Bonding "problems", Part 2

Here's a volunteer's response to the last email from staff on the issue of euthanization notices and why the policy seems to have changed:

It appears that our definitions of "Sadness" differ - that's unfortunate. Sadness for me, is not a label.

An animal that is brought into the adoption program, proves that that animal is mentally sound and healthy to deserve a shot at adoption. A lot of animals that qualify and don't even get this opportunity - that's tragic, but an animal that's pulled out of adoption because he/she succumbed to the stress and couldn't take it anymore (and thus now is a danger to all those around) is no less devastating. Hence, a dog's mental or physical disposition has no bearing on the sadness of a situation. Also, at the cost of being repetitive, How does informing the outcome for an animal hamper the safety of the environment? How are they even remotely related? It just sounds incredible.

Indeed, its a courtesy TLAC extends us by informing us about the status of the animals we toil and care for. Its much appreciated. Perhaps, if the staff had the time,
opportunity and encouragement to spend only an hour (or even a half) with an animal of their choice, once a week, such a courtesy might appear to be a natural and a compassionate gesture. But that's a whole different debate that needs a separate forum. But please, make no mistake, a volunteer who doesn't care much for being notified of the tragic news doesn't see the rationale or the emotions behind those to request such a courtesy. A compromise it may be, but both sides respect and empathize with other's feelings.

There also appears, and I repeat, a significant shift and contradiction in management policy. You first email categorically states, and I quote: "Notification of euthanization WILL NOT be made for an animal that must be removed right away for behavior or health issues" while your last email suggests that "Every effort to notify volunteers with a "sad news" is made . . ." So what has changed and why? Your emails do not explain this anywhere.

I appreciate Sarah for her efforts in writing a depressing email each time something happens. I think its brave and extremely difficult. Also, I don't think that TLAC management is without care, there are places where in volunteers don't have the opportunity to even express themselves as I do right now. But why do you refuse to take a hand that is offered to you? I've been here for over two years, the dogmanners program has come a very long way. Its never been as strong as it is now. How do you think this occurred? And more importantly, how do you expect it to go on, if you don't offer us the trust you expect in return? Volunteers can't expected to be dictated upon without offering a plausible explanation . . . we'd like to be seen as a worthy partner. I've said enough and I thank you for reading thus far. It's all I have to say and you won't be hearing from me on this issue anymore. This email is not directed at all at [the volunteer coordinator], I hold her in very high esteem . . . but it certainly deserves an honest introspection from management. "

And here's the result of the "honest introspection from management", yet still no direct answer acknowledging that the policy has changed or why:

Every effort will be made to notify volunteers with a "SAD NEWS" Yahoo! posting when an adoption animal is pulled from the program.

Check adoption outcome reports and "ALL" animals on our website by animal ID#. Remember to keep track of the animal ID # if you want to email me for the specific outcome of the animal.