-
[Informal] compare and contrast of IACP and APDT Code of Conduct/Ethics
The IACP page is a much more general outline of standards compared to the APDT page (which has more than double the list size) but seems to cover all of the same nine basic principles that the APDT both defines and details more specifically and descriptively.
I feel the APDT version is more effective in addressing every possible point, leaving little to no room for grey areas or interpretation regarding exactly how they expect their members to behave and conduct themselves in the industry and the association to operate. I appreciate the in-depth thoroughness and concise language when I think particularly of new trainers and new members being made aware of what they may not know or have not yet considered to conduct ethical, transparent services especially from a business perspective in the dog industry. It is an excellent educational tool in and of itself, and if based on this code alone to judge which is the “better” organization to join, I would choose APDT.
Unfortunately, this promising outlook almost immediately breaks down when reading their Position Statements where they unilaterally condemn the use of specific, more “traditional” aversive tools and techniques in favor of other aversive tools that they claim allegedly do not cause fear, pain, or intimidation. The irony is their rebranded aversives (e.g. “gentler” because of material, not startling but “interrupting”, Nothing in Life is Free leadership that is more like a dictator for an owner as a general rule, etc) actually I find increases frustration in the dog, can increase behavior fall out from misuse and incorrect/unintended application of techniques, including Koeher techniques on a cloth collar which I have direct personal experience of the failure of these methods and the trachael damage they can do. Any poor results in my experience is blamed on the owner or trainer as less experienced…this is actually written in the APDT Standard as “Trainers who are unable to train a specific behavior or to a specific outcome without resorting to aversive techniques, may use APDT International’s resources to learn more or contact and work with trainers who can help.” which has since been rewritten to soften the passive-aggressive and belittling tone the document originally conveyed when I looked into joining the APDT in 2024 or so. This lends to a silently implied and covert smear campaign on trainers and methods using these tools and techniques that is falsely representative, unethical, and closes the door for a learning and collaborative field.
On the other hand the IACP does a beautiful job of communicating the importance of understanding and skill in all techniques, when and why to use one or the other, and the potential risks (which funny enough is an APDT ethics code item). The reverse could also be said, what are the risks of NOT employing certain techniques and the potential long term or short-term issues at a minimum from prolonging behavior, operating on unrealistic scenarios for training plan implementation to avoid stress, leading to higher anxiety, a stifled coddled animal and partnership with medication for otherwise natural canine behavior displays.
One other interesting thing to note that I think is telling at least of the industry landscape if not a broader underlying scope in the world is that the majority of information and points I thought I would find under Code of Ethics are housed under Standards of Practice on both sites. It seems folks, including myself, when navigating to an organization are immediately looking for Methods – what methods do they use? Are they positive? Do they condemn e-collars? Do they promote aversives? Many layman and scientific terms are used (or rather confused, in the media and public forum), for a propagandist approach instead of fair and humane use, and true education. Code of Conduct and Ethics has become an afterthought and closely connected now with not-so-common common sense.
At any rate, I am a member of IACP myself, which seems to be the last available professional organization to not discriminate based on equipment type and promotes skilled use and ability in ALL tools as a crucial component of a qualified professional.
EDIT: I really would just use and keep APDT’s honestly, but will post my top ten as a sub-reply here to myself.
