That's ... bananas. I mean, I have my own reasons for not getting a guide dog (at least partially because I've sorta gotten used to using the cane, and learning a new modality would frustrate me just a little bit). Now, personally, I have a little trouble with some people that are also guide dog users (there's a person that illandaria was mentioning to me ... leastwise it might have been illandaria ... or someone she introduced me to (this says a *LOT* for the lack of organization of my own internal mental filing system). Anyway, this person, when her dog would relieve itself on something, would scold the dog waste, rather than the dog. I've seen people tie their identity to that of the dog. I've seen a friend of mine, one that was reasonably competent with the cane, opt to continue to use the dog despite doctor's orders that, if she didn't give the arm she'd recenty INJURED a rest, it could be damaged permanently). I hope I'm making sense there. This looks disconnected so far.

Thing of it is, though, none of this is the fault of the dog as either an entity or a concept. The problem that I see the NFB misattributing to "guide dogs" as a concept is the inherently dependent personality in some guide dog users. Another problem I see is the media hype or whatever it is that states that dogs are a *BETTER* tool than canes (my own viewpoint is "whatever works for you"). This manifests itself usually by my being asked in random shopping mall, for instance, "Why don't you have a dog? Wouldn't it be easier if you had a dog?", and the asker never really being able to give me a good reason ... or, for that matter, a *REASON* that wasn't just looping over what they just said. Anyway ... </ramble>