constantly, and there's drama of some kind going on. You know, it never was the animals. The animals never bothered me. I never minded doing or putting up with *anything* regarding the animals. It's the PEOPLE that make me crazy. Just recently a guy hauled his neighbor's goat to the shelter because it was eating his rosebushes. He got so irate because we wouldn't take the goat I thought he was going to come back with a gun and kill us all. See? It's just a house of insanity, 8 hours a day, 6 days a week. There are 47 kennels, and two cat rooms with outdoor enclosures. It's *full*, full past capacity. All the time. That's a tremendous amount of work just in cleaning alone. The grounds have to taken care of. Someone has to work the desk and answer the phone, do the Petfinder listings and other desk work . Someone else has to transport animals to the vet. And I read all the wonderful suggestions here, but it is so frustrating because there's a brick wall I bang my head against on a regular basis. Animal handling classes. Who's going to do it? Who's going to take charge of that? Someone has to. The manpower situation is stretched to the absolute limit already. It takes everyone there to supervise the community service, the work-release, the WEP mothers---and the cleaning can't get done without them. Someone has to *play* with the animals--that's not an option, that is a *must*. They have to be kept socialized. The shelter simply cannot afford to hire enough people. If we did, we'd be belly-up within a year. That's why they *depend* on some rather undesirable manpower. You cannot depend on volunteers. Volunteers are great, we love them, but I've learned, even if they're scheduled, only the dedicated ones you can depend on.
Bah. I have burnout. It's like a bad train that's going so fast I can't see how it can be turned around. All my "control freak" genes are working overtime. I turned in my resignation to the board, but she just patted me on the shoulder and said, "Oh, now you take that back, you don't want to do that." I can't even get off the frigging board.
Rant is over.
Sherry
MaryL - 10 Jun 2007 02:20 GMT >> > Here's my second pet peeve, while I am on a roll. Parents have started >> > just dropping their children off [quoted text clipped - 141 lines] > > Sherry Excellent message, very explanatory. As you indicated, it is much easier for us to write about what "should" be done than to find someone to actually "do" it.
MaryL
jofirey - 10 Jun 2007 02:37 GMT > This isn't a shelter like the ASPCA, or shelters in larger > communities. We get zero dollars [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > was better than them starving > dumped on a county road. . For such an
> humble beginning, it really is amazing > how many people/animals that place has helped. I think I am most proud > of the free spay/neuter > program that is funded by grants. I'm also proud of the free boarding > they do for elderly folks > in the hospital and women in crisis.
> It is so easy for me to run that shelter "on paper". I can come up > with so many ideas about how it [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > putting up with *anything* regarding the animals. It's the PEOPLE that > make me crazy.
> There are 47 kennels, and two cat rooms with outdoor enclosures. It's > *full*, full past capacity. All the > time.
> It takes everyone there to supervise the community > service, the work-release, the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > and said, "Oh, now you take that back, you don't want to do that." I > can't even get off the frigging board. Now I understand even more how upset you must be. You have done something truly amazing here. And like good things tend to do it has grown.
Now you are getting a bad shot of no good deed goes unpunished. No more advice. I could not accomplish so much even back in the day when I was pretty good at it.
Well just a tiny bit of advice, if you haven't covered it already. Talk to a friendly lawyer. Make sure you are reasonably well covered for any personal liability. And maybe set up some sort of permission slip, we can kick you out at any time, parental consent forms for the kids parents.
Jo
Sherry - 10 Jun 2007 03:06 GMT > > This isn't a shelter like the ASPCA, or shelters in larger > > communities. We get zero dollars [quoted text clipped - 85 lines] > > Jo- Hide quoted text - Oh, I do appreciate everyone's suggestions, I truly do. I think they're wonderful ideas. We are *reasonably* well-covered, and have had a few "incidents" over the years that turned out as well as could be expected. But the potential is alarmingly high, I am the first to admit that. I do have insurance that covers me, personally, in case anyone gets really sue-happy and goes after the shelter first, then the board members as individuals next. That could happen. There is a waiver for volunteers to sign. And that's a good point to check out, whether they at least have them on file for these kids signed by their parents. The more I think about this, I think the older board members really *should* step down, and make room for some new blood. New people with the same gusto we used to have ten years ago. We're all getting old, and jaded.
Sherry
Sherry - 10 Jun 2007 03:18 GMT > > "Sherry" <sridd...@aol.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 111 lines] > > Sherry- Hide quoted text - And another thing I think about. I wonder what would have happened if we'd taken the initial $250,000 and spent the whole thing, plus all the donated $$ $ since, simply on an aggressive spay/neuter campaign, neutering everything in the county that didn't outrun us first. And not had a building. I wonder. Moot point though. You have to have a physical building or you can't get grants.
Sherry
Karen - 10 Jun 2007 04:10 GMT >>> "Sherry" <sridd...@aol.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 123 lines] > > Sherry I actually don't think that would have done as much good, frankly. I think you did exactly the right thing. THere is probably a lot of good you don't even know about from it.
MaryL - 10 Jun 2007 03:21 GMT <snip>
>The more I think about this, I think the older board members really > *should* step down, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Sherry New blood is often a good idea but frequently is difficult to find. I served for 20 years as faculty advisor to one of the honor societies on our campus (one that originated under my auspices). I tried for a number of years to convince the department to get a replacement, and one of my reasons was that I thought we needed some new blood with new ideas and a renewed sense of purpose. The department chair kept pushing me to stay on and said that no one else would put the time and energy into it that I had. *Finally,* I was able to get out from under it (and must admit that by then a great deal of my reason for wanting to do so was that the work was overwhelming, not just new blood). Well, it has been a relief to me -- but in actual fact, the organization has far fewer members and is involved in far fewer activities than in any of the years when I was advisor. We won some national academic awards over a period of several years, and now they rarely even meet. So, my point is that you deserve a break, but you may also find that it will be nearly impossible to find replacements with the same fervor and dedication as those who originated the enterprise.
MaryL
Rhonda - 09 Jun 2007 07:22 GMT Sherry,
You showed great restraint in not smacking that girl.
OMG, what an unnecessary tragedy.
Rhonda
> I just have to get this down into words to people that might > understand. [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > Sherry Lesley - 09 Jun 2007 13:17 GMT > I just have to get this down into words to people that might > understand. [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > Sherry Lesley - 09 Jun 2007 13:33 GMT The girl said she had dropped it on the concrete.
> I said, HOW do you DROP a baby kitten? Someone else spoke up and said, > she was carrying it around on her shoulder. Poor little kitten! I assume she's been trained to handle kittens? We all know how much they can wriggle! I am just amazed and had to read twice that this woman is in her 20's. Recently I had to show a group of small children how to hold a kitten properly and okay I expect a 4 year old who hasn't been told otherwise to swing a kitten by the shoulders with the back legs dangling but it's not rocket science and I was able to show them in 5 minutes. I would expect an "adult" to have more sense
> I completely at that point lost control of my mouth and pretty much > verbally tore her up and took the kitten to euth-ed, and made her go > with me. Ditto good for you! She's seen the consequences of her actions and I do hope in future, she either never handles a kitten again or is careful when doing so either is good news for kittens!
> This wasn't even a real volunteer. She was one of those people who's > gotten in some kind of trouble, usually hot checks or DUI, and the > judge hands down a community service sentence that has to be served at > the shelter. In retrospect, ALL these losers should be put through an > animal handling class before they're allowed to serve their sentence. The judge shouldn't just send anyone (You could end up with Paris Hilton) and yes mandatory animal handling training should be compulsory. I suspect when given the attractions of animal shelter community service compared with say working with old people or cleaning up something (These are the sorts of things community service is in the UK- I've not heard of anyone working in a shelter but I could be wrong) some people are going to think "Get to play with cute aninals versus getting someone's shopping for them or hard physical work- where do I sign?"
Anyone who gets community service should be forced to submit a written statement to the judge as to why they want to work there, that should be assessed by the shelter and the shelter should have final say and of course, animal handling should be compulsory before they are even allowed over the threshold
As for irresponsible parents regarding the shelter as a babysitting service, I like the idea that you will only accept them if the parents work with them but of course the parents who just want to dump their kids off on you won't do that
Another idea (thinking out of the box) would be to say that you welcome children as volunteers at the shelter but for their own safety firstly you have to agree the times they work, secondly they have to do a course on animal handling, (for their own safety), this course will cost a modest amount (say $50) but if the volunteer then completes a given number of hours at the shelter it will be refunded. This would weed out the "free baby sitting service" crew and if some of them paid only to drop about before the end of the hours of service then that's $50 for the shelter
> Well, thanks for listening. :-( No problems
Lesley
Slave of the Fabulous Furballs
Karen - 09 Jun 2007 21:24 GMT > I just have to get this down into words to people that might > understand. [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > Sherry That is so very sad. I don't blame you for losing it. It was SO unnessacary. I only hope that they DO do some training now.
Gabey8 - 10 Jun 2007 08:13 GMT > I just have to get this down into words to people that might > understand. [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > Sherry I can't blame you for getting that upset. I doubt that either I or anyone I know could look at a critically injured kitten, hurt in an accident that was 100% avoidable, and not lose their temper in that moment. My temper normally has a very long fuse, but if I were standing right there, right then, and saw the kitten suffering, it's likely my "rational thought" circuit would have temporarily shorted out.
Most Definitely, volunteers should need to pass basic training courses in animal handling and safety before they're permitted to begin working as volunteers. That's only fair to the animals AND the volunteers.
As for underaged volunteers... you might want to consult with your legal department and/or insurers before continuing to have kids being dropped off there by parents who behave like you're a free day-care center. There might be some legal requirements, or requirements set forth by your insurance, that you have to comply with. If that's the case, and it means that the parents have to be notified that there are new guidelines that they and their kids have to follow, so be it.
Find out what your legal rights and duties are when a parent drops off their kid into your custody for the day, without even asking if they can do this. Can you refuse? (Especially if the kid in question is more interested in horseplay than doing any actual volunteer work?) If one of those kids gets sick or hurt, what are the legal requirements for what you have to do? What if, God forbid, one of the adult workers has inappropriate contact with one of the kids? You're not a day-care center. Your employees and adult volunteers aren't screened for past child-related criminal offenses. God forbid that some family sue the shelter for everything it's got, because something happened to their kid who THEY dropped off at the shelter without even asking permission to do so. That's not fair to anyone.
I'm so sorry about the kitten. I hope that the volunteer gets her head on straight for the rest of her community service, or finds some other form of community service to perform.
Donna, Captain, and Stanley
Ginger-lyn - 10 Jun 2007 09:00 GMT > I just have to get this down into words to people that might > understand. [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > Sherry This is so sad, and should never have happened. My heart is with the poor little kitten who never got a chance to be loved and cuddled and stroked. My anger is with not just the girl, but also with the judge. I'm sorry, but sentencing juvenile delinquents or even adult criminals to work in a humane society is a *bad* idea.
Ginger-lyn
Sherry - 10 Jun 2007 16:10 GMT > > I just have to get this down into words to people that might > > understand. [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > > Ginger-lyn- Hide quoted text - You know, Ginger-lyn, I used to think that too. But the vast majority of them are hot-check writers and repeat DUI people, or people who got caught with marijuana one too many times. Some of them are fierce animal lovers just like you and I. Some of them obviously have issues and don't relate to people very well. They are just marvelous with the animals, probably for that reason. One guy spends his breaks sitting inside the kennel with a little dog he has gotten attached to. By and large, they are actually much better workers than the WEP people (that's "welfare employment program--they have to put in 20 hours of volunteer work or they don't get their checks). Most of them are 20's-30's, and they're all women. It's real peculiar. They don't *know* how to clean, either You'd think everybody knows how to clean, but I found out that's not true.
Sherry
Ginger-lyn - 14 Jun 2007 00:05 GMT >> This is so sad, and should never have happened. My heart is with the >> poor little kitten who never got a chance to be loved and cuddled and [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > Sherry I admit I have never met anyone sentenced to this sort of thing, so I suppose I shouldn't judge. I sure don't see anything wrong with someone busted for a joint serving their time in a shelter (as long as they are not stoned when they do!). I've give them the benefit of the doubt, since you appear to know much more about this than I do!
Ginger-lyn
jmcquown - 10 Jun 2007 12:13 GMT > I just have to get this down into words to people that might > understand. [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > Sherry Sherry, you have my condolences about the bitty kitty. Glad you turned the frogs loose, too!
I'm so sorry about the kitten :( Hope that woman learned her lesson.
Jill
leopardusweidii@yahoo.co.uk - 10 Jun 2007 18:00 GMT > I completely at that point lost control of my mouth and pretty much > verbally tore her up and took the kitten to euth-ed, and made her go [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > the crazy woman, so I turned them loose and figured I'd better leave > before I had a heart attack.////// It sounds like you were considerably calmer than I would have been. I have zero tolerance for stupidity and I honestly don't know how I would have reacted in your situation. {{{{{{SHERRY}}}}}}
Many purrs and prayers for a little bitty (RB).
Helen M
|
|
|