Odin-Genie Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 I value humans over dogs. You are proving my point that some think dogs are equal to humans. A child in danger doesn't have to be there through neglect sometime disasters happen and it's not the parent's fault. I just find it incredible that an adult would watch a child die to save their dog so that's why I'm asking. I can't imagine how I'd feel if somehow one of my kids died because someone chose to save their dog over my child. It would be interesting to hear if people with kids have the same viewpoint. I've never really subscribed to the argument that you can't comment on child issues unless you are a parent but maybe it is true. I don't value humans over dogs. They are different species. It's not a question of equality. It's a question of what one values more. And my family, both human and canine, take precedence over any one else. If your personal system of ethics dictates that humans are more important, that's fine. But people are different and their sense of what's ethical is also different. Don't try and impose your values on others. I haven't come across any logical rationale for this presumed superiority of humans. It's always an emotional response. And one can't argue with emotions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 But if you are in a disaster situation and you know things are dire you are still making a choice and if you grab your dog instead of the child you have chosen to let the child die. I think you know I don't mean you sit back and make a cup of tea cackling while the horrible brat carks it. I already know I'd choose human life over my dogs, partly because I know how I would feel if my family died because someone chose their dog over my child. Stranger or not a child is still a child and I couldn't live with myself if I picked my dog. My diving line is definitely there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 I value humans over dogs. You are proving my point that some think dogs are equal to humans. A child in danger doesn't have to be there through neglect sometime disasters happen and it's not the parent's fault. I just find it incredible that an adult would watch a child die to save their dog so that's why I'm asking. I can't imagine how I'd feel if somehow one of my kids died because someone chose to save their dog over my child. It would be interesting to hear if people with kids have the same viewpoint. I've never really subscribed to the argument that you can't comment on child issues unless you are a parent but maybe it is true. I don't value humans over dogs. They are different species. It's not a question of equality. It's a question of what one values more. And my family, both human and canine, take precedence over any one else. If your personal system of ethics dictates that humans are more important, that's fine. But people are different and their sense of what's ethical is also different. Don't try and impose your values on others. I haven't come across any logical rationale for this presumed superiority of humans. It's always an emotional response. And one can't argue with emotions. I could give you a whole host of logical rationales for why one species chooses to protect members of their own species :laugh: You say you have human family, would you chose one of your own human family over your dog? That contradicts this above "I don't value humans over dogs." I assume if one of your parents were in danger or a sibling you'd save them rather than your dog? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainers Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 I would never save any dog over a child and find it hard to believe that faced with the reality, that any decent human being would. It's got nothing to do with how maternal someone is, or how cute you find children - it's about basic empathy for others. Losing a dog is horrible and sad, but contributing to someone losing their child, which is unbearable, is monstrous no matter how you look at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tralee Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 (edited) I guess you don't get it either. Human children are not dogs and dogs are not human children, of course there are going to be different laws and treatment of them. Do you really think they are the same? You can be close to your dogs but they'll never be human. Don't treat me like an idiot please Jo, I didn't say they were the same, I said each to their own. Well, I don't have any children either. If I had to choose between someone elses' children and my dogs, my dogs would get precedence every time. I am responsible for my dogs, I am not responsible for other peoples children. You said this and I asked you to explain what you really meant so I'm trying to make you out to be the bad guy I asked twice if you meant it how it reads and you want to remain cryptic so don't be surprised when people only have your original words to go by. What has the council got to do with it, I asked a question that was nothing to do with council regulations. I understand that people feel the need to protect the things they love but I would like to believe that if it came down to it a person would reach for a child rather than their dog. I guess I better be looking out for number one at dog get togethers then because it seems that it shit goes down the dogs get saved first :laugh: Firstly, I don't see how the OP's original post has anything to do with other people's children being in jeopardy. So you are off topic, and flaunting the forum rules, by continually perpetuating this line of argument. You have this quirk for trying to castigate others by extending meanings from their posts that aren't really there. But for argument sake, I am not Superman, Bruce Willis or Wolverine. I have my lot and my portion which sometimes overwhelmes me. As a result, I have no obligation, or the means, or desire, to be altruistic. However, as a young adult, I spent many Summers in Life Saving at the beach. One year, I had my photo on the front of The Age, out amongst the breakers rescuing a teenage girl. I can still see her face submerged 3 feet under water when I reached her. But there were many others and most of them toddlers. If my dogs are neglected, I'm in the sh*! Other peoples children?? There aren't any here and that's the way I like it. Edited February 9, 2013 by Tralee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 I did ask you to elaborate and if I got it wrong but you refuse to answer so don't be surprised if people get things wrong. If you really do believe your dog should be saved over that of a child then admit it, if not tell me you weren't clear with how it was written and I am wrong. At least the others have the courage to say it, even if I don't agree with their beliefs they are not avoiding it once they bought it up. Debate is healthy but if you prefer not to talk about your posts I am confused why you post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 (edited) Trust me on this, I know what it is like to have a dog be your lifeline I've recently had some really horrible things happen that have and will keep me on the edge of my sanity and I am making some significant lifestyle choices to keep my dogs, something not many people could do. I'm now living on my own with my dogs, my mother is like yours and the only family other than my adult kids I have is my brother. So I am coming from the same place you are. But even though they mean as much to me as Justice does to you I would instinctively and non-instinctively save a child over them. So I'm not saying it because I don't have a strong connection to them. On everyday things sure I'd choose my dogs over a stranger, but not life or death. Edited February 9, 2013 by Reverend Jo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebanne Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 this thread has gone so far off topic it's not funny. The guide dog worker should be sacked. He was negligent in his duties and as a result of this caused the death of a dog. Fault lays firmly at his feet and I for one could care less how much he beats himself up over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odin-Genie Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 I value humans over dogs. You are proving my point that some think dogs are equal to humans. A child in danger doesn't have to be there through neglect sometime disasters happen and it's not the parent's fault. I just find it incredible that an adult would watch a child die to save their dog so that's why I'm asking. I can't imagine how I'd feel if somehow one of my kids died because someone chose to save their dog over my child. It would be interesting to hear if people with kids have the same viewpoint. I've never really subscribed to the argument that you can't comment on child issues unless you are a parent but maybe it is true. I don't value humans over dogs. They are different species. It's not a question of equality. It's a question of what one values more. And my family, both human and canine, take precedence over any one else. If your personal system of ethics dictates that humans are more important, that's fine. But people are different and their sense of what's ethical is also different. Don't try and impose your values on others. I haven't come across any logical rationale for this presumed superiority of humans. It's always an emotional response. And one can't argue with emotions. I could give you a whole host of logical rationales for why one species chooses to protect members of their own species :laugh: You say you have human family, would you chose one of your own human family over your dog? That contradicts this above "I don't value humans over dogs." I assume if one of your parents were in danger or a sibling you'd save them rather than your dog? Well, you haven't. And ethics isn't species related. What a species would do for its own survival does not define ethical standards. I don't value humans over dogs and I don't value dogs over humans. The species has nothing to do with my preference. The one and only thng that defines my preference is how much I value a particular member of my family. And those I value most, I will save first. But this is going way off topic and is an argument where those who disagree will continue to call the rest inhuman, simply because people react emotionally. So I will not participate in such a pointless discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 I suppose what is truly ironic about this particular case is that the guy was a Guide Dogs worker... his job is all about the provision of service dogs to blind people. A lapse in memory, judgement, or whatever is really not acceptable when you look at the larger picture here. While I understand that this guy is now going to have to live with the emotional fallout from his (in)actions, I really do think he may be in the wrong job if he can forget that a dog in his care is in the car - especially when he's parked in the carpark at his place of work - Guide Dogs WA no less... At the very least - if they don't sack him - then he should never be entrusted with another dog from the organisation. T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staffyluv Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 We have seen and heard of this happening so many times now.. It is heartbreaking.. I take Zig in the car with me a lot. If I need to pack the car up, he is the last thing to go in the car. He is the first thing out of the car at our destination. Then I unpack the car. I don't take him if I know he won't be able to get out of the car with me. These accidents should not happen. No one should ever be in a position to forget a dog in a car.. As sad as it is that the dog lost its life, one can only assume that someone working with the guide dogs loves animals and would be totally shattered at making such a horrible mistake. I can't imagine having to live with that for the rest of my life. Hopefully more people will learn that if you put your dog in a car, then it should be the first thing you remove when you set where you are going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
labadore Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 this thread has gone so far off topic it's not funny. The guide dog worker should be sacked. He was negligent in his duties and as a result of this caused the death of a dog. Fault lays firmly at his feet and I for one could care less how much he beats himself up over it. I suppose what is truly ironic about this particular case is that the guy was a Guide Dogs worker... his job is all about the provision of service dogs to blind people. A lapse in memory, judgement, or whatever is really not acceptable when you look at the larger picture here. While I understand that this guy is now going to have to live with the emotional fallout from his (in)actions, I really do think he may be in the wrong job if he can forget that a dog in his care is in the car - especially when he's parked in the carpark at his place of work - Guide Dogs WA no less... At the very least - if they don't sack him - then he should never be entrusted with another dog from the organisation. T. I too cannot believe how off topic this thread has gone . Thanks to the above posters for bringing it back on topic. I will reiterate, this guy's negligence caused a service dog who had the potential to do so much great work to die an agonising, horrendous and cruel death . He needs to be held accountable for this negligence. He failed in his duty of care to this poor dog, she lost her life in the worst possible way. He needs to lose his job and should never be allowed to work with dogs again as he cannot be trusted, one memory lapse in this type of role is one too many and in this case proved fatal Working with service dogs carries a much higher responsibility and accountability than owning a pet dog does and this job is only suitable for a select few. These dogs perform valuable community services and the handlers/carers are entrusted with the duty of care for these special dogs. Changing the types of vehicles these dogs are transported in as one poster has suggested and implementing more rigorous procedures for their transport can only go so far in ensuring the safety of these dogs, as ultimately, their safety is in the hands of their handler/carer who is responsible for performing their duty of care to these special dogs. This guy was in breach of his duty of care to Collete, his negligence caused her horrific death. He didn't leave her in the car at home or some other place, he left her in the car at his work place, his mind obviously wasn't on his job and he has proven he is not capable of performing the duty of care required for working with service dogs and he he needs to lose his job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poochmad Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 (edited) Reverend Jo - suggest you start a new thread about your topic. On topic, if the person isn't sacked, I'd be surprised if they don't resign. Can you imagine the other workers there? Whispering and looking at them, giving funny looks whenever there is contact, the person's reactions to notices of changes, knowing it's happening because of them. I'm sure the same high emotions being portrayed on here would be even higher at the work place. Edited February 10, 2013 by poochmad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 (edited) I don't think anyone who accidentally left a child or a dog in a car to perish would end up with a criminal conviction http://www.theage.co...0524-1z75u.html http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/national/16085078/mum-charged-over-toddler-death-is-pregnant/ No charges for this mother though http://news.smh.com....1212-2b8im.html Edited February 9, 2013 by Clyde Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosetta Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 (edited) Some people keep referring to this as an accident - it is not. It is negligence. All the policies and procedures in the world mean nothing if employees do not have the mental capacity to follow them. Perhaps this guy is mentally challenged? Many charitable organisations employ people who are. I don't understand how anyone could forget about having a dog in a car when the place of work is all about dogs - presumably with pictures of dogs scattered around the workplace. Would that not "jog" any person's memory? Edited February 9, 2013 by Rosetta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeckoTree Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 RIP dog, So avoidable. Is there not a law in WA about dogs locked in cars? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Sorry for going off the main topic, it lead there though and it seemed all that had been going to say was said. I guess for me it comes down to the guy's work record. If he had been squeaky clean and his work valuable then leaning towards not sacking, if he was known to be slack then yes, sack him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
labadore Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 (edited) Sorry for going off the main topic, it lead there though and it seemed all that had been going to say was said. I guess for me it comes down to the guy's work record. If he had been squeaky clean and his work valuable then leaning towards not sacking, if he was known to be slack then yes, sack him. In the workplace, there are terms and conditions of an employment contract that if breached are sackable offences (i.e. stealing from an employer, divulging confidential/sensitive information etc), regardless of the employees work record, so I would have thought that causing the death of a service dog in a dog related industry through negligence by the handler/carer would result in instant dismissal regardless of the handlers/carers word record. ETA - If causing the death of a service dog through negligence is not considered as grounds for instant dismissal as part of the handlers/carer employment terms and conditions, then it darn well should be - seriously what is a more serious breach of employment than causing the death of a service dog through negligence. Edited February 10, 2013 by labadore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 If that's in his contract of course, but it doesn't appear to be because they haven't said that in their announcement. So looks like it is a discretionary thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
labadore Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 If that's in his contract of course, but it doesn't appear to be because they haven't said that in their announcement. So looks like it is a discretionary thing. I was just amending my post as you replied Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now