The Nannies of the SPCA

In the past 12 months, our two family dogs, Murphy and Princie, passed away from ailments worsened by old age. About two months ago, we decided it was time to start looking for a new canine companion. Our pets have always been rescue dogs — ignored, abandoned, malnourished, mistreated, you name it — and they've all been wonderful reminders of how a little love and care can pay off big-time — reciprocally, of course. My wife and I are passionate about adopting from the pound, have supported the SPCA in word and deed for decades, and wouldn't soon think of buying a dog from a breeder.

So we filled out a form at the Hancock County (Maine) SPCA, saying we're looking for a medium- to big-sized dog, and answering yes to the question whether we have young children. That turned out to be fateful reply.

For eight or nine weeks, we waited in vain for the shelter to call us with news of suitable pets.

Fast-forward to last Saturday. We decide to drive over and take a look at the available dogs. A bit to our surprise, the woman at the desk won't allow us to walk into the kennel room. She asks us to instead peruse a binder containing small pictures and what little data they have on the dogs, and to choose which one we want to see. She will then usher all the other dogs into a fenced area outside, she explains: "Otherwise they'll all start barking and it takes a while to quiet them down again." Hmm. "Odd that she works at a shelter and is bothered by barking," I think, but then I give her the benefit of the doubt. Maybe it's unfair to the animals to see strangers come into their quarters at all hours of the day; it might overexcite them, or make them anxious, or aggressive, or what have you. So, fine.

We thumb through the binder, which contains information on just six or seven dogs, and notice that at the bottom of each and every sheet — from the little Jack Russell to the 100-pound Saint Bernard — there is a checkmark next to the line that says, "Not suitable for adoption by families with children under 12," or words to that effect. We've always had big canines, including one nervous doberman mix who required a little extra parental attention around our kids, so we feel that, short of a dog that's known to be overly aggressive, we can handle it. Blissfully undeterred, we ask to see Baxter, the Saint Bernard. Judging by his picture (at right), he's a lovable lug, and he's described as having a friendly and affectionate disposition.

The shelter lady makes a face. "As long as you understand that that dog isn't a good choice if you have young children," she intones, eyeing our two- and four-year-old daughters, whom we've schlepped along. We politely ask why not. Is Baxter a problem animal? Neurotic? Dangerous? Prone to biting? No, she replies, it's just that the shelter has to be careful, and that safety is a "top concern." But if we insist... Still looking vaguely annoyed, she goes to remove the other dogs and get Baxter ready for our visit.

Before gaining admittance to the kennel area, the four of us are asked to use hand sanitizer (to ward off human-to-dog cooties, I suppose). Then we meet our candidate. He is as lumbering and as good-natured as we'd imagined. We talk to Baxter, pet him, and attempt to make ingratiating conversation with shelter lady. I lamely joke that given Baxter's size, our recently purchased SUV should have been considerably bigger. My wife asks if shelter lady thinks that Baxter would like to join us for some cozy late-night lazing-about on the living room couch. Shelter lady's lips remain pursed. None of our chit-chat seems to soften her up.

After five minutes of this, Baxter is returned to his cage. We step out into the reception area again, and ask what we need to do to adopt him. "You fill out an application, and we'll consider it," she says, with just a hint of — hard to say. Concern? Sounds more like dismissiveness and condescension to me. My wife and I shoot each other a glance. She's heard it too. So I gotta ask.

"You'll consider it?" I echo. "Sounds like you've already made up your mind. Have you?"

Shelter lady waits just a beat too long, and the momentary panic that sweeps across her face is unmistakable — someone caught in a lie. "We're trying to do what's best," she says, struggling to recover. "As I said, you're welcome to fill out the form."

"That's not what I asked," I shoot back, virtually in unison with my wife. Now I almost feel bad for shelter lady, as if we're ganging up on her.

"We will evaluate your application," she insists, regaining her hauteur only to give the game away again: "Though frankly, your children didn't seem that interested in the dog."

What's this now — she knows our kids better than we do? They should have stormed in shrieking with excitement and dying to hug anything on four legs? Should we tell her that when we asked our four-year-old to make a wish list recently, this sensitive kid with a big heart put "having a dog again" near the top? Nah. What's the point? This is going nowhere, and maybe we should just skedaddle.

But now, a tall man wearing an SPCA shirt steps forward — we later learn that he is executive director Doug Radziewicz. "You should understand that we don't know most of these dogs' backgrounds," he says. "It's for everyone's own good. We want to be sure that adoptions are successful, both from the point of view of the dog and the point of view of the family."

I think about this for a moment. It sounds eminently reasonable and illogically fishy at the same time. Putting aside for now the disingenuousness of being told to fill out an application that is sure to be rejected, I tell him that two things bother me. Of course the SPCA doesn't know the provenance of most of the animals it shelters. That's a given. But to tell families with kids that they can't adopt a dog whose history is the least bit murky — even a dog that the SPCA itself describes as friendly and affectionate — is, in my book, a disservice to both the families and the animals. And also, I say, I just don't take kindly to people making unbidden decisions on my behalf, presuming to tell me what's best for me, my wife, and my kids. Would he?

This goes on for a minute or two: Radziewicz, increasingly irate (as am I, frankly), painting a picture of adopted psycho dogs that sink their teeth into a child and asking how that would "look" for the SPCA; me trying to get him to respond to my two points. Then he cuts me off: "That's the way we do it. You don't like it?" His voice now booms with indignation. "Then you should LEAVE!"

The sentence hangs there for a second. Holy crap, he's kicking us out! He's telling us to scram for the terrible crime of questioning his policies!

I do something I immediately regret. Rising to leave, I say in a low, incredulous voice, "You've got some fucking nerve."

That's stupid. By using the f-word, I instantly lose the moral high ground — and it only justifies his decision to kick us to the curb. I'm also not proud of saying it in front of my kids. If I could take it back, I would. Dumb. Unnecessary. Oh well.

Radziewicz is right behind me now as I walk out, his voice still rising, and he's half-yelling that I am never to set foot in his shelter again. I guess Baxter isn't going to find a home today.

Once we're outside, baffled kids in tow, my wife remarks dryly, though with an undertone of mild reproach, "That could have ended better." She's right.

The episode is on my mind for the rest of the day. I keep circling back to these intertwined points:

1. It's admirable that the SPCA wants to carefully match a shelter dog to its new owner and vice versa. But having a de facto policy that prevents families with kids under 12 from adopting any canine with an unclear history (that's almost all of these dogs) is beyond bizarre. (Remember, every dog at the Hancock County shelter was marked unsuitable for my type of family.) I have to wonder if this is just an overzealous local interpretation of the rules, or nationwide SPCA practice.

2. As lifelong dog owners, and as the only two adults who deeply know our own kids and our domestic circumstances, my wife's and my best judgment should at least count for something. I really don't need bureaucratic do-gooders to tell me how I ought to protect my kids, and what I and my family can handle.

3. The reticence and the condescension we encountered at the SPCA are perhaps born of the fear of legal consequences should a recently adopted pet viciously turn on its new owners. No need. I would of course happily have signed a statement saying that the second the dog becomes ours, we relieve the SPCA of all legal responsibility. They can make it as ironclad as they'd like. One page. Three pages. Twelve. It's fine.

4. Kids who grow up with dogs are both more likely to behave safely and appropriately around them (recognizing the warning signs of imminent canine aggression, for instance), and more likely to have dogs themselves once they're adults. You'd think this is exactly what the SPCA wants, but er, maybe not.

5. Tightening pet adoption rules may have been a good idea at some point. Overtightening those rules certainly isn't. Shelter animals are ill-served by policies that prevent their adoption by hundreds of thousands of certifiably responsible parents and dog owners (see under 6). For the SPCA, this is an act of self-sabotage. The organization ends up alienating much of its base and ruining its own success numbers.

6. Yes, certifiably responsible. We have a multi-year record with our local vets that shows that our dogs were always well cared for, and we would have had no qualms about authorizing the SPCA to verify this. Also, my wife and I are in a slightly unusual position, in that officials have probed and scrutinized hundreds of details of our lives numerous times — all in the course of our adopting two wonderful kids. From 2000 through 2006, we've repeatedly and willingly undergone all of the following: We've had our fingerprints taken by both the local police and federal authorities. We've submitted to criminal background checks. We've had to go to friends and relatives to ask them to write letters of recommendation that attest to our fine characters. We've had social workers and child experts come to our home on seven occasions and ask us detailed questions about our physical, mental, and financial health, while they discreetly scanned the rooms for any signs of trouble (incidentally, these folks all met our two dogs). We passed with flying colors, and were deemed great candidates for the adoption of two then-fifteen-month-old babies. Subsequently, we received glowing post-adoption evaluations noting that our kids are healthy, loved, well-adjusted, and thriving.

In other words, we've been declared fit to adopt two baby girls, but unfit to adopt a dog.

A funny old world, this is.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
UPDATE, September 18: I just found out that the SPCA killed Baxter.

Comments

[Phelps]

Part of the traffic that has popped up on this thread might be because Radley linked the post.

[Lee]

First off: My wife is a veternarian.

She loaths the local SPCA with almost every fiber of her body. Their last concern is the actual welfare of the animal.

We live in the suburbs and the difference between the SPCA of Dallas and the ones in the burbs is incredible.

The one in Dallas really tries its best to place every animal. If the animal has aggression issues that can't be resolved it gets put down.

The ones in the burbs are for the local bleeding hearts. Getting a pet thru them is almost tougher than adopting a kid.

When we started looking for a buddy for our new dog we went straight to the local dog rescue organization and got wonderfult addition to our family. We kept her for a week and at any time we could have returned her with no questions asked (their policy).

[Kevin R.C. 'Hognose' O'Brien]

I guess we should be thankful that we live in a country that has no Totenkopf-SS for Doug Radziewicz to fit into... instead he has to run Auschwitz for dogs.

It's the basic equation of bureaucracy: "a little man and a little power do not actually equal a big man."

[Jeff in Texas]

My wife and I used to be "foster parents" for a dog and cat rescure organization run by friends of ours. What you find out from working with groups like that is that while most of the people are genuinely just animal people who are trying to do right by the rescued pets, there are many holier-than-thou zealots who assume everyone else is an idiot or closet animal abuser, or both. And don't bother telling them you've had dogs your whole life, because they will just explain to you that you've doing it wrong that entire time.

My wife and I eventually ended up with a total of 5 dogs that we could not part with (when we started helping the group we had only two dogs of our own), and so we had to go cold-turkey on the foster thing. But we avoid that type of pet zealot to this day, lest they remind us to "never let the dog walk through the door ahead of you!!!" or some other no doubt sound and yet incredibly irritating dog advice delivered in a patronizing tone.

[Omnibus Driver]

You might try Googling on "St. Bernard Rescue," "Newfoundland Rescue," and the like. Breed rescue groups do a terrific job of making sure that dogs like Baxter don't end up with the SPCA, and if there are behavior issues, they foster the dogs and work with them to ensure that the right personalities go to the correct forever home.

[John David Galt]

David Friedman's piece on shelter employees' wanting to feel important understates the case.

All through the western US at least, the animal rights movement has pretty much taken over the SPCA and animal shelters. These folks are so crazy that they literally believe dogs and cats are people, and making themselves the only legal source of pets (as recently proposed here in Sacramento: a law banning possession of un-neutered animals unless you are a licensed breeder) is just the first step toward giving them a complete set of "rights". (The animal-rightists, of course, will cast the animals' votes as their representatives.)

Give me a break. The animal rights movement is loony from top to bottom, and ought to die from neglect, but for certain people in Hollywood who finance the movement for reasons unrelated to animal welfare. See activistcash.com for names and details.

[Lori McGowan]

Did you contact St. Bernard Rescue? Maybe they can help you & Baxter. Baxter deserves a great home. I have Saints and I foster for them, and they are great with children.
Poor Baxter...

[Gina]

Go to a pure-breed rescue or to a reputable breeder. I have fostered and found homes for several owner-surrendered Labrador Retrievers. I won't deal with shelters because they won't let me foster their dogs because I already have dogs! Most shelters are run by idiots witha God complex.

[Carol]

GEESH!!! Peta and their all knowing, smarter than us - rears it's UGLY head once again!!! What a bloomin' idiot!!! To take a dog that would've had a splendid home, loving family - and keep him in the shelter so they can have control? For WHAT??? What is wrong with our country that people HAVE to be protected from life? What is wrong that children can't have a dog? What is wrong when people aren't allowed to pick a dog? I'll tell you -- idiotic politicians that are making laws against everything, laywers that are suing over normal life, AND idiots who just want to control!!! What a crying shame!!!!

[Dian Welle]

If you have not already done so, read this:
http://www.naiaonline.org/body/articles/archives/hijack.htm

[Gail]

I had a very similar experience relayed to me by a man that I work with. He had adopted two children, but was determined by the local humane society to be unfit to adopt a kitten. His fatal flaw was that he planned to allow the cat to go outside on occasion. Apparently, cats don't like to go outside. I guess they have always been house dwellers. These animal rights do-gooders who think they know better than anyone else are so out of control!!!!

[Elly Mae]

My experience with recent failed adoptions led me to this discussion. My husband and I have been life-long pets owners...all kinds; dogs, cats, rabbits, birds.... I did not realize that adopting a pet was such a miserable task. Petfinder is nicely organized and gives you pictures to look at. Unfortunately, each organization wants you to fill out their own application. Some are simple, others are complex and intrusive (i.e., what is your income, what is the value of your home, etc.)
I do not mind home visits, because it is in the best interests of the pet, but I think that something else is going on here. I think that there is selective discrimination among these private organizations. There is no agency watching over their activities. I also noticed that pet adoption "fees" vary widly - anywhere from $85. to $950. I do not mind chipping in for medical care, but some fees seem unreasonable. I truly want to adopt a pet...but I am leaning toward contacting a reputable breeder...

[Texan]

My husband and I have always had dogs, big dogs. We recently had to put our sweet Sugar down due to cancer. She was a boxer mix and very energetic. Well, we finally reached a point where we wanted to adopt another dog. We'd always prefer adopting to buying. The problem? We don't have a yard; we live in an apartment. Despite the fact that I am home all day and exercise with my dog at least three long walks on top of going to the park EVERY DAY, and a glowing letter of recommendation from our vet, all FOUR shelters who were pleading on the news just three nights ago about how overflowing their pens are and how they're in desperate need of adoptive homes refuse to even TALK to us about a dog. The hear the word apartment and close the door on us. I've never felt more frustrated in my life. All we want to do is love a dog who otherwise will be put down or spend the rest of it's days in a no-kill shelter. The contempt and complete prejudice with which we have been treated by the shelters' representatives is incredibly upsetting and almost embarrassing to me, even though I KNOW I'm a good owner...

[shinki21]

Yeah, it is really sad trying to seeve over all the nonsense while the poor animals are being put down. We recently had to euthanize our 9 year old girl who was suffering from renal failure. We did all we could to save her life. After a few weeks, we started our search for a new companion and were surprised at all the requirements and applications. We started with the Humane Society who requested all sorts of verifications. Including asking us to bring our present dog who is 10 to the shelter. Well, the way I look at it, the dog is not going to be in his best behavior in a shelter filled with other dogs. And, the shelter counselor insisted I take the dog she wanted and not the one I liked. In any event, I went to Petfinder.com and found a dog in Atlanta which I was willing to drive to Georgia to get. I filled out the application and got rejected because we have a cat. So much for that. I finally ended up at the local pound in Miami and found two great 4 month old terriers for $62.50 each, microchipped, vaccinated, spayed and with rabies shot. Great deal - we love them to death already and are very happy with the results, although we spent the entire morning and early afternoon at the pound - it was well worth it. I guess it is a matter of luck mixed with patience and a lot of perseverence. Don't give up on adoptions though! Why make the innocent pay?

[ME]

Can they be sued on Baxters behalf?
Maybe that is one way to get this type of situation worked out.
This reminds me of the work of PETA
UGH!

[Ashley]

When I was in the sixth grade my cat died and a few months later my family decided that it was time for me to get another one to "replace" it. We went to the shelter and I picked out a cute little kitten. They told us that the kittens where not adoptable for another week but that they'll put that one on hold for us. A few days later they called us and said that the cat had mysteriously died. Susspecious of the fact that a perfectly healthy kitten died at the shelter, we ended up getting a free to good home kitten instead. About a couple of weeks or so later we where looking at the successful adoption stories in the rescues newletter and saw that our kitten was adopted out to someone else. Why would they do that to a little girl?

[Carol]

YEP - - am not at all surprised!!! H$U$, SPCA, and PETA are all in the same bag. They're agenda is to eradicate all pets! SAD! They're sick! That's the problem! I also grew up with dogs - all sizes - and know that I am a better person for what I learned from them.

When will everyone wake up and take away their non-profit status. When will people stop donating their hard-earned money - the agenda is NOT to save pets, but to take them away! IF they're not stopped - they WILL destroy our way of life!

[Beth W.]

It's Baxter that lost out here. That poor dog could have had a home with people to love him unconditionally, and because of the shelter "policies", he was put to sleep! I can understand if the dog was aggressive, but as stated by them he was "loveable". And the family agreed to sign a waiver allevating the shelter of any responsibility. It was said they don't know the backgrounds of most of these animals...ok, but don't they do a "behavior test" on them to see what their triggers are, if any? How else will they know if the animal is good with other dogs, kids, cats, etc?

As far as the rest of you writing comments here. If you can't teach your children to respect animals, that it's wrong to pull tails, ears, etc, you shouldn't have a pet. NONE OF MY KIDS (and I raised 5) ever mistreated an animal in any way. Now my granddaughter (4) lives with us. She also knows the difference between right & wrong, and how to treat an animal with respect. It's amazing how many people here in Maine let their kids do whatever, whenever they want without consequence.

[Bucky]

I have decided I will no longer complete and submit lengthy online (unsecure transmissions/non encrypted) applications truthfully for fear of identity theft, and other unscrupulous possibilities. Why do they want to know my employer, names and ages of everyone in my household, how many hours each day I'm away, home address, concede total strangers the right to come to my home to inspect it before during and after adoption, details about my kids, their names, ages etc. etc.

I feel violated..... and it's the poor adoptable animals who will suffer the most due to these inane "requirements."

[Joy]

To let you know I have two of the greatest dogs known to man and I also have a very sick grandmother who needs extra attention with no dogs in her life. I would be HONORED if you would adopt them. They are both about two, one is a lab mix and the other is a Blue Heeler mix. I know that if they were to live with you they would have a great life...

Let me know

Joy

Irishkidcop@yahoo.com