Fear Free Responds
wernerimages/stock/adobe.com
A couple of months ago, I was made aware of some disturbing information about a program that I admired and often recommended to dog owners - a program called Fear Free Pets. It allows veterinarians, trainers, and groomers to be certified as a “Fear Free Professional.” This mean that people use methods which don’t cause fear, anxiety, or stress in their practices whenever it’s possible to avoid them. I wrote about these problems in a blog post called Foundation Cracks at Fear Free?
I think we can all appreciate that medical care can be uncomfortable and stressful at times and, if the problem is urgent, we might indeed simply have to muscle through it in order to save an animal’s life or major abilities to function even if they are sometimes upset. Even then, of course, we should do what we can to minimize the upset - using sedation might be an example of something that could be done.
But outside of emergencies, there are a lot of things that well-educated and ethical professionals can do to reduce fear, anxiety, and stress. And a Fear Free Certified Professional has undergone specific education, agrees to a code of conduct, and agrees to ongoing professional development in order to retain the certification.
Or, that’s how it’s supposed to work. Except it doesn’t.
Tori Williams, the Chief Operating Officer at Fear Free Pets reached out and invited me to meet with her. We spoke via Zoom for more than an hour and had an ongoing email exchange following that discussion.
Obviously, I’m not going to go through point by point by point of our conversation and quote everything we both said. But, I’ll summarize the major points as succinctly as possible here. And, obviously, I acknowledge that I’m sharing all this through my own lens - not Tori’s. But I promise to be as fair as I can possibly be. Let’s look at the things we discussed:
The use of cosmetic anesethesia-free dental procedures by Fear Free Certified Professionals. Tori explained to me that no procedure is against the rules at Fear Free Pets (FFP). What matters is whether or not that procedure could be done without causing fear, anxiety, or stress (FAS). That’s an interesting approach - but I get it. And I even think maybe I can get behind it generally speaking. But there are clearly procedures which do cause unnecessary FAS and they should be avoided. Fear Free previously considered writing position statements to clarify which would and what procedures would NOT be allowed under this general guideline. But the red tape of getting a position statement approved in the organization was found to be too daunting and was back-burnered. And, you know what, I get that too. I’ve worked in corporate America in places where almost nothing could get done because of the internal politics. It drove me nuts and I’m glad not to deal with that anymore. I’ve also seen how terribly long it’s taken other animal welfare organizations to update their position statements. So, Tori and I brainstormed other options besides something “official” like a position statement. We talked about a simple blog post that could clarify the policy and specifically call out anesthesia-free cosmetic dental procedures as something that clearly couldn’t be justified. It’s my understanding that they’re working on something like that blog post and it will be coming out in the (near?) future. So, I’m hopeful about that one!
Then there’s the question about Gerald Flannigan’s role on the Fear Free Pets Advisory Board and member as a Fear Free Certified Professional despite his role in helping write a training manual for franchise owners of a shock collar company. His stated goal was to teach them “how to use this product in the most welfare friendly way possible.” This sure sounds like the line often used by shock collar or prong collar users who say, “it doesn’t hurt when used properly.” So, he admits to his involvement and explained that he felt his involvement was important as a Veterinary Behaviorist. Tori Williams wrote to me that, “We support this past decision and can appreciate that this is before his commitment to Fear Free.” Look, I get that we all did things in our past that we wouldn’t do now. But I see zero indication that he feels that what he did was a mistake or that he wouldn’t do exactly the same thing again. Maybe he feels differently - but that’s how it was presented to me. I’m left with the impression that the decision was purely political. Gerald Flannigan is a Veterinary Behaviorist AND an old friend of Marty Becker. It’s easier to look the other way on this instead of revoking his certification and place on the Advisory Board than to rock the boat. Tori denies that’s what’s happening, but I’m not convinced.
Reporting certified professionals who break the code of conduct: Though not included in my first post, this question came up between the time I published that article and when I spoke with Tori. It’s my understanding that Fear Free often (“usually” was the word I heard) sidesteps any reports of infractions by saying, “well, it’s a he said/she said situation and we don’t have any way of knowing.” When I asked Tori about this, she said that there’s sometimes video evidence they can act on. And sometimes people say, “oh! I didn’t realize that was a problem” and they promise to change their ways. I asked Tori if, short of video evidence or an admission that the person was using methods which clearly don’t fit with the Fear Free ethos and stating that they would continue doing so, it there was anything else that could be done. The answer was: no, not really. I’ve had a number of people approach me in confidence saying that they’d reported someone and nothing had happened and they didn’t have the time or emotional energy to pursue it. This means that there are people in the Fear Free directory who have been reported for using aversives but Fear Free doesn’t do anything about it. I get that this is complicated and I don’t have a great answer to this problem. But I will no longer refer my clients to the directory because of this.
The requirement for ongoing education: This is wholly broken. Fear Free Pets doesn’t track nor confirm ongoing education that is supposedly required to keep your certification. They don’t have the manpower nor a good system for tracking it. So, they have a requirement which, if not met, is supposed to lead to the loss of the certification - but it just doesn’t. Tori even said to me that she thought that such professionals are probably better off learning on the job than taking time out of their busy days to learn from an online class. I wholeheartedly (and loudly) disagreed. Fear Free Pets has NO clue what they are learning on the job nor whom they are learning from. Everyone in a vet practice might not be Fear Free Certified and a Certified Vet may be learning a terrible method from someone that they generally admire. Fear Free gets to decide what counts for continuing education - they have zero control over everything else that may influence a certified professional. Abdicating their role in monitoring ongoing education is inexcusable as long as it’s a stated requirement. I suggested then, and I repeat now, having such a requirement that isn’t enforced degrades the credibility of Fear Free Pets further. They’d be better off getting rid of the requirement altogether.
So, while there was some forward momentum on one item (or at least the promise of it - I’ve not yet seen the blog post that was promised six weeks ago), the number of red flags that are not addressed leads me to conclude that Fear Free Pets is not currently something I can support. I know that some very good people work at Fear Free Pets or have in the past - I even know a few of them. And I’m hopeful that they’ll be able to effect positive change in the organization. Until then, I won’t pursue a certification as a Fear Free Certified Professional since I don’t see any meaning in it at this time.
It’s a great idea. But, currently, so poorly executed that I can only describe it as completely broken.