Francisvale Home for Smaller Animals rejects adoption application from cancer survivor

The original comment has been deleted from the ZooToo site, so I've posted it here.

Here is the link to previous comments about the problems at Francisvale.

Francisvale discriminatory to cancer survivor.

Reviews: 33
Avg Rating: 4.2
Pros: Selection on pets to adopt.
Cons: Treatment of cancer survivors.
Reviewed: 5 days ago -- Tuesday, August 5, 2008

Pet Service Reviewed by: LabradorLover
Supporting Shelter: Montgomery County SPCA

Review Details

A very good friend, Sharon, and her husband, Ray, applied to adopt Sherman, an adorable Beagle mix, but were summarily denied.

After filing all the required paperwork, including veterinary receipts for the care of previous pets, and sitting through and cooperating with the various interviews, they were denied. Not just denied, but told they didn't qualify to adopt any of Francisvale's pets. Why? Because Ray mentioned that he had (past tense) cancer. Ray is a cancer survivor.

Whomever at Francisvale made the decision to exclude Sharon and Ray as possible adopters did so, not because Sharon and Ray are unfit to care for Sherman, or any other pet, but rather because of Ray's medical history.

Actually, Francisvale denied Sharon, the primary applicant for Sherman, because Ray had cancer. He mentioned it during one of their interviews. He told them how he loved his previous pets and how he missed playing with and caring for them now that they were gone. His latest, a Golden which passed on about a year ago, lived into its early teens. Sharon still has pictures on her desk at work.

Ray told Francisvale how his life changed when he was diagnosed with cancer. He told them that he wanted to get another dog, but decided to postpone an adoption until he went through his cancer treatment and beat the disease.

Sharon and Ray know what commitment is when it comes to raising and caring for pets. Sharon and Ray produced veterinary bills for their previous pets. They showed the Francisvale staff photos, as proudly as parents show photos of their children.

I would hope that Francisvale does much good for the animals they take in. I know that Sharon and Ray would have been excellent companions for Sherman.

This isn't a depiction of how a couple lost an opportunity to adopt a pet to another applicant. It's a depiction that Francisvale management was very callous, possibly even discriminatory, in the treatment they extended to Sharon and Ray. According to Francisvale management, Sharon and Ray don't qualify to adopt any of Francisvale's pets, because of Ray's recent medical history.

Sharon and Ray will find another pet to adopt and they'll make fantastic companions for that animal.


2 comments found.

4 days ago
I cannot help but to comment. I feel bad for the treatment these two adopters, especially for the husband Ray. There's no excuse in the world why a cancer survivor cannot have a pet and according to the review, they are not qualified for any pets?? Sounds like the francisvale shelter has some serious personnel issues going on there. I cannot speak for them but I hope they lodge a complaint of some kind to the proper authorities.

3 days ago
This outrageous incident with Sharon and Ray is just another example of the clueless and callous management now at Francisvale. I guess you can't expect any better from a so-called "no kill" animal shelter where the board vice president lets bow-hunters come onto shelter property and kill deer; and, where the so-called "wonderful" new "executive director" puts 7 newborn puppies in a locked room with a BUCKET of water and when one drowns in the bucket of water - to cover up her own incompetence, negligence, or even malice - calls the police and makes a false report that a longtime, dedicated employee - who didn't even have access to the room where the puppies were located - had purposely drowned the puppy. This new "executive director" commented on Zootoo that a former, dedicated, Francisvale employee, who was having mini-strokes, was a "brain-damaged retard." Plus, you can only get in "by appointment only" and they charge $250 to adopt "puppies." Now that's a really welcoming place, isn't it? I guess if you're a hunter.


Anonymous said...

I think you people are Ridiculous! Don't you think management may be looking out for the animals too? God forbid the man get cancer again, but maybe shelter wants to make sure the animal has a FOREVER home. You see too much of the people who move or just can't care for the animal take it to a shelter.

It is sad the man had cancer, go somewhere else than.

How about you COMMENT/COMPLAIN on how the PAWS and the SPCA is killing animals everyday, or the TRASH that shot 80 dogs. Go knock on their door!!!
No one knows the whole story about the puppy so stop speculating and STOP giving this shelter a bad name. Maybe the employees were mistreating the animals. OR maybe they are out for revenge because they were fired.

There is probably a reason your post was taken off zoo too. As it should be taken off here.

Wai Thay So Dim said...

To: Anonymous
First of all, YOU are the one who is "Ridiculous!" You are barely literate, Kris821.
Second, it wasn't my post that was taken off of Zootoo. It was LabradorLover's.
Third, we're not giving Francisvale a bad name. It's the awful management and their sick policies that are giving Francisvale the bad name. Remember, it's the CURRENT management that refused to adopt a dog to somebody because her husband is a cancer survivor. We just want to make sure the public knows about Francisvale's discriminatory policies.
Fourth, the employee who's mistreating animals at Francisvale is the shelter MANAGER. Remember, it was YOUR beloved shelter MANAGER who put a bucket of water in a locked room with 7 newborn puppies and one of them drowned. Then the shelter MANAGER knowingly filed a fraudulent police report, trying to blame somebody else for the puppy's death even though the MANAGER knew she was the only person who had a key to the locked room and that she, the MANAGER, was responsible for the puppy's death.
Fifth, I can't believe you actually wrote, "It is sad the man had cancer, go somewhere else than." Besides being totally devoid of compassion and sensitivity, you are truly a MORON, Kris! With people like you speaking up on behalf of Francisvale, it's pretty obvious why "this shelter" has a bad name.

Anonymous said...

Is this the same Kris821 who commented on the Morris Animal Refuge site on Zootoo that Mac (an American bulldog)at the shelter was "put down" by animal control because he supposedly "viciously attacked" the shelter director? I'm sure they didn't bring out syringes. The most curious part is that Mac is pictured on their photographer's website as being ADOPTED in the pet adoption gallery section.

Anonymous said...

I just want everyone to know that this is the one and only comment I have ever posted on this site. Maybe its someone who is currently involved with the shelter commenting on here but its not I.

Anonymous said...

We were denied because we have a dog door.

Anonymous said...

I am done with shelters and I am going to a reputable breeder. Sorry to the sheltered dogs truly, but I did attempt to adopt from Main Line Animal Rescue and was denied. No reason given - so what can I say? I've read enough here and elsewhere to see what's happening here. Funny, but all I am learning really begs the question of why the OBAMAS themselves did not adopt a dog! These shelter people wouldn't know a foxhound from an ardvaark (I watched them handle several dogs)and they are telling good people that they are unfit to help a dog? I have no inclination to put my children through the shelter routine again. My daughter is still asking when the dog she fell in love with is coming home and I have not had the heart to tell her we received a terse rejection letter in the mail. And, frankly, the shelter people ahowed absolutley no interest in my kids when they visited - very telling, indeed. They walked us through rows of caged dogs and asked, "Do you see any you like?" They cannot be serious! We made such a big deal with the kids about responsiblity, and helping mistreated dogs, and the wonderful work the shelters are doing only to tell them we were summarily denied? Forget them! Some of the rationale on these posts is patently absurd. "They want to make sure blah blah blah...." They're so busy "making sure" that meanwhile the dogs are croaking in their shelters and good people and dogs are denied companionship. A man with cancer denied a dog, because he had cancer? What the h is the matter with people? GET.....A....Life! The whole world has gone nuts!

Anonymous said...

It's not just Francisvale that has impossibly strict rules about adoption. My brother went to every single shelter in Philadelphia to try to ADOPT rather than BUY, but because he wasn't rich enough, they all thought he wouldn't be able to afford an animal. He now has the best, most well-behaved puppy I have ever seen that he bought from a breeder. I'm sorry for the poor shelter dogs, but since I'm almost guaranteed to get rejected, I'm not even going to try. I also have to say that the ASPCA is the worst shelter system of all. "Don't shop until they stop!" "Adopt, don't buy!" "Save a life!" These are all complete bs if they won't even let my brother have a dog. They'd rather kill them, I guess...

Amy said...

Denied by Main Line for the inability of Bill Smith or an MLAR staffer to find my house and refusal to call for directions to any of the three contact numbers I was asked to provide (along with my address and driver's license number). No numbers on the mailbox was what I was told. Tacked onto this lame excuse was a contrary reason that my fence and the dogs who live in the downstairs portion of the converted barn. Seriously? You mean you have concerns about a fence and dogs that you've never actually inspected because you claim you couldn't find my house even though you spent an hour driving up and down my street?? It seems a bit unbelievable. However, I politely responded by asking if they would perform the home check if I provided directions and/or made myself available to show them to the property. Not surprisingly, I never received a response. Even a "No, thank you" would have been a courtesy. After crying for a bit, I decided to try one more rescue, Pointer Rescue Organization, before contacting a breeder. Even though it was after 10 pm, I had a response within 15 minutes from an adoption coordinator. I'm happy to say that my new furry family member will be coming home next weekend. In the ends, it's the animals who suffer for the questionable judgement and policies of some organizations. As a former rescuer and animal foster, I'm all for screening applicants, but when dogs are sitting in kennels for months on end because potential adopters are refused for any and all reasons. Anyone considering Main Line Animal Rescue should think long and hard. Chances are very high that you will be denied. If you do, by some miracle, find yourself approved, be aware that MLAR's adoption contract states that the rescue retains ownership of the animal and can remove him/her from your custody. This has been documented at least twice in the media, most recently in April 2014. For myself, when it comes time to donate time or money to Pointer Rescue rather than Main Line with it's mult-million dollar budget, and when it's time to bring a second dog home, it will be PRO or a breeder.