There is a cost to prolonged public disputes that cannot be measured simply in social media posts, comments, solicitors’ letters or accusations.

There is a human cost. And then there’s the cost to the dogs.

Over a considerable period, the founders of Pumpkin and Friends Charity, together with some individuals associated with the charity, have made serious public allegations and criticisms concerning other charities, rescues and individuals. We are examining those allegations separately and will continue to distinguish between what can be evidenced, what is disputed and what remains unverified.

But there is another question: Has anybody considered the hidden cost?

THE HUMAN COST

We have heard from people who describe the sheer exhaustion of repeatedly having to try and defend themselves and their organisations while being blocked from their social media pages. Time that could have been spent helping animals instead spent responding to allegations, preserving evidence, seeking professional advice and fearing what might appear online next.

There’s the stress of seeing posts and comments about themselves in groups and forums, and the anxiety of promoting their own charity or celebrating its achievements because they fear what negative response might follow. Some have described becoming wary of accepting new volunteers because they fear there might be hidden motives of people approaching their organisation.

Whatever the eventual findings concerning individual disputes, these are serious consequences.

Behind a charity name or Facebook page are human beings, people who may already be devoting enormous amounts of time, energy and often their own money to helping animals.

This is why we are giving them a voice. Please visit our Testimonies page to hear from a number of victims whose lives have been impacted by the trustees and supporters of Pumpkin and Friends Charity.

AND THEN THERE ARE THE DOGS

This is the hidden cost that should concern every animal lover.

When a rescue or charity is subjected to damaging allegations or sustained negative publicity, what happens if members of the public decide not to donate? What happens if potential volunteers walk away? What happens if supporters become frightened of publicly associating themselves with an organisation?

Every donation lost can mean less money available for veterinary treatment, food, equipment or rehabilitation. Every volunteer discouraged can mean fewer hands available to help. Every hour consumed by conflict is an hour that cannot be spent elsewhere.

And while one organisation may be successfully attracting substantial donations and public support, that does not mean the consequences for other organisations caught up in these disputes cease to matter.

OUR PURPOSE HAS NOT CHANGED

From the beginning, our purpose has been about more than establishing what happened between organisations and individuals. We want to be a voice for the dogs, and for the people who devote their lives to helping them.

Where allegations are supported by evidence, that evidence matters. Where allegations are disputed, the other side deserves to be heard. And where claims have caused damage without adequate foundation, the consequences of that deserve examination too. Because behind every allegation, every post and every public dispute there can be a hidden cost.

A cost to people. A cost to charities. And, ultimately, a cost to the dogs they exist to help.

We will not lose sight of that.

OPPORTUNITIES TO STEP AWAY

In a number of the disputes we are examining, requests have been made for allegations, public commentary or other disputed conduct to stop. Those requests provided an opportunity for matters to de-escalate. Yet, based on the material we have reviewed, the disputes did not simply end. In some instances, further allegations, legal threats, posts or commentary followed.

That raises an important question. At what point does somebody consider the cumulative impact their actions may be having on the people on the receiving end? When somebody tells you that your actions are causing them or their organisation harm, there is an opportunity to stop, reflect, establish the facts and allow the situation to de-escalate.

Where that opportunity is not taken, and the public dispute instead continues or intensifies, the resulting human cost cannot simply be dismissed as an inevitable consequence of disagreement.