From Property to Family: American Dog Rescue and the Discourse of Compassion
In the wake of the considerable cultural changes and social shifts that the United States and all advanced industrial democracies have experienced since the late 1960s and early 1970s, social discourse around the disempowered has changed in demonstrable ways. In From Property to Family: American Dog Rescue and the Discourse of Compassion, Andrei Markovits and Katherine Crosby describe a “discourse of compassion” that actually alters the way we treat persons and ideas once scorned by the social mainstream. This “culture turn” has also affected our treatment of animals inaugurating an accompanying “animal turn”. In the case of dogs, this shift has increasingly transformed the discursive category of the animal from human companion to human family member. One of the new institutions created by this attitudinal and behavioral change towards dogs has been the breed specific canine rescue organization, examples of which have arisen all over the United States beginning in the early 1980s and massively proliferating in the 1990s and subsequent years.  While the growing scholarship on the changed dimension of the human-animal relationship attests to its social, political, moral and intellectual salience to our contemporary world, the work presented in Markovits and Crosby’s book constitutes the first academic research on the particularly important institution of breed specific dog rescue.
1120167484
From Property to Family: American Dog Rescue and the Discourse of Compassion
In the wake of the considerable cultural changes and social shifts that the United States and all advanced industrial democracies have experienced since the late 1960s and early 1970s, social discourse around the disempowered has changed in demonstrable ways. In From Property to Family: American Dog Rescue and the Discourse of Compassion, Andrei Markovits and Katherine Crosby describe a “discourse of compassion” that actually alters the way we treat persons and ideas once scorned by the social mainstream. This “culture turn” has also affected our treatment of animals inaugurating an accompanying “animal turn”. In the case of dogs, this shift has increasingly transformed the discursive category of the animal from human companion to human family member. One of the new institutions created by this attitudinal and behavioral change towards dogs has been the breed specific canine rescue organization, examples of which have arisen all over the United States beginning in the early 1980s and massively proliferating in the 1990s and subsequent years.  While the growing scholarship on the changed dimension of the human-animal relationship attests to its social, political, moral and intellectual salience to our contemporary world, the work presented in Markovits and Crosby’s book constitutes the first academic research on the particularly important institution of breed specific dog rescue.
25.95 In Stock
From Property to Family: American Dog Rescue and the Discourse of Compassion

From Property to Family: American Dog Rescue and the Discourse of Compassion

From Property to Family: American Dog Rescue and the Discourse of Compassion

From Property to Family: American Dog Rescue and the Discourse of Compassion

eBook

$25.95 

Available on Compatible NOOK devices, the free NOOK App and in My Digital Library.
WANT A NOOK?  Explore Now

Related collections and offers

LEND ME® See Details

Overview

In the wake of the considerable cultural changes and social shifts that the United States and all advanced industrial democracies have experienced since the late 1960s and early 1970s, social discourse around the disempowered has changed in demonstrable ways. In From Property to Family: American Dog Rescue and the Discourse of Compassion, Andrei Markovits and Katherine Crosby describe a “discourse of compassion” that actually alters the way we treat persons and ideas once scorned by the social mainstream. This “culture turn” has also affected our treatment of animals inaugurating an accompanying “animal turn”. In the case of dogs, this shift has increasingly transformed the discursive category of the animal from human companion to human family member. One of the new institutions created by this attitudinal and behavioral change towards dogs has been the breed specific canine rescue organization, examples of which have arisen all over the United States beginning in the early 1980s and massively proliferating in the 1990s and subsequent years.  While the growing scholarship on the changed dimension of the human-animal relationship attests to its social, political, moral and intellectual salience to our contemporary world, the work presented in Markovits and Crosby’s book constitutes the first academic research on the particularly important institution of breed specific dog rescue.

Product Details

ISBN-13: 9780472120765
Publisher: University of Michigan Press
Publication date: 03/26/2015
Sold by: Barnes & Noble
Format: eBook
Pages: 347
File size: 3 MB

About the Author

Andrei S. Markovits is the Karl W. Deutsch Collegiate Professor of Comparative Politics and German Studies as well as an Arthur F. Thurnau Professor at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor.
Katherine N. Crosby, a 2011 graduate of the University of Michigan, is completing her doctorate in the Department of History, University of South Carolina in Columbia.

Read an Excerpt

From Property to Family

American Dog Rescue and the Discourse of Compassion


By Andrei S. Markovits, Katherine N. Crosby

The University of Michigan Press

Copyright © 2014 Andrei S. Markovits and Katherine N. Crosby
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-0-472-12076-5



CHAPTER 1

What Is Breed Rescue?

If not you, then who? If not now, then when? — Annie Kassler

Foster home and adoption coordinator of Yankee Golden Retriever Rescue in the late 1980s and early 1990s


The Rescue Group — A Basic Picture

What is a breed specific rescue group? The broadest definition encapsulates any individual or group that assists in the placement of homeless dogs of a particular breed. For the purposes of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), a rescue group is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt charitable organization, although not all rescue groups, particularly small and new entities, have or intend to obtain 501(c)(3) status. Although 501(c)(3) status is advantageous for rescue groups, it is not necessary. The IRS defines a 501(c)(3) organization as one that "must be organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3), and none of its earnings may inure to any private shareholder or individual. In addition, it may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates." Most rescue groups are further classified by the IRS with the activity code D20, which declares their purpose to be animal protection and welfare. Functionally, this provision renders these groups into charitable organizations that are tax exempt, meaning that donations to them are also tax exempt and can be deducted from individual and corporate taxes. In essence, these groups do not have to pay income taxes, resulting in more of their money being allocated toward their charitable activities, in this case the rehabilitation and rescue of homeless dogs of a particular breed. Carol Allen, president of Golden Retriever Rescue of Central New York (GRRCNY, Jamesville, New York), emphasized the importance of 501(c)(3) status for rescue groups when she stated: "At some point, I do believe it is a major benefit to separate a rescue committee from a breed club; mainly because you obtain the 501(c)(3) group status that is immensely advantageous to rescues." Although early involvement in clubs can be beneficial for rescue groups, Allen feels that continued membership in a club can limit a group's ability to grow and flourish.

Why are rescues necessary? Pet homelessness is a massive and profound problem in the United States; according to the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), "approximately 5 million to 7 million companion animals enter animal shelters nationwide every year, and approximately 3 million to 4 million are euthanized (60 percent of dogs and 70 percent of cats)." Puppy mills, which breed dogs commercially in inhumane conditions purely for profit, contribute significantly to the problem, flooding the market with a large number of poorly bred dogs, many of which have congenital or genetic diseases as a result of careless animal husbandry. These dogs are distributed to pet stores, where they are sold to a generally unsuspecting public for profit, perpetuating the cycle of canine overproduction and homelessness. Finally, a failure on the part of dog owners to spay or neuter their dogs can result in backyard breeding or accidental mixed-breed litters. If puppies born by this means are not sold or destroyed, they end up in animal shelters, where they remain until they are adopted or euthanized. The combination of puppy mills and irresponsible dog ownership has created the current crisis of pet homelessness. Animal welfare organizations have emerged to combat this alarming condition. The forms these organizations take and the goals they espouse determine how they attempt to reduce pet homelessness in the United States.

Needless to say, breed specific rescue groups constitute just one of many organizational variants that exist solely for the purpose of rescuing animals. Community animal control facilities are arguably the most basic forms of animal rescue and often the most overworked. Typically, these institutions operate an animal shelter and contract with a municipality, usually either a city or a county, to handle homeless animals (mainly cats and dogs, but certainly not exclusively) within their specified geographic area. These organizations attempt to find owners whenever possible but are often unable to do so. Thus, many maintain — as an option of last resort — policies that require animals to be euthanized after they have spent a specified amount of time in the shelter if a home for them does not materialize. Humane societies often provide animal rescue services, although they perceive the core of their raison d'être as preventing and opposing animal suffering. These societies generally try to avoid euthanasia unless absolutely necessary and can be contracted by a municipality to provide some or all animal control services.

Breed specific rescue as an organizational form of humans engaging in and committed to the welfare of dogs emerged essentially in the 1990s (with some important precursors in the 1980s, even as early as the 1970s), totally separate from, often complementary to, but also frequently in direct competition and conflict with humane societies and animal shelters. Activists in the latter have often perceived the breed rescuers as "elitists" who only care about the welfare of their favorite breed while neglecting the fate of other dogs in need of shelter and a home. Breed specific dog rescuers, in turn, regard shelters as ill-equipped, sometimes even uncaring, institutions that cannot provide the proper care that dogs deserve. Breed specific dog rescue organizations differ from humane societies and animal shelters primarily in the sense that dogs are housed in volunteer members' homes, taught some basic household manners (housetraining, in particular), and then placed into the care of new families, who have generally undergone a rigorous application and review process prior to taking ownership of the dog. Like the altered discourse about dogs generally, the discourse of dog rescue is full of the language commonly used in the context of abandoned or neglected human children. Dogs are "fostered" by "foster moms and dads" and "adopted" by new "forever" families hand selected by the foster family as being a particularly good match for the dog in question. Rescue organizations typically guarantee a lifelong commitment to the dog and will generally take the dog back into the organization, even after several years, if the placement fails for whatever reason.

In contrast to humane societies and shelters, breed rescue groups are composed of volunteers looking to supplement local animal control or humane society efforts. They generally operate as foster home networks, rather than being based in a particular physical facility. Breed specific rescue groups are more specialized forms of all-breed rescue groups, as they devote their resources to rescuing one particular breed of dog or cat, rather than all breeds in the area.

The main function of a breed rescue group is simply to rescue and re-home homeless dogs of a particular breed. To achieve this goal, rescue groups must progress through the following steps for each dog they intend to rescue. First, they obtain the dogs in need of rescue. Rescue dogs generally come from one of two sources, either a local animal shelter or control facility or through owner surrenders, often called owner turn-ins (OTIs), where the original owner of the dog surrenders, via contract, any and all rights of ownership for the dog and often gives a donation to the group as a condition of accepting the dog. Second, the group must then address any health or behavioral problems the dog is experiencing. Local veterinarians, often for reduced rates, examine the dogs and ascertain any health and behavioral problems, the curing of which then becomes the responsibility of experienced group members or, in extreme cases, animal trainers or behaviorists. Third, the group must temporarily house the dogs until they are adopted. Foster homes are the most popular housing arrangement. Here, a dog is placed with a volunteer who takes care of the dog in her or his own home until the dog is adopted. Other housing options include boarding kennels, which is not the preference of the rescue organizations because they can be expensive and lead to behavioral problems if the dogs need to stay in these kennels for a long time, and group-owned facilities, which are rare because of the rescue groups' inherent expenses in the purchase and upkeep of such properties.

In order to achieve their main — indeed sole — goal of rescuing breed specific dogs, all rescue groups must engage in two activities that are not technically rescue but make rescue possible: fundraising and maintaining positive external relationships. Fundraising is vital for rescue groups to be able to function because dog rescue is an expensive proposition. "Many of us in rescue will take dogs which will require thousands of dollars of veterinary care because we know that we can still produce quality of life for these dogs," stated Robin Adams, president of Delaware Valley Golden Retriever Rescue (DVGRR, Reinholds, Pennsylvania). Adams's attitude demonstrated an idealistic view of rescue, one which we will explore in greater detail later in this chapter. And Maureen Distler, a volunteer with Lowcountry Labrador Rescue (Charleston, South Carolina), elaborates in terms of explaining the daily costs of running such organizations:

I don't think that people understand the whole concept about saving dogs and how expensive this is. I mean, like, heartworm medication for all these dogs every month, flea meds every month, food for all these dogs, you know. Sometimes we'll have thirty dogs, that's a lot of money. I mean, even just flea stuff once a month is about $10, that's $300 a month just for flea medication for thirty dogs.


Add to these regular expenses the major outlays that become routine for every rescue, because dogs incur illnesses and injuries that, although not the norm for any particular dog, become just that for a collective of dogs, and these projects become very costly. Moreover, the very nature of these rescue organizations features a disproportionate amount of dogs in some kind of need, often, of course, physical and health related. Almost by definition rescue groups have a tendency to collect dogs that are injured, ill, seniors, or have behavioral problems that require a higher investment than healthy dogs. Phil Fisher of NORCAL Golden Retriever Rescue (Menlo Park, California) explains:

And then we occasionally have dogs with serious problems, like dysplasia neglect issues, just all kinds of awful things and, you know, if I told you it would break your heart so I'm not going to tell you. So that's anywhere between $5,000 to $10,000 per dog and we have enough money that we'll do a few of these every year if there's good potential outcome for the dog. We have spent as much as $10,000 on a dog.


Because of the high costs associated with rehabilitating dogs and preparing them for adoption, fundraising is of utmost importance for rescue groups; without the ability to secure funds for veterinary and other expenses, rescue would be impossible.

Every aspect of dog rescue has both monetary and opportunity costs that groups must meet to succeed, from obtaining dogs (shelters not infrequently charge rescue groups the very same adoption fee for dogs that they do for any other adopter), to veterinary care (which, in spite of the discounts offered by the majority of veterinarians, accounts for the single greatest expenditure for all breed rescue groups), to caring for the dogs while in the program (boarding dogs in a kennel costs the group money, as does feeding dogs and ensuring they have the necessary supplies such as collars, leashes, and preventative medicine for fleas and heartworm). Group fundraising activities can take a variety of shapes, from local dog washes, can drives, and raffles to national capital campaigns, the solicitation of corporate donations, and partnerships with organizations like the United Way. Larger groups tend to use more complex fundraising methods like capital campaigns, which, while potentially more labor intensive initially, yield far higher returns than are possible with more pedestrian methods such as bake sales, can drives, or raffles.

Also critical to well-functioning rescue groups are positive external relationships with other, nonrescue organizations and entities involved in the canine rescue world. Chapter 6 will explore this phenomenon further, but here a brief explanation will suffice. Rescue groups maintain relationships with the general public, local animal shelters, other local breed rescues, local breed clubs, and national breed clubs. Because the quality of these relationships determines the resources available to the rescue group and has a direct impact on its success in rescuing and providing new homes to its dogs, it is of paramount importance to each group's efficacy that its relationships with all these outsiders be as cordial and supportive as possible. Rescue groups therefore must devote part of their often meager and overstretched resources, including temporal and monetary, to maintain these positive relationships if they want to ensure that the resources available through these relationships remain accessible to them. Concrete examples of such costs include website design and hosting, booth rates at dog shows, and adoption costs at local shelters, among others. Maintaining positive external relationships constitutes perhaps one of the most important ingredients in any rescue group's overall success and forms a vital part of its core being.


Group Origins

Comprehending the manner in which breed rescue groups function is not possible without understanding their origin and formation. A breed rescue group, regardless of which breed it represents, can come into existence in one of three ways: either as part of a club, an independent startup, or as a split from another rescue group. The origin of a group has a large impact on the group's format, function, and capabilities and is therefore critical to a proper understanding of the group's subsequent existence and operation.

The most common type of a rescue group's origin is the independent group; 74 percent of rescue groups for the top-ten breeds were formed independently. There are two archetypes of the independent group: those formed unintentionally, what we would call the "single-dog" type, and those formed intentionally, what we call the "perceived-need" variant. The single-dog type commences with an individual rescuing a single dog, without having any intention of starting a rescue group. After the initial rescue, the individual gradually becomes more involved in rescue, rescuing more dogs and involving more individuals until a group is formed. These groups tend to be the earlier independent groups and seem to take longer to obtain their 501(c)(3) status. The perceived-need group, by contrast, is intentionally formed by an individual or group of people. These groups emerge to fill a perceived need for a rescue in their area and are typically the independent groups that commenced at a later date in terms of these organizations' institutional chronology. In sharp contrast to the single-dog groups that obtain their 501(c)(3) status much later in the group's existence, if at all, the perceived-need groups typically make it a point to receive their 501(c)(3) status early in their existence, often before they rescue their first dog. In other words, the latter groups approach their task with a much more professional mindset, which is likely to inform virtually all facets of their activities centered on the rescue of dogs in their geographic area.


(Continues...)

Excerpted from From Property to Family by Andrei S. Markovits, Katherine N. Crosby. Copyright © 2014 Andrei S. Markovits and Katherine N. Crosby. Excerpted by permission of The University of Michigan Press.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.

Table of Contents

Contents Preface and Acknowledgments Introduction One. What Is Breed Rescue? Two. The Overwhelming Predominance of Women in the World of Dog Rescue: The State of Michigan as a Representative Case Study Enhanced by Relevant Interview Data from Rescuers Elsewhere Three. The Topography of Breed Specific Dog Registrations from 1960 to 2009: An Important Contextual Framework for Rescue Four. The History of Golden Retriever Rescue as a Case Study of Breed Specific Rescue Five. Regionalism in the Breed Rescue World Six. Rescue Groups and External Relationships Seven. Communication, Networking, and Sustenance Eight. The Golden/Labrador Retriever Comparison Nine. The Unique Case of Greyhound Rescue Ten. Changing Discourse of Compassion within Breed Specific Rescue in the United States: “Good” Breeds versus “Bad” Breeds: The Case of Pit Bulls Conclusion Appendix A: Data from Our Survey of Michigan Rescues Appendix B: Breed Specific Canine Rescue Survey Appendix C: Interview Questionnaire Appendix D: Interview Subjects Index
From the B&N Reads Blog

Customer Reviews