Foster Failures And Continued Fostering

[nawnim]

...

Edited June 1, 2012 by padraic

[dog_fan]

I am convinced some foster careers and some rescues are a front for hoarders.

Have you ever actually met a diagnosed hoarder? Or seen how the animals are kept? That term makes me prickle and often pops up in anti-private-rescue propaganda. Hoarding is an illness. And you have to be qualified to diagnose it, not just an armchair critic. A true collector isn't just keeping a couple of fosters and I think many carers would be mortified to think foster failure could even be considered a red flag for mental illness.

Yes, I absolutely agree that rescues do need to keep an eyes on all policies and procedures.

And yep I'm all too aware of how people react when you suggest they are letting the side down.

People do not need to meet a diagnosed anything to understand the issues. However, yes I have witnessed this first hand, not that it matters.

I object to anyone saying all rescue is good and that they cannot do better. That level of arrogance is mind boggling.

Foster carers need support which includes an understanding of why they are fostering because some foster to meet their own needs not the dogs.

Anyway seems to me some rescue is a closed shop with people protecting their own interests by personally attacking others to make their point.

Which is very poor form and gives the impression there is something to hide.

[_PL_]

I am convinced some foster careers and some rescues are a front for hoarders.

Have you ever actually met a diagnosed hoarder? Or seen how the animals are kept? That term makes me prickle and often pops up in anti-private-rescue propaganda. Hoarding is an illness. And you have to be qualified to diagnose it, not just an armchair critic. A true collector isn't just keeping a couple of fosters and I think many carers would be mortified to think foster failure could even be considered a red flag for mental illness.

Yes, I absolutely agree that rescues do need to keep an eyes on all policies and procedures.

And yep I'm all too aware of how people react when you suggest they are letting the side down.

People do not need to meet a diagnosed anything to understand the issues. However, yes I have witnessed this first hand, not that it matters.

I object to anyone saying all rescue is good and that they cannot do better. That level of arrogance is mind boggling.

Foster carers need support which includes an understanding of why they are fostering because some foster to meet their own needs not the dogs.

Anyway seems to me some rescue is a closed shop with people protecting their own interests by personally attacking others to make their point.

Which is very poor form and gives the impression there is something to hide.

But it does matter. I guess unless you're trying to prove a point. Then diagnosis and pathology just get in the way.

And find me ethical rescuers who believe they cannot improve on what they are doing. Please.

Obviously there is a story behind your posts. Dog_fan, time for some of that 'truth' you mentioned.

What exactly happened to you?

Not that you have to share, but you definitely have a lot of very strong opinions for someone anonymous who doesn't participate in the rescue section except in threads like this one so you can have a little dig at rescue.

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

I doubt that anyone would reject a foster carer out of hand without a very good reason.

You might like to hear about the last one I rejected, in the nicest possible way - even though they'd wasted my time and that of the home checker's time.

I had a good length phone call about them upon receipt of a beautifully worded email and not once - even though I asked some pertinent questions - did they mention:

- they lived with their parents who weren't keen on having a foster dog at all

and

- they had easy/constant acccess through a doggie door to an unfenced pool.

Call me awful but the answer was no - would have caused stress within the family unit and possibly the death of a dog by drowning.

Everything has to be assessed individually but I was very excited to have found such a caring foster carer only to be extremely disappointed. Who was in the wrong here as some of you think it is very black and white - was it me or the potential foster carer?

[SkySoaringMagpie]

dogmad I would have made the same call, for whatever that is worth. Sometimes people don't disclose things because they don't see the problem I guess, but other family members not agreeing would be a red flag for me before getting to the question of the pool which is also a serious problem.

As far as the discussion about hoarding and collecting goes, you don't have to be living with a mental illness and piles of dog poo to be out of your depth to a point where it's not good for you or the animals. I recall dropping some donations off to a cat rescue a few years ago now, you could smell the house from the street, and there were cats bloody everywhere - far too many per square foot of house space. Would they have met a clinical definition for hoarding? Who knows, but it was still unacceptable from a welfare perspective.

[tdierikx]

Foster 2 we failed after an hour, and foster ~12 is with us until the end due to some health and attitude issues making him unsuitable to rehome. We've put up the 'house full' sign for a while, but will go back to it when we have more space in our lives. I can see why a group would look carefully if someone has a FF, but it would have to be on a case by case basis I'd think.

You also get to share the fun of my fosters though Katdogs... and they all love their time playing with you and the Katdogs clan...

T.

[Guest Ams]

I think the topic has gone a little of course. The question I believe was not how to you fail a potential foster carer but does a foster carer keeping a foster dog as their own disqualify them from future foster work?

We would all have turned down offers of foster for any number of reasons and it doesn't make the person a bad person or unsuitable to foster for someone else, it just means they are not suited for your/the dogs purposes at that point in time. Yes there are some people who should never own a pet but I don't see it as being my place to tell them that. They are simply unsuitable for my rescue.

I have several people who have offered to foster and I have yet to place a dog with them. They are wonderful people but I have yet to find a dog I would feel safe in placing with them and keeping them and their dog safe as well.

I still maintain that if a foster carer has a special bond with a foster dog and wants to adopt it then if all things are equal and they are not exceeding their quota of allowable animals then certainly I would allow them to adopt that foster dog and would still consider them for future foster work.

[tdierikx]

I think we can all agree that rescue isn't for the faint of heart or thin of skin... the things that some say about others can be totally outrageous, and very rarely is there a whole lot of truth to what is said on the rumour mill. OK - sometimes there is truth, but there have been many threads about those already...

Case in point - I foster a lot of puppies - my preference - and I get to source or select them for the rescue I work with. Our rescue is also running a program we call Pregnant Paws (explained in another thread) which also sees us taking in pregnant bitches reasonably regularly, whelping and raising/weaning the pups, and then desexing, vaccinating, and microchipping the bitch and giving her back to her family. We then rehome the pups with the same work done. Any money we make from the sale of the pups covers the expenses of the program. Win-win, right?

Well... some people have decided that as we seem to have quite a few pups moving through our rescue, that we MUST be breeding them ourselves. This is NOT the case, and it is actually very hurtful to receive rude, nasty, and downright scary emails, text messages, and Stalkerbook attention from people who have never met us or been to our rescue themselves. I will note that some of the people who have been very vocal in espousing their opinions about us all over the internet are ex-volunteers who were asked to leave because THEY were actually endangering the health and wellbeing of the dogs in our care - some people take rejection quite badly it seems...

Personally, I don't care at all what people who have never met me say about me, because I know that those who have met me know better. It would be nice to not have the police on speed dial for when the latest death threat arrives though...

... and I will continue fostering puppies as long as I am able and my dogs still love having them around.

To be quite honest I have come so close to "failing" with a large number of my fosters - but when the perfect family comes along for them, I don't find it as hard to hand them over... *grin*

T.

[frenzied1]

Hell no. That excludes half the people in rescue.

IMHO "Success moving dogs on" is not the duty of a carer, more-so the rescue who is doing the promoting and vetting of applications. If someone is not what you'd approve to adopt a dog then don't give them fosters. Easy.

Well said, the only person that would put the stop on me fostering would be my husband if we kept lots of fosters. I have a FF and she is great with any other foster I have.

[HazyWal]

Yes this is fair enough, there is no way Iggys should be running with Greys and large dogs.

I don't agree with it, it is very limiting if enforced. What I'd worry about more is fostering for more than one group.

We have Italian Greyhounds generally at Iggy Rescue and one of our lovely carers occasionally takes on Greyhounds - we ask that they are constatnly monitored when together and not left alone unsupervised. We make that work but I'd be very concerned if we were left in the dark and our Iggies were being exposed to different types of dogs from rescue groups that don't undertake proper temperament testing or quarantine etc first.

Sorry Whipitgood I disagree.I have known greys to run away screaming from a cat and almost poo themselves when they have seen a chook.My own two greys are scared to death of my friends one eyed foxie.Can't speak for other large dogs but there would be plenty of Greys that could happily live with an Iggy, a chi and even rabbits.

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

Stan's Mum, I love greyhounds and have rescued them but Iggies are pretty fragile and greys can be playful, so are iggies. There is too much of a size disparity for them to play without supervision and that's why we recommend they are not left alone together. If we have someone with a greyhound contact us, we refer them to whippets as they are less fragile.

I've just been through the Iggy broken leg scenario - it's not one I'd care to repeat, typically it is $5000 specialist surgery (plates and screws) and 4 months confinement ...

[sas]

dogmad I would have made the same call, for whatever that is worth. Sometimes people don't disclose things because they don't see the problem I guess, but other family members not agreeing would be a red flag for me before getting to the question of the pool which is also a serious problem.

As far as the discussion about hoarding and collecting goes, you don't have to be living with a mental illness and piles of dog poo to be out of your depth to a point where it's not good for you or the animals. I recall dropping some donations off to a cat rescue a few years ago now, you could smell the house from the street, and there were cats bloody everywhere - far too many per square foot of house space. Would they have met a clinical definition for hoarding? Who knows, but it was still unacceptable from a welfare perspective.

I agree. I have been to some dog rescues like that and actually took photos and reported one that was a dump and the dogs were in poor condition.

[nawnim]

...

Edited June 1, 2012 by padraic

[nawnim]

...

Edited June 1, 2012 by padraic

[HazyWal]

I doubt that anyone would reject a foster carer out of hand without a very good reason.

You might like to hear about the last one I rejected, in the nicest possible way - even though they'd wasted my time and that of the home checker's time.

I had a good length phone call about them upon receipt of a beautifully worded email and not once - even though I asked some pertinent questions - did they mention:

- they lived with their parents who weren't keen on having a foster dog at all

and

- they had easy/constant acccess through a doggie door to an unfenced pool.

Call me awful but the answer was no - would have caused stress within the family unit and possibly the death of a dog by drowning.

Everything has to be assessed individually but I was very excited to have found such a caring foster carer only to be extremely disappointed. Who was in the wrong here as some of you think it is very black and white - was it me or the potential foster carer?

I have some concerns about this post. I'm not sure that it is appropriate for a rescue group to refuse someone because of their parents. Perhaps this potential foster carer did not appreciate the pool danger, and may have been prepared to put up a fence. Interestingly he/she had a doggy door so presumably they already had or had had a dog.

On a more general note I did not think there was such an oversupply of foster carers for rescue groups to be so choosy. Healthy dogs die because they cannot find rescue.

As I read it dogmad didn't refuse the potential foster carer because of their parents as people but the fact that the parents were not keen on fostering at all.I think dogmad was right in her decision....JMO.

[nawnim]

...

Edited June 1, 2012 by padraic

[garnali]

Have to agree I would have refused unless all family members were in agreeance & have done that in the past..

Family had current dog (Staffie) bonded with male in house.. Wife wanted new pup for herself.. Hubby never showed any interest and kids were not really excited..

I refused their adoption application for a staffy puppy.. I dont want to see that pup back in pound because of family disagreements.

And Padriac... Yes all family members are included in foster carer application.. House & yard check are also part of the deal.. Same as if adopting.

On Foster Failures I believe a good carer will have at least one foster failure.. It shows they care about the animals placed in their homes.

I have one.. Wouldn't give him up for the world.. He's still my little baby and helps with any other fosters. :D

[Greytmate]

Rescues need to treasure their foster carers. Sometimes foster carers are paying a big price (not only financial) to house another animal. It is also quite offensive to tell someone they are unsuitable to foster. There would need to be a good reason which should be explained sensitively. I wonder if such decisions could be challenged in a court of law.

A failed foster carer

There might be good reasons, but the rescue is under no obligation to spell them all out.

How do you tell somebody that their kids are feral and cruel, their house is filthy, their own pets need attention, and their partner doesn't give a rats arse about what animals are brought into the house? Easier to say "I'm sorry, we don't have a suitable foster dog for you at the moment".

A rescue group has a responsibility to the animals it places, they are not there to fulfil the needs of potential foster carers wanting a free dog.

If you are told you cannot foster, just accept it. Either find another group with different standards or rules, or makes some changes. When I think about the type of people I have rejected as carers, the thought of them taking me to court is insanely ridiculous.

Good carers are so valuable, like gold, there is no way a rescue group would reject one unnecessarily. I wonder whether this thread is about a true thing, or whether a rejected foster carer doesn't really understand why they have been rejected.

[mita]

[i have known greys to run away screaming from a cat and almost poo themselves when they have seen a chook.My own two greys are scared to death of my friends one eyed foxie

We've lived next to racing greyhounds with a doting owner, for years. He raised an enormous big fellow who became the Q'ld sprint champion. This big fellow had the reputation of macho aggressiveness on the track. But when our little tibbies come up to the fence, he hides behind his 'dad'! He's frightened of them. :) He'd probably faint at the sight of the one-eyed foxie. :)

Recently, this man discovered a little stray kitten was moving into his place. He found her lapping away on the other side of the dinner dish belonging to the big grey's litter sister.....who just stood there looking totally confused & overwhelmed by the whole thing.

Edited April 30, 2012 by mita

[HazyWal]

I doubt that anyone would reject a foster carer out of hand without a very good reason.

You might like to hear about the last one I rejected, in the nicest possible way - even though they'd wasted my time and that of the home checker's time.

I had a good length phone call about them upon receipt of a beautifully worded email and not once - even though I asked some pertinent questions - did they mention:

- they lived with their parents who weren't keen on having a foster dog at all

and

- they had easy/constant acccess through a doggie door to an unfenced pool.

Call me awful but the answer was no - would have caused stress within the family unit and possibly the death of a dog by drowning.

Everything has to be assessed individually but I was very excited to have found such a caring foster carer only to be extremely disappointed. Who was in the wrong here as some of you think it is very black and white - was it me or the potential foster carer?

I have some concerns about this post. I'm not sure that it is appropriate for a rescue group to refuse someone because of their parents. Perhaps this potential foster carer did not appreciate the pool danger, and may have been prepared to put up a fence. Interestingly he/she had a doggy door so presumably they already had or had had a dog.

On a more general note I did not think there was such an oversupply of foster carers for rescue groups to be so choosy. Healthy dogs die because they cannot find rescue.

As I read it dogmad didn't refuse the potential foster carer because of their parents as people but the fact that the parents were not keen on fostering at all.I think dogmad was right in her decision....JMO.

Yes but presumably the applicant was an adult. His/her parents and their attitudes are his/her concern. He/she makes the judgement and accepts the responsibility. It is not up to an outsider to make decisions for him/her. :)

Yes I would presume the applicant was an adult but that makes no difference.As garnali has said ALL family members or flatmates or whoever lives in the home have to agree on taking a foster into the home.It IS up to the rescue group(or as you said outsider)to make that decision.In this case it's dogmads rescue group so it's her dog,her responsibility and her right to say no.