Bridge fostering; the next level of care for our communities

When I spend time on rescue forums, I’m always astounded and saddened by the vitriol aimed at pet owners either looking for support during a crisis, or who are looking for temporary care for their pets rather than resorting to leaving them at the pound.

This lack of sensitivity and ‘holier than thou attitude’, although exciting reading for other flame-throwers, does little to help these struggling owners. With assumptions made about their situation and having been branded ‘irresponsible’ for needing support, we chastise them for not making better provisions, for making ‘bad’ decisions and offer criticism instead of solutions. And these are just people perusing their options online – imagine how they’re regarded when they arrive at the shelter with pet in hand!

So why do we love to roast someone in dire straits? Merritt Clifton from Animal People says it harks back to our colonial roots;

.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.

British expatriates in the late 19th and early 20th centuries founded hundreds of humane societies all around the world, many of which still exist, without having had the slightest visible influence on their surroundings, because they simply fail to interact.

Some “go missionary.” They rant, rave, rail, sometimes persuade, sometimes alienate, cannot be faulted for lack of interactive intent, and yet often do not succeed because they convey the attitude that knowing more about animal care equals moral superiority.

.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.

In short, we alienate those around us and reduce our overall effectiveness by treating people who know less than us as inferior and anyone who’s unfortunate enough to wind up in trouble as somehow deserving of their misfortune. It’s the Just World Theory played out in real-time, but then defended by the idea that ‘we’re in it for the animals not the people’.

Trouble is, animal welfare and owner welfare are unreservedly intertwined. If our aim is to ‘reduce abandonment’ it makes little sense to scold those owners actually looking for help. By viewing everyone who is forced to give up a pet as ‘irresponsible’ and undeserving of support, we fail to give that pet the best chance to stay in its existing home and certainly then, the animal’s welfare is in danger.

So what can we offer people who are affected by a crisis? Often all they need to get their life together is time. Whether it be the loss of a home, problems finding pet-friendly accommodation, the loss of a job or the illness of a family member, you have a situation that requires sympathy and support, not lectures. And certainly we should be working to ensure that the loss of a loved family pet is not added to this disaster.

‘Bridge fostering’ is the term used to describe temporarily housing for the animals of people who need time to recover from a crisis. It has only found acceptance in Australia over the last few years in supporting victims of domestic violence, but many of 2009’s shelter surrenders of ‘foreclosure’ and ‘rental crisis’ pets could be prevented through ‘bridge fostering’ programs.

A foster home of 60 to 90 days can give the pet owner the time he or she needs to find a new job, find new accommodations that will allow pets or sort out their personal crisis. If the pet is not reclaimed within the designated time, then the contract specifies the animal can be made available for adoption – but these contract should be flexible and designed to find the best outcome for pet and owner.

A common argument against these kinds of programs is that giving temporary homes to pets that aren’t in the pound system is somehow disadvantaging death row or ‘truly needy’ animals. But caring for an animal who’s already lost it’s home is no more noble than caring for one that is about to lose it’s home should its owner not be able to find the resources to keep it. Add to that the knowledge that fostering is not a zero sum game; there is a huge pool of potential foster carers that would appreciate the convenience of caring for an animal for only one or two months, rather than indefinitely until the animal is rehomed. They also may rather people weren’t coming to their homes to view pets or not want to be burdened with screening adopters.

For every pet that is kept out of rescue is one home we don’t have to find. It’s one home we don’t have to ‘waste’ saving a pet that already has a home. And all it takes is changing our attitude towards people in crisis – helping them is the simplest way to help their animals.