248
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net to c/news@lemmy.world

When she first arrived, the standard policy encouraged counselors to check potential adopters on MyCase before releasing an animal into the adopter’s care.

That policy was first instated in 2022, after the gruesome hanging and stabbing death of a dog that had been adopted from Animal Care Services to an owner with a violent criminal history. The rule was changed about two weeks into Fox’s tenure at Animal Care Services.

“Within the first week or two of me being there, they took away the MyCase policy,” Fox said. “They argued that going to any home, no matter who it’s with, where it is, what not, is better than being in the shelter.”

top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ptz@dubvee.org 91 points 3 months ago

“They argued that going to any home, no matter who it’s with, where it is, what not, is better than being in the shelter.”

For the shelter, maybe, but not always for the animals.

The shelter near me used to do similar. There was a whole process that included something akin to a soft background check before you could adopt. That was in ~2014 or so when I adopted my first dog from there. I remember the people one desk over being denied because they already had 3 dogs and none had received any rabies or other vaccines since they adopted them.

When I adopted again in 2021 and 2023, it was a totally different, in-and-out process both times. You had to fill out some basic paperwork, but they didn't check anything or vet the adopter at all.

On one hand, they're a no-kill shelter with limited resources. I've donated and volunteered when I could, but they do have a finite capacity. On the other hand, even the slim chance of some psycho animal abuser walking out with one of the animals should be avoided.

[-] YaDownWitCPP@lemmy.world 39 points 3 months ago

It'd be more merciful to euthanize the animal than send it to an abusive home for the rest of its life.

[-] Transporter_Room_3@startrek.website 28 points 3 months ago

Legitimately if someone said "it's better than the shelter no matter what" I'd tell them "okay then, you're coming home with me. Every night I will kick you because you're slightly too slow for my liking and in my way. Every morning I will forget to feed you because I don't really care about you. I might give you my leftovers after dinner. No lunch because you only get two meals a day. Forgotten breakfast included. I will also tie you outside in 95 degree heat for a week and only fill your water every other day because I misplaced my shoe and blamed it on you. When you get sick, I'm just going to break your leg and leave you in the woods." and tell them not to complain because at least they aren't in a shelter.

If that isn't the end of the discussion, then [REDACTED]

[-] ptz@dubvee.org 16 points 3 months ago

You left out "I'm going to lock you in a tiny cage for 14 hours a day rather than train you", but otherwise, spot on.

There's a lot that's left out, but I only have so many hours in a day...

[-] nobody158@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 months ago

I know when I adopted my dog 3 yrs ago they required that we give them our vets info so they could call to see how well we took care of our animals. I think that is a decent check to make.

[-] ptz@dubvee.org 5 points 3 months ago

Absolutely. That was part of the adoption process I went through back in 2014, though I hadn't had a dog for about a decade then, so was basically N/A for me.

[-] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 39 points 3 months ago

if anyone would like to give this organization their opinion;

https://www.indy.gov/agency/animal-care-services

i have.

[-] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 13 points 3 months ago

Encourage random ignorants that best case scenario read the clickbait headline to provide negative feedback on the work of people that are probably just doing their job the best they can.

You're what's wrong with the Internet.

that are probably just doing their job the best they can.

Did you *read *the article?

[-] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 months ago

Ok courae not. That's what I said.

[-] Boinkage@lemmy.world 24 points 3 months ago

"you're what's wrong with the Internet"

Proceeds to do the stupid thing making the Internet bad

[-] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 15 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

This story is about the organization firing people for following organization policy. The person you are replying to is suggesting letting the organization know that they are in the wrong for firing low-paid workers for just following policy.

Replying angrily and insultingly to a post without understanding what they are talking about and without reading the original story... you're what's wrong with the internet.

EDIT: I misread. The organization fired employees for NOT following the policy. They were fired for doing background checks when told not to. That's even worse and more of a reason to be angry.

[-] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 12 points 3 months ago

this story is about an animal organization actively providing abusive homes for animals.

im not sure how that isnt the primary issue for you, but to each his own

my statements to the organization were not about the employees, but the lack of qualifying adopters who are known animal abusers.

[-] breakingcups@lemmy.world 24 points 3 months ago

If the article is true, that's astonishingly bad management.

[-] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It's dangerously easy to obtain ownership over an animal in some states in the US, and it's the reason why so many dogs are euthanized for almost no reason. My neighbor just got a dog from a southern state off of their execution list, he's not even done growing, full of energy, just being abandoned and unwanted in overcrowded shelters almost cost him his life.

[-] memfree@lemmy.ml 19 points 3 months ago

Is the statement at the bottom of the article new or did the earlier posters simply miss it?

... One of Best Friends’ recommendations for due diligence within the adoption process was to focus on the shelter’s existing system, Chameleon, which pulls information related to animal welfare cases. This includes animal abuse and animal cruelty cases. Checking MyCase was discouraged, as its use was problematic and could lead to biased, inequitable vetting of potential adoptees.

This story does not have enough detail, so I looked for more.

First, I looked up Best Friends and they are firmly no-kill to the exclusion of all else. I am guessing the 'Chameleon' referenced is this CMS, but I could be wrong. If that is the software, it looks like there is a way for people to add notes about specific animals, but it isn't clear if you can enter notes about specific people. It certainly doesn't look like it has a way of automatically checking police records for criminal records. It does suggest you can enter these types of 'field' data:

  • Calls for service
  • Citations
  • Bite reporting
  • Field staff dispatching
  • Shift control and tracking
  • Laptop implementation
  • Case photos

I'm guessing MyCase is this free Indiana-specific portal.

Now: if they aren't talking about the free MyCase link I found, then perhaps they are using software that charges the Animal Shelter for each search. I can see getting fired for incurring costs that aren't in the budget. Alternately, perhaps 'Best Friends' is giving them funding based on the shelter NOT rejecting any adopter ever for any reason -- or at least thinking that is a condition based on this statement from the Best Friends 'who we are' page:

We’re making sure that everyone has the same access to loving pets and that every adoptable pet has access to the comfort of a foster home instead of a kennel in a shelter. 

-- note that the above is meant to foster diversity and its links to their diversity page (which seems focused on income disparity), but that quoted bit COULD be read to mean 'everyone gets a pet, no matter what'.

I would think it incumbent on all employees to create notes/warnings about known abusers and have that be a flag if they come back to adopt, but I do see a case for allowing people to re-adopt an animal they voluntarily gave to the shelter because they had gone through a patch where they couldn't afford to feed it, but now they can. Others might argue that this is abuse or that the owners don't deserve a pet, but it is clear that Best Friends thinks that refusing such people is discriminatory.

That doesn't mean that the particular abuse getting uncovered with MyCase was simply surrendering a pet until people got on their feet. Mostly, it just feels like there's a bunch of stuff going on that no one reported.

[-] beefbot 8 points 3 months ago

Pessimistic take: someone with power in that organisation wants to secretly sell animals for fights or for meat

[-] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

WISH-TV - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for WISH-TV:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://www.wishtv.com/news/indy-animal-care-workers-fired-for-checking-adopter-criminal-history/
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

[-] GluWu@lemm.ee 3 points 3 months ago

Prisoners and their cats(ft. gopher and pigeon): https://youtu.be/i8xIwiPk0G8

this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2024
248 points (100.0% liked)

News

23259 readers
2825 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS