Common Sense not applied to Oreo Situation

[Steve]

Hi,

I am new to these forums, and I want to post because what happened to Oreo greatly disturbed me. But I would like to post from another angle that is not really looked at.

There are all the arguments that Oreo could never be rehabilitated, or enjoy a quality of life. Nobody will now know if one of the offers put forth to the ASPCA would have made a difference. Personally, I would like to think it would have. But there is something else somewhat disturbing about this whole thing. Please read on...

Officials may say that what happened to Oreo, that an animal is euthanized for various behavior reasons, is a common occurrence, and that the process that occurred prior to Oreo being euthanized was standard process, meaning there were attempts with a trainer, behavior evaluation, etc. Then at the conclusion to all this, it was decided that Oreo was to be euthanized. I am sure there are just as terrible, or even worse, abuse stories that never become worldwide news items (the Oreo story has been picked up by news organizations outside the USA). But in this case, the reality is that Oreo's story DID make it to the news pages, and there was, and likely will be, a fair amount of attention given to this.

One may then say "Oreo was just one of the normal cases, all procedures were followed, and we scheduled the euthanization for the afternoon of the 13th, using all our policies. Other animals were very unfortunately euthanized in this country today under similar circumstances also."

Again, lets bring up the case that people DID know about Oreo's story. So, in not arguing for or against whether Oreo could be rehabilitated, or have some pleasure in life, I would like to look at it from this perspective:

The ASPCA is likely a great group. Ultimately the animals they have saved, the attention they have brought to animal cruelty issues, and other things they have done, has really been worthwhile. But as mentioned above, something about this disturbs me. The reality is that the ASPCA now had a high-profile case at hand. Regardless of what behaviors Oreo exhibited that were not seen by the public, it was still a high profile case. In my view, I really question why there was not simply a delay put forth, or, from the aspect of the ASPCA's public perception, a second look given. A public "forum" open (not this forum, just general discussion by the broader public) about the plight of Oreo, the ASPCA, etc.

So, maybe "standard procedure" was followed. But, no matter how big a group you are, there is always a way to intervene. Once, when purchasing a computer from Dell, something went wrong with the order, and I was quite upset. Dell was wrong, they made a mistake, and I said that if needed, I would even like to speak to Michael Dell about this. They told me I could not (of course I did not expect to speak to him, but I would have if he was put on the phone). Also, I am the CEO of a small corporation. We have staff to handle customer service issues, and other things similar. But occasionally, something gets through to me that was supposed to be handled by another staff member, and in many cases I will try to handle it! This is outside our "standard procedures". So, no matter how big an entity is, there CAN be intervention. And non-standard procedure should be part of "standard procedure". And I think something broke down today.

It was almost handled like a government handing down a sentence! Oreos death was scheduled... maybe the "papers were stamped, appeals heard, and the schedule set". But this is not a government! This is an organization that is supported by 1000's of individuals. This WAS a case with public attention. The ASPCA in my view, should have stepped up further, and taken a close look at the public nature of this, and intervened, EVEN IF Oreo's fate would ultimately have to be what it was (but I like to always think there could have been an alternative). From a corporate view, there is now the risk that some donors will stop donating because of this. That is NOT what is needed. And hopefully, and as a writer, I do plead to any donor to not look at a potential mistake of the ASPCA as the sole reason to not donate. There will be an animal somewhere affected by your decision not to donate (unless you take the same funds and give it elsewhere). And I do not think you would be happy looking at a dog that needs rescuing and say to it "sorry, you cannot get rescued because the ASPCA did something wrong and I had to hold back funds". So look at the animals potentially affected by holding back donations.

On the other hand, I hope the ASPCA is held accountable for some of the actions. Sticking to a "death sentence" like schedule, not giving the public some consideration today, in a time where many were likely in emotional distress, shows a disregard which I think needs some real attention. I believe MANY are very upset tonight, and something simply does not make sense to the masses. "Why was it simply not delayed until tomorrow, or Monday. Someone could have done that. 3:00PM today was not a law! Why were things not delayed? It seemed like such a simple thing to do".

Personally, I was watching the story most of today, checking back in from time to time, hoping for a reprieve. Now the public is in a state of distress, rather than having the opportunity to take up this issue with a level of functional discussion. I hope the ASPCA continues to do very good things. But please take a second look... a good second look, at how "standard procedures" may have potentially cost you all a good opportunity to get beneficial attention, and how it possibly cost an animal a chance to have a rewarding life, even if the odds were stacked well against it.

I am not wanting start an inflamed discussion. I am just venting some thoughts that I have been thinking of much of the day.

Regards,

Steve

[Bullies2Love]

Steve,
I am not sure of the words to say about this other than all my friends on Facebook that are Pit Bull rescuers were ripping when they learned of Oreo's death. I too am sadden that nothing further was done and if I am not mistakened some people were in the process of trying to save the dog.
I am sharing your story on my wall on facebook.

[Steve]

I would like to add that the CEO of the ASPCA made a statement most of us likely read. At the end of the statement, it was posted... "Yet, the moment this statement is picked up, we will feel the repercussions of the difficult decision we know had to be made. We will receive angry phone calls… profanity-laced e-mails... and we will likely be vilified by tweeters and bloggers across the country. And the rallying cry of these missives will all be the same: the ASPCA failed this animal."

Then this is all the more reason to simply pause for a moment, and allow a shared reflection over this situation (between the public, and the ASPCA). This way, the impressions of "us against an unbending giant" would not have been fueled, even if the ASPCA is not really an unbending giant. By announcing what was picked up by the press as an "execution date" at the last minute, it played into all the possible emotions of everyone. Urgency, disbelief, raw emotion, etc. And ultimately maybe these emotions could not be avoided. But still, I think there was an opportunity lost here. What was the rush yesterday once it was obvious this hit the presses? That is what I do not quite understand. And it is unfortunate that the ASPCA would have to endure "angry phone calls… profanity-laced e-mails", as the CEO posted, about anything. I just think that the way this was handled, it may have placed, hopefully just temporarily, a point of contention between the ASPCA and many animal supporters out there.

And maybe there can be lessons here, for both the public, and the ASPCA itself, and even better outcomes can occur in the future.

[Pam Bonaventura]

Hi! I also am new to this forum. The comments posted about this sad case have been really revealing. May I appeal to those of you who have vowed to NEVER donate again to the ASPCA. I say this as an English silver-surfer living for nearly half a century in southern Italy. I have been following the ASPCA on Animal Planet through satellite TV and can assure you that America, with it's Police Dog Force, is the envy of animal lovers here in Italy.

Here in Italy there is no help for animals accept at a very basic level. The few Animal Welfare laws that exist are never applied (surprise!) and although local governments are supposed to maintain a small shelter for strays in their district, this is abused by people who set up private 'shelters' to gain the small sum set aside for this purpose, but which finishes in their pockets and the animals are left to starve in atrocious conditions. There is no private or national help for animals at all here.

Your wonderful organisations exist thanks to public donations from civil minded people like yourselves. This is true of all the Anglo-Saxon countries. In the UK we have the RSPCA and other animal welfare organisations also privately funded, in the South Africa, Australia and New Zealand & Canada it is the same. Be proud and above all be thankful.

In Europe it is a struggle for animal lovers to help our voiceless friends. Please remember this when you say 'how awful - I'm not donating anymore'. Why penalise thousands of other animals for one highlighted case?

And remember how lucky you all are to have your Animal Cops - bring them to Italy.......

[Darrell]

Steve:

I think you hit the nail on the head. Nice writeup.

[Steve]

Thanks Darrell...

If the ASPCA is officially listening, I really would hope these questions are, or become answered at some point:

1. Why was it so important to stick to the schedule yesterday?

2. Did you truly evaluate any of the offers made from the outside to take over responsibility for Oreo?

3. Did you give yourself enough time to evaluate these offers, and if not, why not give a little extra time?

4. Were you keenly aware of the public reaction going on, and why did you not consider a delay, or alternative in light of this attention and the potental negative affect this could have on the ASPCA?

5. Could a representative of the ASPCA join in a public discussion over this, in a place such as these forums, on this and other cases, rather than issuing a press release.

6. The press release yesterday said "Her contact with the outside world would have been minimal at best. Her quality of life would have been reduced to virtually nothing." Did you evaluate what type of facilities could have been provided by other organizations that came to you yesterday?

7. Do you believe there is an change of policy that could occur out of this? Are you second guessing any of your own policies or handling of this case? Or simply, do you belive stepping outside standard procedures from time to time is OK, and do you give yourselves the freedom to do this?

8. If it is determined by your own internal investigations that this was mishandled, could there be a more personal statement, apology, or whatever, regarding the handling of this case? If this is in order, it may serve to educate, and calm any potential rifts that have developed. Why apology? Because you were keenly aware of the reaction of the animal loving public, yet you seemed awfully decided on sticking to a schedule, and to not consider what was happening on the outside. Or it seemed this way. That is why I almost feel like the public is starved for something more tangible from the ASPCA than yesterdays press release.

The ASPCA did mishandle this event (again, in my opinion), but on the other hand, you have it in your ability to reach out in a way that may undo at least some of the damage. We all make mistakes unfortunately, and the ability to admit to a mistake, in a heartfelt way, will allow for quicker healing, and for positive things to occur from this negative situation. And maybe people will end up forgiving also! And if it truly ends up not being a mistake (and I am mistaken), then enlighten us more regarding the events, so it can help us reach a resolve on this.

[Barbara]

Steve, this is a well thought out, coherent, reasonable list of questions in my opinion. I would hope that the ASPCA would make the effort to provide answers. As I stated in the other thread that Darrell started, I'd like to know whether there were legal/insurance/liability issues that precluded the transfer of Oreo to another facility and, if so, exactly what they were.

[I Figueroa]

I just posted this comment in the NY Bird club community and found this wonderful post by Steve, so I thought it was an appropriate place to re post it:

The NY Times article is not accepting any more comments about Oreo.

The ASPCA does have a high tech hospital in NYC and I would hate to see that service suffer because revenue is withheld, but I support letting them know of our concerns for their assessment practices, strongly encouraging them to review their procedures and protocols to ensure that they have actually done all that could be done. This includes allowing other groups to step in and take responsibility for the animal.
I have been disturbed by the show Animal Precint, the episodes that show the staff in the process of assessing a dog for their potential for rehabilitation. Some of their techniques i would not use with my own animals because they seem unnecessarily aggressive/provoking in nature. Grabbing their food bowl while they eat, dangling weird fake hands in their faces, these things would disturb even me, let alone a traumatized dog. 5 months is not long enough for an abused dog to show what they can become, no one would expect a human with mental disorders to respond in that short period of time!
I support the legal team of the ASPCA, going after abusers; and the great job done in their magnificent hospital ( I still recall the life saving behavior by one of their vets in saving a "no pulse" puppy brought to their facility, the extreme measures taken by the vet). It is these extreme measures that I want to see in dealing with mental injuries also. We need to contact the organization and demand that they review their practices if they are to continue receiving our financial support. We have to demand and give them a chance to change, before putting the animals currently in their care in jeopardy by withdrawing our donations. Think of them. Demand a change.

AND, if you are one of those neighbors, hearing a beating for 20 to 30 minutes, GET involved and call the police! My gosh! If these neighbors would have acted from the get go, Oreo would have had a better shot at life. GET INVOLVED before it gets worse. BE a nosy neighbor for goodness sake. Things would have been different for Oreo and the animals in the recent abuse case in Selden, Long Island.
We have to address everyone's responsibility, starting with the human in the mirror.

I am now copying this letter to the ASPCA, trying to avoid another Oreo:
ASPCA, you need to review your practices before you request any more support from us. We need to see this organization take action, show the public that they are putting forth a new, revised protocol in dealing with severe mental injuries.
Your response of "it is business as usual and we are following standard procedure" is not enough in this time and place.

Ivette

[Kathi Reid]

Very well put Ivette. I hope there is a response.

[Belles]

Ivette, you only see snippets of scenes on Animal Precinct. Please do not think that behavioral analysis consists of sticking a hand in front of a dog while she's eating. There is a very long process with painstaking steps along the way. It's a half hour show.. at least do some googling and find out a bit more about how this process works.

I agree, you should contact them and make your demands and voice heard. While you're at it, why don't you contact PetsAlive and ask them where the hell they were WELL BEFORE this dog was ever put down? That's the question I have.. crying foul the day this dog is set to be euthanized is not very fair.. and now they are asking for donations so they can "help more dogs like Oreo live!" I find that disgusting.. they were nowhere to be found for months.. and now that she is dead, they are blaming the ASPCA, making themselves out to be the hero and asking for people to stop donating to the ASPCA and donate instead to them.

Why would they fix her broken bones, nurse her back to nutritional health and work with her for 5 months.. only to make the decision to euthanize her. This makes no sense to me.

I think before you begin demanding answers.. we need to learn the facts of what happened. Conjecture as to what happened is premature.

[Gunzilla]

I see you're asking some well founded questions, Belles, but no one seems to have an answer regarding PetsAlive. I, too, would like to know where they were in the months previous to Oreo's euthanization. It's obvious that the ASPCA had not intended to euthanize this animal, like you said, "Why would they fix her broken bones, nurse her back to nutritional health and work with her for 5 months.. only to make the decision to euthanize her."

[Belles]

Renee.. that's the part that keeps sticking in my mind.. I mean, why even bother. While her medical care costs were part of doing business for them, it was costs nonetheless.

I would also like to know why nobody stepped forward to help this dog until the eleventh hour..

Maybe we'll never know all the answers and each of us has to accept our own feelings on the matter.

She's gone, that's the horrible part.. not made much better by the slimey tactics of this rescue trying to cash in on her death. I think that's tasteless and tacky.

[Darrell]

belles:

Unfortunately, I believe that only by demanding answers will we ever get to the facts. I say put it on "60 minutes";and let's hear both sides give their side of the story.