Friday, 12 September 2008

Unhealthy attitudes at the Cavalier Club

I'd quite understand the Cavalier Club having a petition and a special general meeting to expel one of the Cavalier people featured on Pedigree Dogs Exposed.
I'm sure lots of people would sign to expel Beverley Costello for knowingly breeding on from a dog with SM.
But, no it's not Beverley they're after - it's Margaret Carter, the brave lady from the health committee who confirmed on camera that she'd seen the scan that showed Beverley's dog had SM.
The motion is to remove Margaret Carter from the Committee for breaking the Code of Ethics Part A Paragraph 3.
Part of the Cavalier Club code of ethics states: "Members should conduct themselves at all times in a manner that is a credit to the Club and ownership of Cavaliers."
I think Margaret's actions were very much of credit to the breed and the club. Anyone who cares enough about their breed to put up with this sort of intimidation deserves all our respect.
If anyone with a legal background might read this blog and want to help Margaret please do get in touch. The meeting is on Sunday October 5th and she must provide her defence seven days before at the latest.

Postscript:
I did fleetingly wonder if we should omit the last cowardly comment calling Margaret and the TV researcher on the show a liar - being anonymous and calling people liars doesn't impress me much - what about you?
I quote so you don't have to scroll: "Lying about something that can destroy dogs and the people that have them is unethical, dishonest, stupid, and a basis to remove them from a post where they are representing the breed."
Is this cowardly wretch talking about the wrong woman here? If you want to prove Margaret is a liar and the dog in question doesn't have SM - get the original vet that did the scan to speak up. If anyone innocent stood accused of something as serious as knowingly breeding on from a dog with such a serious and painful condition as this they'd have had a statement out from teh vet clearing their name within seconds. Why hasn't this happened I wonder?
If this dog hasn't got SM that would be the obvious way to clear its name - how can you punish someone for telling the truth! Surely the Cavalier Club have to establish that what she said was untrue for it to be scandelous.
Call the neurologist who performed the original scan to clear the dog's name. Why wouldn't your vet stand up and support you if you had done nothing wrong?
And having such a strange wording in your code of ethics makes the Cavalier Club look like they have so much to hide - they look even more secretive than KC branch of the freemasons! If they are more concerned about protecting people with something to hide than the health of the breed, what hope is there?
Totally agree with the comments re the Cavalier people needing some help here, beginning to wonder which end of the lead has the brain problems.
Can I be struck off their Christmas card list for talking about the Cavalier Club without having something from writing from each and every of their members giving me their explicit approval?
Mad. If it weren't all so important, you could laugh at these oh so very, very important women being so very outraged that one of their number dared stand up and put the dogs they claim to love first. Margaret has broken their shameful code of silence. Has dared to say in a gentle, quiet voice - stop the suffering.
Let's all get behind Margaret and fight this small-minded Club madness. Oh god, the irony of that last statement.
Talk about shooting the messenger, where are these people's morals?

Here's the address for the Chairman of the Cavalier Club - just realised she's really local to our magazine:

Mrs L Jupp,
60 Roundway,
Camberley,
Surrey, GU15 1NU

26 comments:

Anonymous said...

That's appalling. It doesn't sound as though the cavalier people are interesting in changing the breed for the better if they want to expel the one member who does.
Maybe she should found a new cavalier society, one that wants to rid the breed of the dreadful defects it suffers from by sensible breeding and doing an outcross.
She was certainly brave in exposing the problems.

Anonymous said...

That's absolutely shocking. What a brave woman. She should start a new cavalier club devoted to the betterment of the breed.

karlin said...

I believe she actually could use some legal help to simply inform the CKCS Club and Kennel Club that they cannot call an SGM to remove a member in this way on an ethics complaint, full stop. On the legal advice of the KC itself in 2006, the Club changed its procedural rules and they have not followed that procedure in calling this SGM. They are only able to call an SGM after first, an initial warning and second, only after 'further and persistent complaints be substantiated'. There is only a single complaint and it has not been initially addressed according to the procedures established at the 2006 AGM. Legal support to properly inform the KC and CKCS Club of this fact is now needed, but professional legal advice has already confirmed that the club's own rules make this action against Margaret null and void.

Di said...

I fear the Cavalier Club are making a big mistake here. This will be seen by the public as condoning members unethical breeding practices, whilst at the same time castigating a member for speaking out in public about what has very obviously been known and hushed up for some time within their membership.
I can find no reason to suppose that MC has failed to "conduct herself at all times in a manner that is a credit to the club and ownership of Cavs." Whereas on the other hand it is my personal opinion that it is the Cav Club themselves who are.!!

alfmcmalf said...

With the planned follow up to pedigree dogs exposed I think someone should direct the Cavalier people, very promptly to some "How to handle the media" courses.

They are really going to make complete idiots of themselves. In that last sentence I was being polite.

Anonymous said...

Please get your facts right before you post! This is the Code of Ethics rule that Margaret has broken. Also we are not calling for her expulsion from the club, just as a member of the committtee.

“Members should conduct themselves at all times in a manner that is a credit to the Club and ownership of Cavaliers. Members should not use any method of communication whatsoever in a way that could be considered defamatory, insulting, or detrimental to another member, or the Club, or to the breed in general, nor furnish information including pedigrees and photographs of dogs not owned by them without prior written consent of the owner.”

Anonymous said...

Please get your facts right before you post! This is the Code of Ethics rule that Margaret has broken. Also we are not calling for her expulsion from the club, just as a member of the committtee.

“Members should conduct themselves at all times in a manner that is a credit to the Club and ownership of Cavaliers. Members should not use any method of communication whatsoever in a way that could be considered defamatory, insulting, or detrimental to another member, or the Club, or to the breed in general, nor furnish information including pedigrees and photographs of dogs not owned by them without prior written consent of the owner.”

Anonymous said...

The woman lied in the broadcast, and so did the researcher. Lying about something that can destroy dogs and the people that have them is unethical, dishonest, stupid, and a basis to remove them from a post where they are representing the breed. Pugs, Yorkie's, Maltese, Otterhounds, German shepherd dogs,etc. all have much more serious health problems than the cavaliers. Do you homework people, don't just vomit bilge read in your daily rags or heard on you dumbed=down TV shows.

this will probably not be posted as it is a sensible comment in favor of seeking the truth.

Beverley Cuddy said...

Please see my Ps to the original post for comment on these recent posts!

Jan said...

There is something wrong when the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel Club are more interested in getting revenge on Margaret C than sorting out the problems with the breed.
I am a member of the club and am proud of Margaret C for doing her best for the Cavalier breed.

This seems like a tactic to to avoid looking at the real issue. As so many people have already said, if Beverley Costello's dog was ok to breed from, why does she not have an independent expert look at the scan?

I not longer trust the club's intentions and I know many pet Cavalier owners that feel the same (members and non-members).

If this meeting goes ahead I am hoping to get there (current disability means I am hoping that somebody from the Surrey area might give me a lift as I can't drive!) to vote. But as there seem to be so many voices from the CKCS club against Margaret I have no idea how this is likely to go.

If they manage to succeed in this action the club will show that it's real commitment is to a small circle of breeders, not to the vast majority of people who buy and love the breed and rely on such clubs to improve canine health. I do know that there are many breeders in the club who agree with Margaret, so I hope that they will all turn up at the meeting to give their votes.

Anonymous said...

I don't know why everyone thinks Margaret is so wonderful. By her own admission she had known about Beverley's dogs scan for three years! Surely she should have spoken out sooner instead of letting him be used on 26 bitches after he was diagnosed!
It is absolutely not true that everyone else knew about this dog. It was most certainly not common knowledge. Margaret should have reported Beverley to the committee on an ethics charge the very first time the dog was used at stud after the diagnosis. Instead she chose to wait three years and do it on National TV and try to damn the whole breed. I feel her halo is slipping.

I don't suppose you will print this
as it is at odds with your own views.

Anonymous said...

Unfortunate but as the CKCS Club members seek to rationalize their position they will continue to try to chip away at character and integrity of those who disagree with them. They would be better spending their time trying to understand their group psychology oh so perfectly expressed in C.A. Sharp's article
http://devinefarm.net/rp/biggest.htm

Jan said...

Given the reaction from the CKCS club I am not suprised that Margaret didn't disclose this until the information had a chance of reaching a wider audience.

It was the opportunity of getting this through to more people through Pedigree Dogs Exposed that meant it was worth risking the wrath of the CKCS club.

And please don't forget that Margaret has been working on behalf of Cavalier health for some time - she has been working to get SM recognised as a serious threat for the last five years, and administered the Cavalier Lub Dub Fund (MVD). People like Margaret and Carol Fowler have put a huge amount of their lives into the welfare of the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel.

The power of the media means that she (and others) had a chance to get the message over. Don't shoot the messengers.

jo siemieniowski said...

I see that the people who want margaret thrown off the committee want to remain anonymous, is,nt that just typical of just about everybody at the KC. do they not realise that people like margaret and Dr clare rusbridge are speaking the truth, the whole world seems to understand this, but NOT those at the KC. i wonder why?

Julia said...

I agree that the behaviour of the CKCS Club is appalling. I have a great deal of respect for Margaret and her bravery in speaking out. If speaking out to confirm that a person is causing unnecessary suffering to dogs is discrediting the club then there is something wrong with it. The sooner we have legislation to prevent breeding in such instances the better (I'm talking about the dogs here, but I'm beginning to think it could apply equally well to some of the humans involved!). Hopefully any such legislation would allow the RSPCA to prosecute breeders who knowingly breed in such circumstances in future for causing unnecessary suffering.

Anonymous said...

I think there were two mistakes in this ....
The first one was done by the neuro/vet who gived the name of a patient (dog) to Margaret. Due to medical secret he may not ...
The second was Margaret herself who said publicaly she had seen the scan and know the name of the dog and tell it publicaly.
All this 'documentary' about 'pedigree dogs' isn't good, not only for cavaliers but for all breeds. It only try to discredit the breeding of pure dogs.

FJB said...

So she broke the 'secrecy' rule did she? Well good for her. If the Cavalier club cared at all for this breed they would punish the appalling excuse for a breeder who thinks it ok to continue (even AFTER being interviewed) to allow this dog to sire litters. I think Margaret is a credit to the cause of the Cavalier. It is the Cavalier Club who are making themselves look pathetic.

fjb said...

"No dog which has a known physical defect that could be detrimental to the health and well being of the offspring or the breed in general should be used at stud".

So the breeder also broke the code of ethics - will she be thrown out?

jo siemieniowski said...

Vets can now charge for prescription, so that for me means that although i pay my vet £98.90 amonth for zak,s epilepsy medication i will also have to pay him £12.35 for each prescription i ask for! Zak has two, one of them is for his other epilepsy meds Keppra, and as it is a human drug it cannot be bought at the vets, so a prescription is essential, his keppra costs me £106 91, so now on top of that i have the extra charge of £12.35. is this fair?? i also get a script for his metacam, as it is cheaper online than at the vets, I am spending over £200.00 per month as it is. how much more can one person take?

jo siemieniowski said...

Margaret Carter has been voted off the committee, I think it is an utter disgrace, these people are supposed to care for their dogs!! all they care about are the linings of their pockets, Margaret could have been the saviour of the KC. b ut no, they have all let down the only person on the committee who cared about SM.

Anonymous said...

The vote was as follows
204 to have her removed
31 against
4 abstained.

jo siemieniowski said...

I have just been informed aof a protest going on that is in manchester and leeds, for a pet superstore its called pets4us, and from what people are saying you can go to any of these shops and just buy a puppy, it reminds me of back yard puppies, I would never go and buy a pup without seeing its mother, or the conditions it lives in, I think this is terrible, those poor puppies! why has the RSPCA not done something about this??

Patsy said...

Good post.

Anonymous said...

In a fantastic way!

Gail said...

I have one of the 25 dogs dog that was sired by Beverley Costello's dog beauella radzinski. He has pain and itching, he can't walk very far without stopping for a scratch whilst whimpering in pain. I have only tonight mad ethe connection and fear he may have syringomyelia. I am appalled at what I am finding out about pedigree dogs and attitudes wihin these clubs.

I didn't choose harry for his beauty or that his father won shows, (stupidly it seems) I chose a pedigree dog because I thought it would be healthier and for the temprament of the breed. I chose him to be a family pet and Harry has to live a life of suffering just so people can have perfect looking dogs. Hooray Margaret Carter for speaking out.

Margaret Carter said...

Thank you Gail for your kind words.

I am so sorry that Harry is showing SM symptoms.
There are other problems that cause scratching and yelping, so you would be wise to check that your vet is up to date with the health problems in cavaliers.

Unfortunately it was 25 litters ( well over 100 puppies ) that Radzinski sired after he was disgnosed with SM.