ShocksMyBrain 9,362 Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 This was posted on the AU FB page earlier this afternoon: The students involved in a recent incident that raised issues related to PTSD and service dogs have met and agreed the misunderstanding is an opportunity to raise awareness about the challenges often faced by veterans. Educational programs will be developed by the University and promoted to the campus and local communities.The students agree the incident has been mischaracterized through various forms of media. The students also encouraged those using social media to focus any comments on the positive impact of more understanding about PTSD and service dogs, as they have pledged to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoundationEagle 637 Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 Right way to handle the 2 players and the public. The girl and her sister, however, don't deserve this nice response Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diretiger 0 Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 so our players and the school in general get their names dragged through the mud in a public manner for a week, are basically completely vindicated, and those doing the dragging get to slink off back to their dens with no consequences. glad this worked out so well, and that if football doesn't work out for either of the players they won't have to worry about this coming up later when they apply for jobs, since I'm sure espn and the rest will be running this update on the front page of their websites just like they did the original smear campaign Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike4AU 1,739 Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 This would be a good time to close out comments on this issue. This is a very good end to an unfortunate incident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdgeneration 6,469 Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 Congrats and thanks to autigeremt and all the others at the university who helped these students come to a mutual understanding. Hopefully, there will be an apology coming forth from the sister and K9 for Warriors, who I now have no respect for and will not view as a serious organization. The young lady has my compassion, because she was willing to work through this and she has some issues to deal with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUbritt 611 Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 This would be a good time to close out comments on this issue. This is a very good end to an unfortunate incident. Agreed. ^^^^^ This, and thanks to autigeremt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexava 6,973 Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 This was posted on the AU FB page earlier this afternoon: The students involved in a recent incident that raised issues related to PTSD and service dogs have met and agreed the misunderstanding is an opportunity to raise awareness about the challenges often faced by veterans. Educational programs will be developed by the University and promoted to the campus and local communities.The students agree the incident has been mischaracterized through various forms of media. The students also encouraged those using social media to focus any comments on the positive impact of more understanding about PTSD and service dogs, as they have pledged to do. does this mean all students involved including the girl? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 Congrats and thanks to autigeremt and all the others at the university who helped these students come to a mutual understanding. Hopefully, there will be an apology coming forth from the sister and K9 for Warriors, who I now have no respect for and will not view as a serious organization. The young lady has my compassion, because she was willing to work through this and she has some issues to deal with. Oh yes by all means let's not support a fantastic organization because they decided to support on of their own. I think everyone should get on with their lives and let this student get on with hers. Some of the comments about her have been disgusting. I certainly don't want to see her become on of our 22 suicides happening every day so let it go and move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUIH1 1,515 Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 Congrats and thanks to autigeremt and all the others at the university who helped these students come to a mutual understanding. Hopefully, there will be an apology coming forth from the sister and K9 for Warriors, who I now have no respect for and will not view as a serious organization. The young lady has my compassion, because she was willing to work through this and she has some issues to deal with. Oh yes by all means let's not support a fantastic organization because they decided to support on of their own. I think everyone should get on with their lives and let this student get on with hers. Some of the comments about her have been disgusting. I certainly don't want to see her become on of our 22 suicides happening every day so let it go and move on. While I agree with you in general about those who are really suffering from PTSD, there is evidence out there that this girl is working/scamming the VA system and there is no doubt that K9 for Warriors jumped in the pool on this one before they looked to see if there was water in the pool. Also, I believe the biggest problem in this situation has more to do with the sister and not with the actual girl involved. wde Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTiger 3,896 Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 Congrats and thanks to autigeremt and all the others at the university who helped these students come to a mutual understanding. Hopefully, there will be an apology coming forth from the sister and K9 for Warriors, who I now have no respect for and will not view as a serious organization. The young lady has my compassion, because she was willing to work through this and she has some issues to deal with. Oh yes by all means let's not support a fantastic organization because they decided to support on of their own. I think everyone should get on with their lives and let this student get on with hers. Some of the comments about her have been disgusting. I certainly don't want to see her become on of our 22 suicides happening every day so let it go and move on. I definitely won't go as far as calling them a fantastic organization. They lost a lot of credibility and respect from the way they handled this and just blindly accepted ONE side of the story. They did no research to gather any facts at all. NONE. They vilified our university and the players and no "fantastic" organization would do this without gathering all the information first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoic-one 1,543 Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 Everyone involved needs to pause and take a deep breath, just like the parties in this dispute have done. Too many mistakes have been made by a lot of people, if the primary people involved have conceded this, perhaps others will as well. If not, so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoundationEagle 637 Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 Congrats and thanks to autigeremt and all the others at the university who helped these students come to a mutual understanding. Hopefully, there will be an apology coming forth from the sister and K9 for Warriors, who I now have no respect for and will not view as a serious organization. The young lady has my compassion, because she was willing to work through this and she has some issues to deal with. Oh yes by all means let's not support a fantastic organization because they decided to support on of their own. I think everyone should get on with their lives and let this student get on with hers. Some of the comments about her have been disgusting. I certainly don't want to see her become on of our 22 suicides happening every day so let it go and move on. I definitely won't go as far as calling them a fantastic organization. They lost a lot of credibility and respect from the way they handled this and just blindly accepted ONE side of the story. They did no research to gather any facts at all. NONE. They vilified our university and the players and no "fantastic" organization would do this without gathering all the information first. They may be a great organization, but they made a mistake and tried to publicly villify the entire Auburn University because of the rants of one liar. They owe an apology at the very least. Any "great" organization would realize this. On the flip side, organizations led by shallow people with agendas and willingness to destroy innocent people to try and gain momentum for their cause would never apologize. I guess we will see in the next week or two which one they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdgeneration 6,469 Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 I have to be honest and say that I don't know if it was the organization itself or just posters on their Facebook that made me lose respect. I am sure they do a lot of good for a lot of people, but I do not like the fact I saw no effort on their part to make sure that they had the entire story. I am ready to let it all go and I very much appreciate the way the university and the young men handled themselves after the event. Like I said, the young lady deserves our compassion. I hope everyone involved has learned a lesson about communication and tolerance. Its time for the cynical side if me will slither back into its hole for another day. Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
autigeremt 6,569 Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 Let's not go so far as deep sixing K9s for Warriors. Mistakes were made and learned from but they do a lot of great work with veterans. I think we will be better at handling these issues moving forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatBoCamRob 30 Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 I definitely won't go as far as calling them a fantastic organization. They lost a lot of credibility and respect from the way they handled this and just blindly accepted ONE side of the story. They did no research to gather any facts at all. NONE. They vilified our university and the players and no "fantastic" organization would do this without gathering all the information first. Let's not go so far as deep sixing K9s for Warriors. Mistakes were made and learned from but they do a lot of great work with veterans. I think we will be better at handling these issues moving forward. This was a tough chapter for AU Football. I think the program exited it correctly. I have a very hard time when, at a glance, I see an organization that takes dogs from the pound, trains them for a couple of weeks, puts a vest on them, and calls them service animals. Seems more like a souped-up pet to me. I think if the university really wanted to come out swinging, there is a lot that a research institution with a veterinary school can do. For example, I wonder what experiments would conclude if K9s for Warriors program was compared with control groups, etc. Is there a marginal benefit to the war veteran to have a pet that is designated as a service animal, above having a regular pet? (Establish a baseline. Compare 2 groups of a significant sample size using the same questions and metrics, etc.) Does pairing a veteran with a dog that was bred for and extensively trained to be a guide-level service dog, rather than a dog with little training sourced from a shelter, carry a higher level of benefit to the veteran? (Establish a baseline, compare the 2 groups...) Do the veterans, who suffer from PTSD and "do not like to be the center of attention," ever feel unnecessarily visible because they have a large animal in public places where one would not normally see them? (Establish a baseline, compare the 2 groups...) These would be great research subjects... As would the capability of a non-deployed soldier to develop PTSD. But, what do I know? I'm not a psychologist. And I've never been shot at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexava 6,973 Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 I definitely won't go as far as calling them a fantastic organization. They lost a lot of credibility and respect from the way they handled this and just blindly accepted ONE side of the story. They did no research to gather any facts at all. NONE. They vilified our university and the players and no "fantastic" organization would do this without gathering all the information first. Let's not go so far as deep sixing K9s for Warriors. Mistakes were made and learned from but they do a lot of great work with veterans. I think we will be better at handling these issues moving forward. This was a tough chapter for AU Football. I think the program exited it correctly. I have a very hard time when, at a glance, I see an organization that takes dogs from the pound, trains them for a couple of weeks, puts a vest on them, and calls them service animals. Seems more like a souped-up pet to me. I think if the university really wanted to come out swinging, there is a lot that a research institution with a veterinary school can do. For example, I wonder what experiments would conclude if K9s for Warriors program was compared with control groups, etc. Is there a marginal benefit to the war veteran to have a pet that is designated as a service animal, above having a regular pet? (Establish a baseline. Compare 2 groups of a significant sample size using the same questions and metrics, etc.) Does pairing a veteran with a dog that was bred for and extensively trained to be a guide-level service dog, rather than a dog with little training sourced from a shelter, carry a higher level of benefit to the veteran? (Establish a baseline, compare the 2 groups...) Do the veterans, who suffer from PTSD and "do not like to be the center of attention," ever feel unnecessarily visible because they have a large animal in public places where one would not normally see them? (Establish a baseline, compare the 2 groups...) These would be great research subjects... As would the capability of a non-deployed soldier to develop PTSD. But, what do I know? I'm not a psychologist. And I've never been shot at. i have wondered the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plainsman04 0 Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 I guess I shouldn't be surprised that al.com hasn't bothered to print this statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texan4Auburn 1,626 Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 I definitely won't go as far as calling them a fantastic organization. They lost a lot of credibility and respect from the way they handled this and just blindly accepted ONE side of the story. They did no research to gather any facts at all. NONE. They vilified our university and the players and no "fantastic" organization would do this without gathering all the information first. Let's not go so far as deep sixing K9s for Warriors. Mistakes were made and learned from but they do a lot of great work with veterans. I think we will be better at handling these issues moving forward. This was a tough chapter for AU Football. I think the program exited it correctly. I have a very hard time when, at a glance, I see an organization that takes dogs from the pound, trains them for a couple of weeks, puts a vest on them, and calls them service animals. Seems more like a souped-up pet to me. I think if the university really wanted to come out swinging, there is a lot that a research institution with a veterinary school can do. For example, I wonder what experiments would conclude if K9s for Warriors program was compared with control groups, etc. Is there a marginal benefit to the war veteran to have a pet that is designated as a service animal, above having a regular pet? (Establish a baseline. Compare 2 groups of a significant sample size using the same questions and metrics, etc.) Does pairing a veteran with a dog that was bred for and extensively trained to be a guide-level service dog, rather than a dog with little training sourced from a shelter, carry a higher level of benefit to the veteran? (Establish a baseline, compare the 2 groups...) Do the veterans, who suffer from PTSD and "do not like to be the center of attention," ever feel unnecessarily visible because they have a large animal in public places where one would not normally see them? (Establish a baseline, compare the 2 groups...) These would be great research subjects... As would the capability of a non-deployed soldier to develop PTSD. But, what do I know? I'm not a psychologist. And I've never been shot at. They train the handler and animal together for 3 weeks. The dog itself goes through months of training. If you look at different organizations you will see the dogs go through months of training: No. K9s trainers spend months training each dog prior to matching the dog with a warrior. This training includes behavior modification, general obedience and manners, plus service dog and public access skills. The acquisition of these skills distinguishes a service dog from a pet. Not all dogs have the temperament to handle the stress of service work in public, and many pets lack the necessary training for service work. http://www.k9sforwarriors.org/k9-academy/faq/ The dogs are trained in specific reactionary and preventive tasks that a normal pet is not trained in. The tasks differentiate between a service dog and a emotional support dog as defined by the ADA and allow for its access in public areas: Whereas a pet may be able to tell if his warrior is in distress, a service dog is trained to respond to this awareness by performing tasks to lessen the distress. Examples of these tasks include: licking, pawing or bringing a toy to break a disturbing episode; performing a sit/stay facing away from the warrior to ‘watch his back’; blocking an unwanted person from advancing too close by performing a stand/stay sideways in front of the warrior; forging ahead around a corner in front of the warrior; reminding the warrior to take medicine; safety checking a room before the warrior enters; or nudging the warrior while thrashing due to a nightmare. Each warrior has differing symptoms, so his or her service dog is trained for his or her specific disabilities. http://www.k9sforwarriors.org/k9-academy/faq/ Due to the identifying, reactive, and preventive training that the dog receives... yes a trained service dog carries higher benefit than a normal pet. The center of attention question is easy to answer. Hit the library and use pubmed, academic premier search, or other such engines and you will find the answer. Dogs have been used in treatment of psychological disorders for a very long time. Research in their benefits is not new. Obviously there will be some variance dependent upon the individual just like with medication. My sister is a psychologist and I have a undergrad in it mixed with my other degrees and researched the use of dogs while earning it. These are not dogs that they just randomly yanked out of the pound, trained for a week or two, and declared service dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatBoCamRob 30 Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 @texan, They are rescue dogs. Already, the organization is starting low. Service dog breeders start training their dogs almost at birth with socialization, etc. We don't know, with a rescue, whether that dog has been abused, etc. It appears they have a preference for labs, collies, and GSD mixes. It's nice that they prefer these classic service dog breeds as much as possible. But, if they are 1/2 something else, they could be 1/2 fighting dog. Is this a dogue de bordeaux in this photo? Dogs have been used in the treatment of psychological disorders for a long time. Also, entire generations of soldiers came home from foreign wars without needing to take dogs into restaurants and grocery stores. If it will make them feel better to have a pet, that's great. I'm all for it. But, let's not call it something it isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 So the organization shouts out their accusations but only whispers the resolutions. Frick them, every person out there that gave that woman pity and spewed hatred towards Auburn should hear the truth from that organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey 16,546 Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 I think most of us "get" what it takes to properly prepare and train a service dog. I'm simply not certain this particular organization is doing it. They aren't the only outfit in this business and like other areas of endeavor there are certain to be good and not so good entities. Judging by their actions in this case, they may fit more into the fund raising, rabble-rousing category than anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCTiger2011 1,277 Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 The thing that rubs me the wrong way about this situation is that many of the service dog organizations involved are terrible at social media. For instance, if you read what their supposed mission statement and main goals to the public are, "to educate people about the importance of service dogs," you would think they would be more understanding about a misunderstanding between the general public and the service dog community. This is how you properly educate people, not berate them for doing something wrong. They had the perfect opportunity to use this event as a way to further educate the public, but instead used it to throw around accusations without obtaining facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texan4Auburn 1,626 Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 @texan, They are rescue dogs. Already, the organization is starting low. Service dog breeders start training their dogs almost at birth with socialization, etc. We don't know, with a rescue, whether that dog has been abused, etc. It appears they have a preference for labs, collies, and GSD mixes. It's nice that they prefer these classic service dog breeds as much as possible. But, if they are 1/2 something else, they could be 1/2 fighting dog. Is this a dogue de bordeaux in this photo? Dogs have been used in the treatment of psychological disorders for a long time. Also, entire generations of soldiers came home from foreign wars without needing to take dogs into restaurants and grocery stores. If it will make them feel better to have a pet, that's great. I'm all for it. But, let's not call it something it isn't. I never said they were not rescued (why would I say that when I obviously read their site). They are also donated from breeders. Just like a majority of the other places if you go through and read about them. Breeders and rescues. Example.. this place started in 79: Some of our dogs are donated by private individuals or breeders, while others come from our own limited breeding program. PAWS makes every attempt to rescue dogs from animal shelters for training when qualified dogs are available. https://www.pawswithacause.org/i-want-a-dog/service-dogs I said they were not just yanked out of the pound and trained for a couple of weeks and then proclaimed service dogs as you suggested(use my full sentence). They are trained for months and their temperaments are judged and evaluated. And generations of soldiers went through wars and came home before we even knew what PTSD was. In fact at one time in history they would have been declared insane due to demons/devil and locked away in straight jackets. PTSD wasn't even recognized until 1980. Good thing different methods are developed and treatments progress. When we lived by Ft. Sill I saw plenty of Vietnam vets lose it... in grocery stores, restaurants, movie theater's and many other public places. So it isn't like they were all walking around perfectly normal. I came home from a party one night to my neighbor with his wife on her knees in the front yard, gun to her head, and yelling at her in what I guess was Vietnamese and cops trying to talk him down. I personally would rather dogs be used than medications if the prescription of the dog is as effective. Obviously this groups social media/public relations area needs some help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatBoCamRob 30 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Well, Texan, I think we disagree. I don't think we disagree about the facts, necessarily. I'm not here to tell you you are wrong or are lying when you quote these sites. Rather, your perspective is different from mine. It's like an optimist and a pessimist disagreeing about the nature of a glass of water. (I have no problem assuming the position of pessimist here. I see the glass as half empty when it comes to service dogs from the pound.) To me, any service dog not picked from a litter bred for temperament and trained from that point forward is an inferior example that dilutes the concept of what a "service dog" is in our society. Service dogs help otherwise incapable individuals. They are more than a companion animal. If their job requires less than a guide dog's abilities, they should still come from the same process and source. To me, rescue service animals are a liability. What is that quote about "chimpanzees, typewriters, and Shakespeare?" In a large enough population, eventually everything is a statistical certainty. You take enough dogs out of the pound and call them service dogs, eventually one will have a bad moment and bite someone. (Maybe this is why the organization is so testy about strangers petting their dogs.) The problem with this is that the law can't and the media don't discriminate between K9s for Warriors and top tier guide dogs. So, when that dogue de Bordeaux mix with little (I don't care if it's 2 weeks or 3 months) training snaps at a free safety playing for the UC Santa Cruz Fighting Banana Slugs, it'll be all over CNN. And Diane Feinstein will be co sponsoring some knee jerk legislation to limit where service animals (including guide dogs for the blind) can be. It bothers me further that we have someone who failed out of tech school claiming PTSD. Seems the farthest from the vet with a gun to his wife's head as 2 soldiers could be. Yet, the girl that accused the players has a dog. One more proverbial monkey at the typewriter. We're probably both wrong anyway. The optimist and the pessimist were both wrong. The scientist will tell you the glass is completely full- half water, half air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigerbelle 5,299 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 I have to be honest and say that I don't know if it was the organization itself or just posters on their Facebook that made me lose respect. I am sure they do a lot of good for a lot of people, but I do not like the fact I saw no effort on their part to make sure that they had the entire story. I am ready to let it all go and I very much appreciate the way the university and the young men handled themselves after the event. Like I said, the young lady deserves our compassion. I hope everyone involved has learned a lesson about communication and tolerance. Its time for the cynical side if me will slither back into its hole for another day. Lol I agree with this for the most part. I may be less willing to feel much compassion because I am uneasy about her military disability story. My cynical side hasn't gone inactive yet. That K9 group is still responsible for their FB page and for what they allow there. They won't get a dime from me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.