MemberApril 13, 2021 at 2:40 am10
I agree with Dave, that IACP seemed generic copy and paste. It does not even mention ethics except in item 14. when it says a member should cooperate with an Ethics Committee (should one be assigned)…. It was limited in content and I also agree it was lacking a focus on the dog, and what I think should be a necessary mention of improving quality of life.
I did, however, like:
2. Assist in maintaining the honor and reputation of the IACP and their Profession and avoid any form of fraud, deception or impropriety, discrimination or violence.
I think it’s important to include this idea in our code of ethics, though worded quite differently.
APDT was much more thorough. In fact, so thorough it seemed excessive and redundant, bordering on arrogant. It reads very Corporate.
I found it disturbing just how much of the document is based on complaints, and how little of such a large document was based on Responsibility to the Profession.
What I did like about the APDT, was that it calls out each as “Principles”, to follow, versus a list of rules to abide by.
I like 3.3 where it states that we shall ..”maintain adequate knowledge..” and think we should call out that as a FSDT, we maintain to stay accountable to each other, and to continue to further our knowledge.
I found typos and grammatical errors in both, which irritate me immediately.