Article Not Good For Rescues

[Snout Girl]

I am in the middle of privately fostering my first foster dog at the moment, and have also approached rescue about adopting so have been on both sides of the fence.

One breed rescue has a blanket policy of 'will not adopt to people working full time'. they will not take personal circumstances or individual dog needs into consideration: if you work full time, you're out!

I would like to know where all these people are who have at least one person home all day. surely you seriously narrow your aoption pool by not looking at individual cases.

just my thoughts.

[Aphra]

I just find this weird. I work full time, I have my own dogs, I run a rescue group and I foster. All of the dogs cope; in fact I think it's a really important life skill for dogs to learn to cope without constant interaction or company. We don't have any blanket rules, it's horses for courses, an anxious dog might not cope with people who work all day, but a calm, confident dog will happily amuse itself alone, as thousands of dogs all over the country already do. If you refuse dogs to people who work full time you pretty much exclude a big group of people who can afford to care for a dog.

We've had people adopt from us who were on the verge of giving up on rescue; good homes and caring people, but just found the whole process so difficult and unpleasant. It seems really wrong to me that people who are actually ;trying to do a good thing are treated with such suspicion and cynicism. By all means investigate and place dogs carefully, but don't make the process so intrusive and uncomfortable that people give up on rescue altogether. Getting a dog or cat should be a really happy, joyous occasion, and shouldn't make you feel horrible. Ask people to demonstrate their fabulousness as pet owners, not prove they're not serial killers.

The reality is that only a very small percentage of the total dog population of Australia end up in pounds, which suggests than many more people than not are doing the right thing. if you're so suspicious of people and so untrusting you probably shouldn't be doing rescue.

I am in the middle of privately fostering my first foster dog at the moment, and have also approached rescue about adopting so have been on both sides of the fence.

One breed rescue has a blanket policy of 'will not adopt to people working full time'. they will not take personal circumstances or individual dog needs into consideration: if you work full time, you're out!

I would like to know where all these people are who have at least one person home all day. surely you seriously narrow your aoption pool by not looking at individual cases.

just my thoughts.

[minimax]

I am in the middle of privately fostering my first foster dog at the moment, and have also approached rescue about adopting so have been on both sides of the fence.

One breed rescue has a blanket policy of 'will not adopt to people working full time'. they will not take personal circumstances or individual dog needs into consideration: if you work full time, you're out!

I would like to know where all these people are who have at least one person home all day. surely you seriously narrow your aoption pool by not looking at individual cases.

just my thoughts.

I find that really weird, and again it's the income vs being home. All well and good if you're home all day to watch the dog sleep (and I'm sure most people would love to do that!), but if you're not working do you have the funds available for the best care of the dog, emergency vet care etc?

Full disclosure: I was knocked back several times for rescue pugs on the basis I work full time. I ended up getting mine from breeders and am perfectly happy with them and love them to bits, and am not bitter towards rescues, just really find the "if you work full time you can't be a good pet owner" to be a bizzare mentality!

Edited December 11, 2012 by minimax

[sas]

We have a lengthy questionnaire. It weeds out the uncommittted - saves me a bunch of time.

I don't care about full time workers if the dog has shown it can handle that. We have some dogs that couldn't though so wouldn't put them in that situation.

I won't rehome a Dane to an apartment dweller or someone who has a townhouse courtyard though.

Edited December 11, 2012 by sas

[kayla1]

I just find this weird. I work full time, I have my own dogs, I run a rescue group and I foster. All of the dogs cope; in fact I think it's a really important life skill for dogs to learn to cope without constant interaction or company. We don't have any blanket rules, it's horses for courses, an anxious dog might not cope with people who work all day, but a calm, confident dog will happily amuse itself alone, as thousands of dogs all over the country already do. If you refuse dogs to people who work full time you pretty much exclude a big group of people who can afford to care for a dog.

We've had people adopt from us who were on the verge of giving up on rescue; good homes and caring people, but just found the whole process so difficult and unpleasant. It seems really wrong to me that people who are actually ;trying to do a good thing are treated with such suspicion and cynicism. By all means investigate and place dogs carefully, but don't make the process so intrusive and uncomfortable that people give up on rescue altogether. Getting a dog or cat should be a really happy, joyous occasion, and shouldn't make you feel horrible. Ask people to demonstrate their fabulousness as pet owners, not prove they're not serial killers.

The reality is that only a very small percentage of the total dog population of Australia end up in pounds, which suggests than many more people than not are doing the right thing. if you're so suspicious of people and so untrusting you probably shouldn't be doing rescue.

If you go into each application with an open mind, rather than treating applicants with cynicism, it's easier to gather the information and applicants tend not to feel uncomfortable. Though of course there are always some that feel uncomfortable completing an application form or answering questions, or that find yard checks intrusive etc, and they'll go somewhere else.

It's not the full-time work as such, it's all the other things relevant for the dog's lifestyle - hours alone, other pets, exercise etc etc. Personally I prefer case by case based on these other factors, but if some rescue groups choose not to rehome dogs to full-time workers then that's entirely their perogative - their dog, their choice.

[chuckandsteve]

I just find this weird. I work full time, I have my own dogs, I run a rescue group and I foster. All of the dogs cope; in fact I think it's a really important life skill for dogs to learn to cope without constant interaction or company. We don't have any blanket rules, it's horses for courses, an anxious dog might not cope with people who work all day, but a calm, confident dog will happily amuse itself alone, as thousands of dogs all over the country already do. If you refuse dogs to people who work full time you pretty much exclude a big group of people who can afford to care for a dog.

We've had people adopt from us who were on the verge of giving up on rescue; good homes and caring people, but just found the whole process so difficult and unpleasant. It seems really wrong to me that people who are actually ;trying to do a good thing are treated with such suspicion and cynicism. By all means investigate and place dogs carefully, but don't make the process so intrusive and uncomfortable that people give up on rescue altogether. Getting a dog or cat should be a really happy, joyous occasion, and shouldn't make you feel horrible. Ask people to demonstrate their fabulousness as pet owners, not prove they're not serial killers.

The reality is that only a very small percentage of the total dog population of Australia end up in pounds, which suggests than many more people than not are doing the right thing. if you're so suspicious of people and so untrusting you probably shouldn't be doing rescue.

If you go into each application with an open mind, rather than treating applicants with cynicism, it's easier to gather the information and applicants tend not to feel uncomfortable. Though of course there are always some that feel uncomfortable completing an application form or answering questions, or that find yard checks intrusive etc, and they'll go somewhere else.

It's not the full-time work as such, it's all the other things relevant for the dog's lifestyle - hours alone, other pets, exercise etc etc. Personally I prefer case by case based on these other factors, but if some rescue groups choose not to rehome dogs to full-time workers then that's entirely their perogative - their dog, their choice.

I think thats hit the nail on the head, when rescue are closed minded toward adopters. A lot have also been in the game longer than they should have and or have no people skills. They are out right rude, like it or not the general public views rescue as a business of some sort and expect some sort of customer service. I find a lot of rescues have conflicting opinion there in that they see themselves as volunteers and adopters should bend to fit in with them.

[Dame Aussie]

I fully agree that some are over the top. I once saw an adoption form from a rescue that asked for annual salary. I'm sorry, but there has to be a limit on privacy invasion. There has to be a happy medium where people are not treated like arseholes and imbeciles. Because if that's the sort of lengths it goes to then it's too much.

Sale of any animal can be done with common sense, both on behalf of the animal and the humans involved.

Then the ones that say no you can't have an animal because you work full time - so do they want you to be able to finacially care for the pet, or not?

That p*sses me off.

[Snout Girl]

I am in the middle of privately fostering my first foster dog at the moment, and have also approached rescue about adopting so have been on both sides of the fence.

One breed rescue has a blanket policy of 'will not adopt to people working full time'. they will not take personal circumstances or individual dog needs into consideration: if you work full time, you're out!

I would like to know where all these people are who have at least one person home all day. surely you seriously narrow your aoption pool by not looking at individual cases.

just my thoughts.

I find that really weird, and again it's the income vs being home. All well and good if you're home all day to watch the dog sleep (and I'm sure most people would love to do that!), but if you're not working do you have the funds available for the best care of the dog, emergency vet care etc?

Full disclosure: I was knocked back several times for rescue pugs on the basis I work full time. I ended up getting mine from breeders and am perfectly happy with them and love them to bits, and am not bitter towards rescues, just really find the "if you work full time you can't be a good pet owner" to be a bizzare mentality!

I was knocked back for rescue pugs as well, both as an owner and potential foster carer. I also have 2 from breeders who had no problems with me working full time. I too find it bizarre.

[Dame Aussie]

I am in the middle of privately fostering my first foster dog at the moment, and have also approached rescue about adopting so have been on both sides of the fence.

One breed rescue has a blanket policy of 'will not adopt to people working full time'. they will not take personal circumstances or individual dog needs into consideration: if you work full time, you're out!

I would like to know where all these people are who have at least one person home all day. surely you seriously narrow your aoption pool by not looking at individual cases.

just my thoughts.

I find that really weird, and again it's the income vs being home. All well and good if you're home all day to watch the dog sleep (and I'm sure most people would love to do that!), but if you're not working do you have the funds available for the best care of the dog, emergency vet care etc?

Full disclosure: I was knocked back several times for rescue pugs on the basis I work full time. I ended up getting mine from breeders and am perfectly happy with them and love them to bits, and am not bitter towards rescues, just really find the "if you work full time you can't be a good pet owner" to be a bizzare mentality!

I was knocked back for rescue pugs as well, both as an owner and potential foster carer. I also have 2 from breeders who had no problems with me working full time. I too find it bizarre.

The way I see it, resuces who have these types of rules are just missing out on some excellent owners. It's their loss.

[Joany]

What did me in was when I went with someone to do a house check and the potential new owner was knocked back because her kids were in their PJ'S at 10 am.

[Steve]

What did me in was when I went with someone to do a house check and the potential new owner was knocked back because her kids were in their PJ'S at 10 am.

I witnessed something similar and I was so upset by it that I actually came home and threw out all of my kids pyjamas and from then on right up till right now they sleep in tracky dacks or T shirts etc in case anyone came and judged me unfit for my dogs because my kids had a sleep in.

Ive never done a yard check for any rescue since.

[tdierikx]

I find that just talking with prospective adopters tends to give a much better idea than any application form process.

I've looked at a few adoption application forms out there, and have found many of them to be somewhat intrusive and can be daunting for prospective adopters - that's why we don't have a form, but ask people to actually call us about any dog they may be interested in.

We seem to be able to find decent and permanent homes for most of our charges (very few returns) with our procedures/processes.

Sure, we get our fair share of people who may not be suited to the particular dog they are calling about, but we can suggest/show to them other dogs that may be a better fit. It's fairly rare that we get a potential adopter that isn't suited to any dog available - but we have knocked back one or two who really would have been suited to a stuffed toy instead of a real dog... *grin*

The trick is in the communication and time spent making sure of the adopter's expectations - then matching them to a dog that they can live with. If you don't have the time to talk to adopters, and are using an adoption form to "weed out timewasters", then maybe a rethink of how much workload you are taking on is in order.

A big part of rescue is about communication - if you don't have any people skills at all, then you really aren't going to get far.

T.

[Plan B]

Full disclosure: I was knocked back several times for rescue pugs on the basis I work full time.

Were you knocked back because you work full time or were you knocked back because there were equally brilliant family applying that didn't work full time?

[Aphra]

A big part of rescue is about communication - if you don't have any people skills at all, then you really aren't going to get far.

Amen.

[Little Gifts]

T that is why when i do home checks i go in and just talk and look around and get a feel for the people and their lifestyle because i want which ever dog and them to have the most brilliant life together. people just have to be perfect for the specific dog they are interested in, not perfect according to my standards. i home checked some religious vegetarians and they were worried about that but could clearly tell the difference between what they chose to eat and what a natural dogs diet was. and i've not yet met a dog who doesn't like a sleep in with its humans!

[minimax]

Full disclosure: I was knocked back several times for rescue pugs on the basis I work full time.

Were you knocked back because you work full time or were you knocked back because there were equally brilliant family applying that didn't work full time?

I was told I wasn't suitable as I worked full time. What went on behind the scenes with others applicants I don't know, because I wasn't applying for specific pugs, but was open for any.

[Greytmate]

I find that just talking with prospective adopters tends to give a much better idea than any application form process.

I've looked at a few adoption application forms out there, and have found many of them to be somewhat intrusive and can be daunting for prospective adopters - that's why we don't have a form, but ask people to actually call us about any dog they may be interested in.

We seem to be able to find decent and permanent homes for most of our charges (very few returns) with our procedures/processes.

Sure, we get our fair share of people who may not be suited to the particular dog they are calling about, but we can suggest/show to them other dogs that may be a better fit. It's fairly rare that we get a potential adopter that isn't suited to any dog available - but we have knocked back one or two who really would have been suited to a stuffed toy instead of a real dog... *grin*

The trick is in the communication and time spent making sure of the adopter's expectations - then matching them to a dog that they can live with. If you don't have the time to talk to adopters, and are using an adoption form to "weed out timewasters", then maybe a rethink of how much workload you are taking on is in order.

A big part of rescue is about communication - if you don't have any people skills at all, then you really aren't going to get far.

T.

Agree totally with this.

If a rescue is knocking back all fulltime workers as being unsuitable to adopt from them I would assume it is because they are adopting out dogs prone to separation anxiety and have no idea how to avoid it other than putting dogs in homes where people are usually home. A good rescue should be able to match a well- adjusted dog with people that work full time, and to know what sort of homes would suit their different dogs.

Unless it is a breed where demand outstrips supply in which case the dog will go to the family that most impresses the rescue. Good homes may miss out and that is no reflection on them.

[Little Gifts]

actually that is a reality - some dogs get multiple interest in them so an applicant wont have a clue that they are competing for a specific dog. maybe the feedback on why an applicant wasn't successful needs some fine tuning so people aren't so discouraged and left feeling bad about what they have to offer?

[tdierikx]

Feedback - both good and bad - needs to be delivered with some finesse... most people don't like being told no with little (or what they deem to be insufficient) grounds for their "rejection".

T.

[tdierikx]

On the other side of the coin is exactly what the article says happens - people go out to a pet store, the internet, or breeders (of all types) to source the pet they want.

We can't make it too bloody hard for anyone to adopt our charges - it just makes them go to other sources for a pet instead - we need a fine balance to make it all work for all involved.

T.