Replies to Accusations Against CARE
CARE
CARE does not condone euthanasia, but rather utilizes it as a last
resort. In a perfect world, every dog and cat would live the course of
its natural life with the perfect family. But this is not a perfect
world. With more than 100,000 stray and abandoned dogs and cats ending
up in city shelters every year, it is clear there simply aren’t enough
homes. City shelters give strays just 10 days to find a home before
administering euthanasia. In general, CARE houses and cares for each
animal for a minimum of one year, while some dogs have spent 9 years
at our shelter. Time is not the only factor that is considered; age,
aggressiveness, health, size, and adoptability are all taken into
consideration. All decisions regarding euthanasia are made by a
special committee who must reach unanimous consent. This committee
consists mostly of CARE members and board members, and includes a
certified and registered veterinarian who advises the committee.
In March of 2011, 20 dogs were euthanized at CARE’s shelter. These
dogs were chosen based on a number of factors, including size,
aggressiveness, and overcrowded conditions at the shelter.
Unfortunately, 15 of these dogs were so aggressive that the handlers
could not safely remove them from their pen in order to administer
euthanasia. A decision was made to anesthetize the aggressive dogs in
their pen. This happened in view of other dogs. The bodies were then
wrapped in blankets and carried to a different location where
euthanasia was carried out. Admittedly, the decision to anesthetize in
front of other dogs was a mistake. Dogs cannot tell the difference
between being anesthetized and being euthanized. The blame was shared
by the lead worker and the veterinarian on duty at the time. Since
this incident, CARE has implemented a strict policy against
anesthetizing in front of other dogs.
2.) Dogs were euthanized in order to provide Konguk University with
bodies for experimentation.
Konkuk University manages the animal blood & body donation program
which is supported by the RSPCA (UK). Following RSPCA’s lead, CARE has
agreed to donate euthanized bodies to Konguk University in order to
minimize experiments on live animals. CARE also intends to minimize
any effort to raise and kill animals specifically for scientific
experimentation. There is no official contract between CARE and Konguk
University and CARE is under no obligation to provide a certain
“quota” of animal cadavers. CARE simply donates cadavers when they are
available. CARE does not receive any reward (financial or otherwise)
for these donations. Therefore, it is impossible for the needs of
Konguk University to affect CARE’s decisions for euthanasia. The 20
dogs that were euthanized in March of 2011 were not euthanized in
order to provide Konguk University with animal cadavers. Rather, they
were euthanized for other reasons and then provided to Konguk
University.
3.) Two dogs were entrusted to CARE and euthanized by mistake.
About four years ago, a group named ANYCARE entrusted CARE with 14
dogs. The group promised to pay $10,000 for the upkeep of these dogs
over a four year period. CARE agreed to accept the dogs and the money,
but CARE never received the money. CARE decided to shelter the dogs
anyway. After three years of sheltering these dogs (without any
money), one of CARE’s shelter workers mistakenly (perhaps
purposefully*) submitted two of the 14 dogs to the association
committee as “eligible for euthanasia.” The owner of the two
euthanized dogs was an ANYCARE member and occasionally visited the
shelter (about three to four times a year) to interact with his dogs.
Naturally, he was devastated to hear about his dogs being euthanized.
He notified ANYCARE, who immediately filed a lawsuit (and paid the
$10,000 fee they had previously neglected).
Though we believe the cause of this misunderstanding originated with
one person (who has since been terminated), CARE has taken full
responsibility for this mistake. We have offered a public apology to
the owner of the dogs and financial compensation. The owner has
publicly expressed his sympathy and understanding. He has accepted
CARE’s apology and is not requesting any financial compensation.
ANYCARE, however, is suing CARE for $14,000 for emotional damage to
its member(s). This lawsuit is still undergoing.
*There is evidence to believe this worker had intentionally submitted
these particular dogs for euthanasia in order to sabotage CARE’s
Director (So Yeon Park). Another worker had promised him the position
of “Shelter Director” once So Yeon Park was forced out of CARE.
4.) So-Yeon Park has been accused of embezzlement.
About 6 months ago, a CARE employee quit due to personal reasons.
After leaving, she brought a list of 11 “questionable” transactions
from CARE’s financial statements to the police. She accused CARE’s
director, So-Yeon Park, of embezzling donation money and using funds
for personal reasons. The police said they would look into the matter.
A few days later, the same ex-employee filed a law suit against So-
Yeon for embezzlement. When her lawyer called to ask about the police
investigation, the police had no choice but to launch an official
investigation. This official investigation took four months to
complete. During that time, it was true to say “Ms. Park is under
police investigation for embezzlement” and “So-Yeon Park has been
charged with embezzlement.” Note that this does not mean So-Yeon Park
(or any other CARE members) actually embezzled. It only means that
someone accused Ms. Park of embezzling. The investigation and court
case have since officially ended. So-Yeon Park has been found not
guilty of all charges. The entire case lacked concrete evidence and
was based only on the suspicion of one ex-employee.