35 ms·

Stop Faking Service Dogs

280 points by nether 9y ago

hypercluster 9y ago
I'd really appreciate an easier way to take a dog on a flight. When my dog was brought here via plane it had to be transported in the cargo area which is just a horrible thought!
jamespitts 9y ago
To address these issues, there should be difficult-to-attain certifications for a dog to roam free (within certain bounds), and for a dog to go with a human to places not normally allowing dogs (airplanes, restaurants, etc). The latter certification would be a prerequisite for various service dog certifications.
ch4s3 9y ago
> Twelve states now have laws criminalizing the misrepresentation of a pet as a service animal. That's good, but with all the confusion surrounding what a service dog actually is, there's less and less protection for their unique status. No it isn't good. Putting someone in jail for lying about their dog being a service animal is terrible. We should be educating these people and simultaneously putting fewer people in jail. Clearly the article outlines a real problem, but jail surely isn't the answer. * edited for tone * edit: I'd also be curious to know why people disagree with the proposition that prison is too extreme.
- colordrops 9y ago
  You can also give steep fines. It doesn't have to lead to jail time in most cases.
  - dguaraglia 9y ago
    This is the answer. I know people who've used their ESA "certificate" to get out of paying pet rent. If the threat was a steep fee, they'd probably just consider the pros and cons of getting caught. Luckily, most people I know just want to avoid paying pet rent, and won't ever take their dogs into a supermarket or anything like that.
  - ch4s3 9y ago
    Agreed. Eventually the social norm will change.
- majormajor 9y ago
  I don't think jail is an appropriate response in this case, but wonder what your plan for "educating these idiots" is. How do you deal with bad actors who see un- or laxly-enforced policies as an invitation to abuse the system? How do you deal with repeat offenders who are less malicious but are willing to eat a fine, or whatever, and the occasional stigma, to be able to do what they want? How do you deal with people who have missed or forgotten some of the education and so bring their dog into a situation that it isn't prepared to deal with in a space it legally shouldn't be in and it attacks a person, another animal, or causes massive property damage, or health risk? Lately I see a lot of people proposing policies that ignore bad actors or people opting out of the system, and don't discuss what to do then, and it worries me.
  - ch4s3 9y ago
    > but wonder what your plan for "educating these idiots" is. The same way you do with public health campaigns or any other public concern. > How do you deal with bad actors who see un- or laxly-enforced policies as an invitation to abuse the system? Finne them. > How do you deal with repeat offenders who are less malicious but are willing to eat a fine Fine them more. > How do you deal with people who have missed or forgotten some of the education and so bring their dog into a situation that it isn't prepared to deal with Make them leave. > and it attacks a person, another animal, or causes massive property damage, or health risk? There are already laws for that. Do people's dogs routinely attack people in airplanes? > Lately I see a lot of people proposing policies that ignore bad actors or people opting out of the system, and don't discuss what to do then, and it worries me. I agree, and I think jailing people for nonviolent crimes is bad policy.
    - majormajor 9y ago
      Sorry, I read a too far into your original post and somehow thought it was more anti-fine too. Fining does run into a problem when they're out of money, though, where "jail because they're broke" is a still dicey proposition. As to public health campaigns and other public concerns: are we any good at those? In the US, at least, there's a strong "personal liberty" ideological bent that is very resistant to education in many areas. Seems like conservationism is an example of a successful campaign in the past, but even that's been more on the losing side lately around land protection, EPA, etc.
- danso 9y ago
  Note: it's not a prison sentence, it's a county jail sentence. This is in response to your later comment about this overcrowding California's prison system. Not that this is the kind of law for which we'd expect judges to be harsh on: From the state penal code, 365.7, having a fake service animal is seen as fraudulent behavior: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=365.7 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio... > (a) Any person who knowingly and fraudulently represents himself or herself, through verbal or written notice, to be the owner or trainer of any canine licensed as, to be qualified as, or identified as, a guide, signal, or service dog, as defined in subdivisions (d), (e), and (f) of Section 365.5 and paragraph (6) of subdivision (b) of Section 54.1 of the Civil Code, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment. Consider how difficult it is to enforce this law. Business owners are not allowed to ask for proof of a disability or for papers. Given the massive fines they face for discriminating against the disabled -- $50,000 for the first offense, under the federal law (California's penalties may be even harsher -- what do you think most business owners are going to do when dealing with a questionable service animal? It's not even that they have much of a choice to do anything except ask a couple of broad questions, the answers of which do not require proof from the animal owner. Most reasonable business owners are going to let the animal in because the business owner is more worried about a lawsuit that could destroy their business than the net overall harm done to society's treatment of disabled people. Without the possibility of jail, and given the high possibility of getting away with a fake service animal, it might be hard to dissuade people from breaking the law.
iaabtpbtpnn 9y ago
In Palo Alto and Menlo Park, it appears that all the landlords have colluded to forbid dogs. Both towns are very dog-friendly, just not for renters. However, if you get a letter from a doctor saying that your dog is an ESA, which you can obtain online, then the landlord is forced to allow it (barring extreme circumstances like dangerous dogs). So that is what everyone does.
- devdoomari 9y ago
  lol maybe the doctors & landlords have some kind of back-deals on this?
- aquilaFiera 9y ago
  San Francisco is only marginally better, and yeah, everyone gets their dog registered as an ESA.
- nomel 9y ago
  Our manager encouraged us to get a letter to reduce the pet deposit. Our previous apartment manager taught us how to get the ESA.
  - stock_toaster 9y ago
    I would assume it reduces their insurance rates to say "no pets, unless ESA".
    - ghostly_s 9y ago
      Doesn't pet damage fall under your renter's insurance liability + damage deposit? How is it relevant for the owner's property insurance?
      - diggernet 9y ago
        I've heard that some owner's policies raise liability premiums if tenants have dogs (especially certain breeds). Presumably due to risk of someone suing tenant + owner ("deep pockets") after a bite.
mekanicalsyncop 9y ago
There are probably plenty of liars out there, but I think part of the problem may be the fact that there are a lot of people out there that need a proper service dog but can't afford one. PTSD seems to be a big market for service dogs. However, every program I can find that helps people pay for PTSD service dogs is for military veterans only (If you know of one that isn't please let me know). Which is pretty sad considering far more people in the US have PTSD for non-combat related reasons. If you can't get someone to help you pay for one, some of the trainers charge $20k or more. People hear stories about how service dogs can change a person's life completely and so when they can't afford one they buy a dog they can afford and attempt to train them on their own. There are lots of organizations and individuals out there providing information on how to do it. I'm not sure what the typical results are like, but I imagine its harder to accomplish than many assume. My wife and I would have to save for years to get a $20k dog, so we've been thinking about trying to train one ourselves. It might be foolish, but when you're desperate you'll try anything. If they pass laws implementing fines for fake service dogs, I really hope they are thoughtful enough not to make it illegal to have a service dog that's not officially trained by someone that charges a fortune.
- blackguardx 9y ago
  If you have a diagnosed illness, then your service dog should probably be considered "real." I'm not as confident as you that most of these people have diagnosed illnesses, however. I know a guy with a traumatic brain injury that is confined to a wheelchair and has a "real" service dog. I don't think there is any way you can train a random dog to this level on your own. The dog has amazing skills and took many months to train. Also the trainers select dogs that exhibit the right temperment at a very young age.
  - mekanicalsyncop 9y ago
    >I don't think there is any way you can train a random dog to this level on your own. I pretty much agreed in my comment. People try anyways because they've tried everything else and don't have the money. >Also the trainers select dogs that exhibit the right temperment at a very young age. There are lots of breeders now that offer to help you find a dog with the right temperment. I'm not sure how legitimate they are though.
smt88 9y ago
Some of the other comments seem to miss vital information in the article. ESAs (emotional support animals) are not the same thing as service dogs[1]. There's debate about whether they're even effective[2]. Not only does this mean that people with ESAs likely don't need their dog as much as people with service dogs, it also means ESAs don't have the same legal protections. The only places that are required to accept ESAs are airplanes. In any other context, only service dogs are protected. 1. From the article: "The [Americans with Disabilities Act] states, 'dogs whose sole function is to provide comfort or emotional support do not qualify as service animals under the ADA.'" 2. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/animalia/wp/2017/07/02/therapy-animals-are-everywhere-proof-that-they-help-is-not/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/animalia/wp/2017/07/02/t...
- WillPostForFood 9y ago
  Here is the problem - you are a restaurant owner and someone walks in with a dog wearing some sort of blue or red vest with an official looking logo. What do you do? If it is a real service animal, you don't want to grill the poor disabled person for the dogs paperwork, you want to be a good guy, so you do nothing, and bunch of dog owners abuse that goodwill by bringing their dogs places they shouldn't.
  - nether 9y ago
    Stop being a pussy? Politely ask for his papers, please, so that the rest of the patronage and dine in peace and in sanitary conditions. I have literally seen a "service dog" TAKE A SHIT ON THE FLOOR NEXT TO DINERS in California. Allowing that does not make a restaurateur a "good guy."
    - iaabtpbtpnn 9y ago
      One of the major points in the article is that there are no papers, and even if there were, the law doesn't require the owner to explain himself beyond saying what specific task the dog is trained to do.
nomel 9y ago
'Therapy' animals are not service animals and are not protected [1]. [1] https://adata.org/publication/service-animals-booklet https://adata.org/publication/service-animals-booklet
- Spivak 9y ago
  * under the ADA. Discrimination against people with ESAs is protected under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Federal Fair Housing Amendments Act.
dogruck 9y ago
I reject the notion of "fake service dog." I understand the point about the official, narrow definition of a service dog. Also, I don't dispute that many people claim service dogs that don't meet that definition. But that feels like the debate about Illegal Immigrants. One side says "what part of illegal don't you understand" and the other responds with "hey, these are good humans." I think that if a human says their dog provides a service, that the discussion stops there. The more you attempt to push back, the more people will explicitly circumvent it. And really -- is this a major problem?
- WillPostForFood 9y ago
  And really -- is this a major problem? If it doesn't bother you the rich people buy the privilege for their dogs to be in grocery stores and restaurants, then not a major problem. But it bugs me as a dog owner that leaves their dog at home.
- nwhatt 9y ago
  Did you read the article? Do you know anyone with a service dog? There are lots of non profits dedicated to raising dogs and working with people with disabilities. I suggest you find one and volunteer. This is a major problem for a small number of people. It's crippling though - This creep towards ESA is both actively impairing the ability of service dogs to work, and passively hurting perceptions. I'm just summarizing a well reasoned article to you, so please go back and read it again.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - dogruck 9y ago
    Yes, I did read the article -- and I reject its premise. Thank you for the summary and for your pompous and ignorant response to it. In college, I had a sight-impaired friend with a guide dog. That dog worked around street noise, farm animals, and unruly pets. To be constructive -- what is your specific solution to the problem? Anything other than "non profit and volunteer, bro!"
interfixus 9y ago
"In California, the penalty is $1,000 and up to six months in jail" The number and nature of jailable offenses in the US state and federal legal systems keep baffling the European mind.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- smnrchrds 9y ago
  And this is in Caifornia, one of the most liberal states. I shudder at the thought of how it must be like in Deep South.
  - tptacek 9y ago
    It's not hard to find out; just search "service dog fraud" and [southern state], for instance, to find out that Alabama appears to have no such law, while Texas will fine you for trying to pass off a dog as a service animal (but apparently hasn't done so in a long time).
  - danso 9y ago
    Political affiliation and number of laws and regulations aren't obviously correlated. How many red states/cities have the same fines and taxes for grocery bags and improper garbage sorting?
  - dsfyu404ed 9y ago
    Generally speaking the left states are also the most authoritarian states. If you can think of it CA probably has a law regulating it and criminalizing failure to comply. Whether a state is left or right leaning does not have any bearing on whether it is highly authoritarian or not. It just so happens that the general pattern in the US is high population -> lots of laws -> left leaning.
    - sdenton4 9y ago
      "...authoritarian..." I don't think that word means what you think it means... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism
quanticle 9y ago
And why aren’t there more dog-friendly restaurants, bars, music venues, and other businesses? There are nearly 90 million pet dogs in this country. That’s a huge market, but also a huge problem when us owners act inappropriately. As animal lovers, creating and supporting dog-friendly businesses should be our priority. Acting selfishly to the detriment of others will not create a more dog-friendly future. We want to be able to take our dogs to more places, more often, but we have to make sure doing so is appropriate and doesn’t infringe on the rights and well-being of people who need real service dogs. I don't understand this remedy. How will making it easier for the average Joe Public to take his ill-behaved pet everywhere make it easier for those with disabilities who require service animals? Won't that just make it more likely that service animals encounter other animals which interfere with their duties? I think the real answer is to actually have certifications and licenses which effectively differentiate service animals from ordinary pets. Right now, there's pretty much nothing that anyone can do to prove that their "service animal" is actually well-trained enough to be in a public place without causing trouble. So, of course, people are abusing the system in order to get their ill-behaved pets into public areas. The solution to that problem isn't to make every public area open to pets, the solution is to have a clearer way of differentiating well trained service animals from ill-behaved pets. EDIT: The main fallacy that I see in the article is that it seems to be treating pet ownership as some kind of fundamental right, and sees the "fake service animal" phenomenon as a way that people are exercising this right without working to change the system to make the exercise of this right easier. I don't agree with that worldview at all. Owning a pet is a privilege. If you find yourself in circumstances that are routinely unfriendly to owning a pet, don't own a pet.
- jpolitz 9y ago
  There is the Canine Good Citizen test (http://www.akc.org/dog-owners/training/canine-good-citizen/ http://www.akc.org/dog-owners/training/canine-good-citizen/), and the more stringent Community Canine Good Citizen Test (http://www.akc.org/dog-owners/training/akc-community-canine/ http://www.akc.org/dog-owners/training/akc-community-canine/). I've used this informally as justification before when renting housing and bringing my dog to work (she's a plain CGC). I think there's value in having these be more recognized. I especially wish they were by airlines. Note that this isn't the same thing as the issue with service animals, where credentials are at a totally different standard, and more important than where I can bring my pet.
Overtonwindow 9y ago
You could also create a licensure program for ESA's. Issue specificly branded vests or collars, require specific training, registration, and certification. This way if you want to use your animal as an ESA, you can, you just need to be able to register and pay the fees. Those fees might dissuade a lot of fakers.
- ceejayoz 9y ago
  > Those fees might dissuade a lot of fakers. Fakers, and low income people with a genuine need.
  - Overtonwindow 9y ago
    Genuinely low income concerns could be allayed with no fee, for those truly low income, or a sliding scale.
cpr 9y ago
Seems like one of the main problems here is people who are treating dogs (like TFA author) like people or like children replacements.
elipsey 9y ago
Public service announcement: around a couple percent of people, including me, have pet allergies. These are of varying severity. Mine are apparently worse then average. The consequences of a severe exposure are unpredictable, but can be closer to a catastrophe then a temporary inconvenience. I won’t get into the grisly details, but I have been to ER for this, and my doctor told me to carry an Epipen. A lot of people don’t know that animal dander persists in the environment after the animal is gone and transfers onto clothing and upholstery. If I get exposed, I will be sick until I take a shower, change my clothes, and then wait several hours. I will get sick in the presence of upholstery or fabric that certain pets have been in contact with, until that material has been washed. Examples include houses, cars, airplanes, all the clothes in your suitcase that are spread around my hotel room, etc. The after-effects of a strong exposure can last for a couple of days (again, I will spare the details). This is a huge ass pain for me, and I’m doing everything I can to work on it. I get three injections every week, I’m on several drugs, etc. But in spite of all of that, the social problems are worse then the health problems, because people aren’t aware of the issue, and become offended, argumentative, or defensive when I try to escape. I think that people sometimes believe that I am criticizing their pet, their hospitality, or their housekeeping, or that I am irrational or attention seeking. I have been accused of hypochondria (I’ve given this honest consideration, but several of my dearest family members observe that I accurately detect pet owners in blind tests by becoming sick in the presence of their clothing and effects, without advance knowledge of their pet ownership status; also, my doctor pretty much freaked out about the results of my allergy diagnostics). My friend (an RN) got super pissed when my mom asked her nicely not to bring her dog inside my house. Pet owning friends have argued and interrogated me when I offer my apologies and say I can’t stay for dinner. Last week a really nice lady brought her cute guinea pig to an event and waved it around my face. I had to figure out how to flee without hurting her feelings. I really like animals, and the whole thing sucks, but it’s mostly beyond my control. Surviving the “pet friendly” workplace is a serious problem when considering employment, and I have yet to muster the courage to be “that guy” who asks to be reseated on an airplane, in a restaurant, or complained in the college tutoring session because someone brought their dog. I'm totally willing to take one for the team if someone legit needs a seeing eye dog or something. I just wish that my friend who took her “emotional support animal” on the airplane believed that she was, on average, making several people on each flight sick as a trade off. When I told her I had pet allergies, she said she cured hers with mindfulness and meditation. I’m still not totally sure which one of us is superstitious, but I promise, I actually really did like her dog.
HillaryBriss 9y ago
true story: guy goes to a restaurant (in California), sits at the counter, notices that another customer has their dog sitting on that same counter. guy tells the waiter that he would never come there again if the restaurant continued to let customers sit their dogs on top of the counter where people eat. (guy has a compromised immune system and wants to avoid the bacteria present in dog feces). waiter tells the guy "that would be fine. never come back." i guess that's just the way it works these days. makes me wonder about restaurant tables, chairs and counters now.
- sgarman 9y ago
  Not liking dogs isn't a protected class so the private business (restaurant) can do whatever they want. Now if they are violating health codes (sounds like they were) that's different.
  - PostThisTooFast 9y ago
    Being an asshole isn't a "protected class" either, so I guess patrons can just shove animals off eating surfaces at will.
lxmorj 9y ago
Ugh. Pet laws are so terrible. They're made out of laziness and a weird inability to confront the actual problem. I have a pretty damn good dog. Lots of people have shit dogs. Rather than actually address bad behavior, we decide to tell everyone with a dog "no dogs here". "Some people with dogs are inconsiderate, and we don't want to deal with that, so all people cannot bring their dogs". In particular airlines have constructed a ruleset which (incorrectly) assumes small dogs can be only so inconvenient/irritating to other passengers and that larger dogs will be ok in the cargo space. I have an ESA certificate to fly with my ~40lb Wheaten. Once, on a three hour flight, I took my seat well before the woman next to me. When we landed and my pup got out from her curled-up, fuck-this-engine-noise position under the seat, the woman jumped, laughed, and said "I THOUGHT YOU HAD A FUR BAG!". That is to say - while she isn't a perfect dog, she's pretty chill and well-behaved. I got the certificate online, and without lying. That said, the quiz amounts to a longwinded version of "Do you get anxious? Does it get worse when traveling? Does your dog make you feel better?" To which I think most humans who have dogs would say "Triple yes." I've looked at each argument that what I'm doing is immoral, and found a rationale suggestion otherwise. "People are allergic!" For $100 a tiny shedding dog can ride in a very-not-dander-proof container. My dog is non-shedding. "They can be noisy!" So can your toddler. So can above tiny dog. Mine isn't. "It's like parking in a handicap spot!" No silly, my dog takes up my foot space, no one else's "The airline is losing money!" My dog & I weigh less combined than plenty of people who pay the same fare. I've also offered to buy a seat for my dog and leave her in a large crate on the seat. No takers. "The guy next to you doesn't want a dog around!" See answer 1. Also, 90% of people are happy to be distracted from the horror of flying. Anyone who isn't can easily trade seats, since more than 50% of people are happy to sit by the pup. All in, my choices are: - don't have a dog - have a smaller dog - risk my dog dying under the plane / guarantee she's terrified - don't travel - get an ESA certificate
- cakedoggie 9y ago
  Or, you know, don't travel with your dog. Like most people who fly.
- exclusiv 9y ago
  Good points. The airlines definitely push you to register the pets even if you don't want to. I have a hypoallergenic 5 lb dog. She fits under the seat. On most flights they don't care if she is out of her carrier and the only reason we've kept her out is because she either makes an annoying whine or she will sound like a tiny monkey which disrupts passengers. It's not a bark by any measure but it's very noticeable to the point where people don't even know what kind of animal is making the noise. We've drugged her with Childen's Benadryl and another option from the vet before which usually helps but we'd rather not have to resort to it. We pay $75 each way to take her. It's usually completely subjective on the enforcement of any policy. On the last flight the first attendant took selfies with her and oodled over her for at least 5 minutes. Then the next attendant on the same flight yelled at us for having her out of her carrier (saying it's gate to gate). We usually walk her throughout the airport on her leash. Anyway, our options are - we can put her in her carrier and others will be disturbed if they don't have noise cancelling headphones or want to use the available earplugs, or we could keep her out of her carrier with no risk to anyone and she'll be completely fine and look out the window in awe like a child. I understand a few bad dogs can ruin it for all but there should be some discretion allowed and the way they enforce any such policies is confusing and not optimal for all parties. They took my money to allow her but is it really ideal to force me to keep her in her carrier and disrupt passengers?
goldenshale 9y ago
Seriously, is this a problem that needs fixing? Are emotional support dogs really causing society harm? Being able to bring an animal to work with you, for example, has a positive impact on many people and animal's lives, and it in no way discredits or disrespects more skilled or necessary service dogs. Maybe a good solution is to have a dog license with various levels of acceptance. If your dog is licensed then they must be proven to be well behaved in normal circumstances.
- qq66 9y ago
  Did you read the article? Some of these dogs have attacked other people and dogs. If people are getting attacked by dogs they will lobby for policy that gets these dogs banned. Legitimate service animals, genuinely necessary emotional support animals, and fake emotional support animals are all likely to get swept up in the resulting inquisition.
  - arwhatever 9y ago
    I'd need some statistics to be convinced that the anecdotes in the story are actually commonplace, to be sure we're not banning 90 million people and their dogs because of one bite. I live in Seattle and people take dogs everywhere, and I seldom or never see any issues. My initial reaction when I see articles like this is to feel like this is nothing more that people wanting to shove rules down each other's throats (and to think pretty snarkily that people can move to Kansas City if they like) but then, my lack of observation of obviously fake service dogs causing any sort of problems, is it itself anecdotal.
- pfarnsworth 9y ago
  Except some people are violently allergic to dogs, so if a coworker brings their dog to work, it actually impacts other people. At work, someone brought their dog into the cafeteria and it was roaming around the food area, etc, which is not cool. I have 3 coworkers that registered their dogs as service dogs, just so they could bring them on planes and bring them to work. They have no psychological issues, they simply wanted the convenience of bringing their dogs whereever they wanted. It's pure selfishness.
abakker 9y ago
I guess, why should we allow more than the bare minimum of dogs in public buildings. I don't like dogs much, and I'm mildly allergic to them. I've never had a bad interaction with a real service dog, but this article glosses over the part where some people might not want dogs in a restaraunt or on their flight at all. I know I don't.
- marchenko 9y ago
  I think the question of pets in public spaces is a bit of a culture-clash issue. I was raised with well-loved, well-trained dogs, but I would never have considered taking them to a grocery store or restaurant. There are a lot of people whose enjoyment of public spaces is impeded by the presence of animals - one person's emotional support animal is another's source of anxiety, and often for good reason. I think it is reasonable to expect people to tolerate the broad spectrum of humanity encountered in public, including those at difficult developmental stages, but extending this tolerance to other species is a matter for debate.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
wbillingsley 9y ago
> My dogs are as important to me as my friends and family. The first criteria my girlfriend and I apply to where we eat, drink, and travel is whether our dogs can enjoy it with us. Eek, the article lost me here. Much as I have a very dear dog that is "part of the family", I do tend to think it's important for people to remember that no your dog is not as important as your family. It is a dog, not a four-legged human. Time in the back yard while you're out is just fine, and it would probably enjoy occasional trips to a dog-of-leash area to chase other dogs much more than "enjoying a restaurant"...
- bby 9y ago
  Some dogs are more important than family. Not all of us are human centric.
- jamesrcole 9y ago
  > it's important for people to remember that no your dog is not as important as your family I think it is an accurate statement to say that, for some people, pets are as important as their family. What is it that you think these people are not remembering? Some people might not have children, and their pets are like their children. Some people don't have any other family.
  - haswell 9y ago
    It's absolutely an accurate statement that for some people, pets are as important as their family, or pets are their family. For various reasons, me and my SO will never be able to have kids. The dogs are our family. That said, we're responsible pet owners. We don't pretend they're service dogs. We'll take the dogs to pet friendly venues but we won't bend the rules and take them places that we should not. Replying to the parent comment, it's important to remember that not everyone has the same family situation.
    - wbillingsley 9y ago
      SO = family. I would honestly be very surprised if even you would be game to tell him/her that they are only on the level of importance to you as one of your dogs. Or that if there were a fire, you'd be rushing out the door with a dog and leaving your partner to the flames... While I'd say "nice try" at trying to imply some sort of assumption and claim a diversity moral high ground, children are not the only kind of family (nor even did anything in my post even mention children), and whatever relations or friends you might have, yes I absolutely would hope that you would consider their needs as more important than those of your pets.
praptak 9y ago
Maybe there could be an officially recognized vest or badge for proper service animals? That would spare the people who actually need them the possibly embarrassing questions while simultaneously filtering out abusers. Got a badge, no questions asked. Forge the badge, get fined or go to jail.
thraxil 9y ago
My ex had narcolepsy and had a service dog to help her. She (the service dog) did a number of things for her including detecting and alerting her to an oncoming cataplectic attack, giving her a little extra time to get somewhere safe. Her training was extensive and very expensive and she was incredibly well behaved. She was a ten pound miniature poodle though (my ex was allergic to dogs and poodles are naturally somewhat hypoallergenic (also very smart)) so she faced a lot of skepticism. Seeing what she went through on a regular basis, the fake service dog trend that's arisen since has really annoyed me. On another note, I've been living in Europe and the UK for the last few years and one of the interesting cultural differences I've noticed is how common it is over here to just allow dogs in restaurants and pubs and on public transportation. That seems to be the default and only some places have "no dogs allowed" signs up. If the US would take a similar approach, maybe people wouldn't feel the need to fake service animal status.
- NhanH 9y ago
  Just for a counter viewpoint, I have lived in Asia for most of my life and the US in the last couple of years. I greatly appreciate the fact that dogs and pets are not allowed by default in certain places in the US. Regardless of how smart you think a dog is, most of them are barely, if ever, trained.
  - config_yml 9y ago
    Is dog training not mandatory in the US?
    - sokoloff 9y ago
      Almost nothing is mandatory in the US. ;) Dog training is certainly not mandatory (at least in any place in the US I've lived).
      - croon 9y ago
        Indeed. Which is a fair ideal. Legally mandated contracts aren't necessary, as long as social contracts are honored. Unfortunately the "complete freedom" usually amounts to complete freedom of personal responsibility.
kelnos 9y ago
I've always wondered about the prohibition on asking for proof that the animal is actually a service animal. Why is that considered too much of a burden for a disabled person? We don't let people into bars unless they provide proof that they're over the legal drinking age; why should we let animals into restaurants without proof that they have a legal right to be there? It's somewhat ironic, since I see people flaunting their fake "service animal ID cards", which, according to the law, aren't required. I really really wish more businesses would at least ask the "what task is this animal trained to perform?" test. I imagine it would weed out a lot of the fakers on the spot. I think a lot of people are "passive liars" in that they're ok putting on a fake ID tag and presenting it when asked, but will have a harder time actually lying about the animal's service-related capabilities.
- jmull 9y ago
  It's because there is no official system for licensing/registering service animals so there's no way to provide proof. So the law explicitly sets up an honor system, where you have to accept it if someone says they have a service animal.
  - Shivetya 9y ago
    even in systems where there is an official system, think temporary handicap stickers, abuse can be rampant in certain areas. From outright fraud of fake stickers/mirror hangers to just always using a relatives car which has a sticker. the fix is in enforcement backed by real fines. nothing disgusts me more than watching obviously healthy people run from handicap spaces into stores and back out only to watch the little old lady have to hobble from further out because all the spaces are taken. we live in a society where there are people who will abuse a system because they can or they feel entitled to do so because of some perceived offense. considering the technology available today there is zero reason we cannot provide RFID or similar tags that cannot easily be spoofed that is on the dogs collar. where I am we have to have rabies tags on dogs so adding another tag is a non issue
    - JBlue42 9y ago
GordonS 9y ago
Through work, I work with a development team in India. The hotel I always stay at in Mumbai, the Renaissance, has a 'security dog' at the entrance. Every time a car wants to get inside the hotel complex, a security guy opens your door and a bored-looking labrador just sits there. It's quite obviously just a normal, hot, bored labrador. Every time I get back to the hotel after work I have to go through this ridiculous charade. It's so stupid it honestly makes me cringe with embarrassment every time!
PostThisTooFast 9y ago
Business owners can't interrogate offenders, but other patrons can. So... simply pose as an employee and deny access to any assholes who don't have good answers to the questions you're legally allowed to ask: Is this dog required for a disability? What tasks is it trained to perform? If they don't have a damned good answer, then ask them to take their animal outside.
qstyk 9y ago
"My dogs are as important to me as my friends and family." That's not sweet, it's sick. House on fire, can only save one... Dog or Friend - Friend (time spent deciding, 0 seconds) Dog or Family - Family (time spent deciding, 0 seconds) Dog or Total stranger - Total stranger (time spent deciding, 0 seconds)

280 points by nether 9y ago

I'd really appreciate an easier way to take a dog on a flight. When my dog was brought here via plane it had to be transported in the cargo area which is just a horrible thought!

jamespitts 9y ago

To address these issues, there should be difficult-to-attain certifications for a dog to roam free (within certain bounds), and for a dog to go with a human to places not normally allowing dogs (airplanes, restaurants, etc). The latter certification would be a prerequisite for various service dog certifications.

ch4s3 9y ago

> Twelve states now have laws criminalizing the misrepresentation of a pet as a service animal. That's good, but with all the confusion surrounding what a service dog actually is, there's less and less protection for their unique status. No it isn't good. Putting someone in jail for lying about their dog being a service animal is terrible. We should be educating these people and simultaneously putting fewer people in jail. Clearly the article outlines a real problem, but jail surely isn't the answer. * edited for tone * edit: I'd also be curious to know why people disagree with the proposition that prison is too extreme.

colordrops 9y ago
You can also give steep fines. It doesn't have to lead to jail time in most cases.
- dguaraglia 9y ago
  This is the answer. I know people who've used their ESA "certificate" to get out of paying pet rent. If the threat was a steep fee, they'd probably just consider the pros and cons of getting caught. Luckily, most people I know just want to avoid paying pet rent, and won't ever take their dogs into a supermarket or anything like that.
- ch4s3 9y ago
  Agreed. Eventually the social norm will change.
majormajor 9y ago
I don't think jail is an appropriate response in this case, but wonder what your plan for "educating these idiots" is. How do you deal with bad actors who see un- or laxly-enforced policies as an invitation to abuse the system? How do you deal with repeat offenders who are less malicious but are willing to eat a fine, or whatever, and the occasional stigma, to be able to do what they want? How do you deal with people who have missed or forgotten some of the education and so bring their dog into a situation that it isn't prepared to deal with in a space it legally shouldn't be in and it attacks a person, another animal, or causes massive property damage, or health risk? Lately I see a lot of people proposing policies that ignore bad actors or people opting out of the system, and don't discuss what to do then, and it worries me.
- ch4s3 9y ago
  > but wonder what your plan for "educating these idiots" is. The same way you do with public health campaigns or any other public concern. > How do you deal with bad actors who see un- or laxly-enforced policies as an invitation to abuse the system? Finne them. > How do you deal with repeat offenders who are less malicious but are willing to eat a fine Fine them more. > How do you deal with people who have missed or forgotten some of the education and so bring their dog into a situation that it isn't prepared to deal with Make them leave. > and it attacks a person, another animal, or causes massive property damage, or health risk? There are already laws for that. Do people's dogs routinely attack people in airplanes? > Lately I see a lot of people proposing policies that ignore bad actors or people opting out of the system, and don't discuss what to do then, and it worries me. I agree, and I think jailing people for nonviolent crimes is bad policy.
  - majormajor 9y ago
    Sorry, I read a too far into your original post and somehow thought it was more anti-fine too. Fining does run into a problem when they're out of money, though, where "jail because they're broke" is a still dicey proposition. As to public health campaigns and other public concerns: are we any good at those? In the US, at least, there's a strong "personal liberty" ideological bent that is very resistant to education in many areas. Seems like conservationism is an example of a successful campaign in the past, but even that's been more on the losing side lately around land protection, EPA, etc.
danso 9y ago
Note: it's not a prison sentence, it's a county jail sentence. This is in response to your later comment about this overcrowding California's prison system. Not that this is the kind of law for which we'd expect judges to be harsh on: From the state penal code, 365.7, having a fake service animal is seen as fraudulent behavior: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=365.7 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio... > (a) Any person who knowingly and fraudulently represents himself or herself, through verbal or written notice, to be the owner or trainer of any canine licensed as, to be qualified as, or identified as, a guide, signal, or service dog, as defined in subdivisions (d), (e), and (f) of Section 365.5 and paragraph (6) of subdivision (b) of Section 54.1 of the Civil Code, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment. Consider how difficult it is to enforce this law. Business owners are not allowed to ask for proof of a disability or for papers. Given the massive fines they face for discriminating against the disabled -- $50,000 for the first offense, under the federal law (California's penalties may be even harsher -- what do you think most business owners are going to do when dealing with a questionable service animal? It's not even that they have much of a choice to do anything except ask a couple of broad questions, the answers of which do not require proof from the animal owner. Most reasonable business owners are going to let the animal in because the business owner is more worried about a lawsuit that could destroy their business than the net overall harm done to society's treatment of disabled people. Without the possibility of jail, and given the high possibility of getting away with a fake service animal, it might be hard to dissuade people from breaking the law.

iaabtpbtpnn 9y ago

In Palo Alto and Menlo Park, it appears that all the landlords have colluded to forbid dogs. Both towns are very dog-friendly, just not for renters. However, if you get a letter from a doctor saying that your dog is an ESA, which you can obtain online, then the landlord is forced to allow it (barring extreme circumstances like dangerous dogs). So that is what everyone does.

devdoomari 9y ago
lol maybe the doctors & landlords have some kind of back-deals on this?
aquilaFiera 9y ago
San Francisco is only marginally better, and yeah, everyone gets their dog registered as an ESA.
nomel 9y ago
Our manager encouraged us to get a letter to reduce the pet deposit. Our previous apartment manager taught us how to get the ESA.
- stock_toaster 9y ago
  I would assume it reduces their insurance rates to say "no pets, unless ESA".
  - ghostly_s 9y ago
    Doesn't pet damage fall under your renter's insurance liability + damage deposit? How is it relevant for the owner's property insurance?
    - diggernet 9y ago
      I've heard that some owner's policies raise liability premiums if tenants have dogs (especially certain breeds). Presumably due to risk of someone suing tenant + owner ("deep pockets") after a bite.

mekanicalsyncop 9y ago

There are probably plenty of liars out there, but I think part of the problem may be the fact that there are a lot of people out there that need a proper service dog but can't afford one. PTSD seems to be a big market for service dogs. However, every program I can find that helps people pay for PTSD service dogs is for military veterans only (If you know of one that isn't please let me know). Which is pretty sad considering far more people in the US have PTSD for non-combat related reasons. If you can't get someone to help you pay for one, some of the trainers charge $20k or more. People hear stories about how service dogs can change a person's life completely and so when they can't afford one they buy a dog they can afford and attempt to train them on their own. There are lots of organizations and individuals out there providing information on how to do it. I'm not sure what the typical results are like, but I imagine its harder to accomplish than many assume. My wife and I would have to save for years to get a $20k dog, so we've been thinking about trying to train one ourselves. It might be foolish, but when you're desperate you'll try anything. If they pass laws implementing fines for fake service dogs, I really hope they are thoughtful enough not to make it illegal to have a service dog that's not officially trained by someone that charges a fortune.

blackguardx 9y ago
If you have a diagnosed illness, then your service dog should probably be considered "real." I'm not as confident as you that most of these people have diagnosed illnesses, however. I know a guy with a traumatic brain injury that is confined to a wheelchair and has a "real" service dog. I don't think there is any way you can train a random dog to this level on your own. The dog has amazing skills and took many months to train. Also the trainers select dogs that exhibit the right temperment at a very young age.
- mekanicalsyncop 9y ago
  >I don't think there is any way you can train a random dog to this level on your own. I pretty much agreed in my comment. People try anyways because they've tried everything else and don't have the money. >Also the trainers select dogs that exhibit the right temperment at a very young age. There are lots of breeders now that offer to help you find a dog with the right temperment. I'm not sure how legitimate they are though.

smt88 9y ago

Some of the other comments seem to miss vital information in the article. ESAs (emotional support animals) are not the same thing as service dogs[1]. There's debate about whether they're even effective[2]. Not only does this mean that people with ESAs likely don't need their dog as much as people with service dogs, it also means ESAs don't have the same legal protections. The only places that are required to accept ESAs are airplanes. In any other context, only service dogs are protected. 1. From the article: "The [Americans with Disabilities Act] states, 'dogs whose sole function is to provide comfort or emotional support do not qualify as service animals under the ADA.'" 2. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/animalia/wp/2017/07/02/therapy-animals-are-everywhere-proof-that-they-help-is-not/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/animalia/wp/2017/07/02/t...

WillPostForFood 9y ago
Here is the problem - you are a restaurant owner and someone walks in with a dog wearing some sort of blue or red vest with an official looking logo. What do you do? If it is a real service animal, you don't want to grill the poor disabled person for the dogs paperwork, you want to be a good guy, so you do nothing, and bunch of dog owners abuse that goodwill by bringing their dogs places they shouldn't.
- nether 9y ago
  Stop being a pussy? Politely ask for his papers, please, so that the rest of the patronage and dine in peace and in sanitary conditions. I have literally seen a "service dog" TAKE A SHIT ON THE FLOOR NEXT TO DINERS in California. Allowing that does not make a restaurateur a "good guy."
  - iaabtpbtpnn 9y ago
    One of the major points in the article is that there are no papers, and even if there were, the law doesn't require the owner to explain himself beyond saying what specific task the dog is trained to do.

nomel 9y ago

'Therapy' animals are not service animals and are not protected [1]. [1] https://adata.org/publication/service-animals-booklet https://adata.org/publication/service-animals-booklet

Spivak 9y ago
* under the ADA. Discrimination against people with ESAs is protected under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Federal Fair Housing Amendments Act.

dogruck 9y ago

I reject the notion of "fake service dog." I understand the point about the official, narrow definition of a service dog. Also, I don't dispute that many people claim service dogs that don't meet that definition. But that feels like the debate about Illegal Immigrants. One side says "what part of illegal don't you understand" and the other responds with "hey, these are good humans." I think that if a human says their dog provides a service, that the discussion stops there. The more you attempt to push back, the more people will explicitly circumvent it. And really -- is this a major problem?

WillPostForFood 9y ago
And really -- is this a major problem? If it doesn't bother you the rich people buy the privilege for their dogs to be in grocery stores and restaurants, then not a major problem. But it bugs me as a dog owner that leaves their dog at home.
nwhatt 9y ago
Did you read the article? Do you know anyone with a service dog? There are lots of non profits dedicated to raising dogs and working with people with disabilities. I suggest you find one and volunteer. This is a major problem for a small number of people. It's crippling though - This creep towards ESA is both actively impairing the ability of service dogs to work, and passively hurting perceptions. I'm just summarizing a well reasoned article to you, so please go back and read it again.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- dogruck 9y ago
  Yes, I did read the article -- and I reject its premise. Thank you for the summary and for your pompous and ignorant response to it. In college, I had a sight-impaired friend with a guide dog. That dog worked around street noise, farm animals, and unruly pets. To be constructive -- what is your specific solution to the problem? Anything other than "non profit and volunteer, bro!"

interfixus 9y ago

"In California, the penalty is $1,000 and up to six months in jail" The number and nature of jailable offenses in the US state and federal legal systems keep baffling the European mind.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
smnrchrds 9y ago
And this is in Caifornia, one of the most liberal states. I shudder at the thought of how it must be like in Deep South.
- tptacek 9y ago
  It's not hard to find out; just search "service dog fraud" and [southern state], for instance, to find out that Alabama appears to have no such law, while Texas will fine you for trying to pass off a dog as a service animal (but apparently hasn't done so in a long time).
- danso 9y ago
  Political affiliation and number of laws and regulations aren't obviously correlated. How many red states/cities have the same fines and taxes for grocery bags and improper garbage sorting?
- dsfyu404ed 9y ago
  Generally speaking the left states are also the most authoritarian states. If you can think of it CA probably has a law regulating it and criminalizing failure to comply. Whether a state is left or right leaning does not have any bearing on whether it is highly authoritarian or not. It just so happens that the general pattern in the US is high population -> lots of laws -> left leaning.
  - sdenton4 9y ago
    "...authoritarian..." I don't think that word means what you think it means... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism

quanticle 9y ago

And why aren’t there more dog-friendly restaurants, bars, music venues, and other businesses? There are nearly 90 million pet dogs in this country. That’s a huge market, but also a huge problem when us owners act inappropriately. As animal lovers, creating and supporting dog-friendly businesses should be our priority. Acting selfishly to the detriment of others will not create a more dog-friendly future. We want to be able to take our dogs to more places, more often, but we have to make sure doing so is appropriate and doesn’t infringe on the rights and well-being of people who need real service dogs. I don't understand this remedy. How will making it easier for the average Joe Public to take his ill-behaved pet everywhere make it easier for those with disabilities who require service animals? Won't that just make it more likely that service animals encounter other animals which interfere with their duties? I think the real answer is to actually have certifications and licenses which effectively differentiate service animals from ordinary pets. Right now, there's pretty much nothing that anyone can do to prove that their "service animal" is actually well-trained enough to be in a public place without causing trouble. So, of course, people are abusing the system in order to get their ill-behaved pets into public areas. The solution to that problem isn't to make every public area open to pets, the solution is to have a clearer way of differentiating well trained service animals from ill-behaved pets. EDIT: The main fallacy that I see in the article is that it seems to be treating pet ownership as some kind of fundamental right, and sees the "fake service animal" phenomenon as a way that people are exercising this right without working to change the system to make the exercise of this right easier. I don't agree with that worldview at all. Owning a pet is a privilege. If you find yourself in circumstances that are routinely unfriendly to owning a pet, don't own a pet.

jpolitz 9y ago
There is the Canine Good Citizen test (http://www.akc.org/dog-owners/training/canine-good-citizen/ http://www.akc.org/dog-owners/training/canine-good-citizen/), and the more stringent Community Canine Good Citizen Test (http://www.akc.org/dog-owners/training/akc-community-canine/ http://www.akc.org/dog-owners/training/akc-community-canine/). I've used this informally as justification before when renting housing and bringing my dog to work (she's a plain CGC). I think there's value in having these be more recognized. I especially wish they were by airlines. Note that this isn't the same thing as the issue with service animals, where credentials are at a totally different standard, and more important than where I can bring my pet.

Overtonwindow 9y ago

You could also create a licensure program for ESA's. Issue specificly branded vests or collars, require specific training, registration, and certification. This way if you want to use your animal as an ESA, you can, you just need to be able to register and pay the fees. Those fees might dissuade a lot of fakers.

ceejayoz 9y ago
> Those fees might dissuade a lot of fakers. Fakers, and low income people with a genuine need.
- Overtonwindow 9y ago
  Genuinely low income concerns could be allayed with no fee, for those truly low income, or a sliding scale.

cpr 9y ago

Seems like one of the main problems here is people who are treating dogs (like TFA author) like people or like children replacements.

elipsey 9y ago

Public service announcement: around a couple percent of people, including me, have pet allergies. These are of varying severity. Mine are apparently worse then average. The consequences of a severe exposure are unpredictable, but can be closer to a catastrophe then a temporary inconvenience. I won’t get into the grisly details, but I have been to ER for this, and my doctor told me to carry an Epipen. A lot of people don’t know that animal dander persists in the environment after the animal is gone and transfers onto clothing and upholstery. If I get exposed, I will be sick until I take a shower, change my clothes, and then wait several hours. I will get sick in the presence of upholstery or fabric that certain pets have been in contact with, until that material has been washed. Examples include houses, cars, airplanes, all the clothes in your suitcase that are spread around my hotel room, etc. The after-effects of a strong exposure can last for a couple of days (again, I will spare the details). This is a huge ass pain for me, and I’m doing everything I can to work on it. I get three injections every week, I’m on several drugs, etc. But in spite of all of that, the social problems are worse then the health problems, because people aren’t aware of the issue, and become offended, argumentative, or defensive when I try to escape. I think that people sometimes believe that I am criticizing their pet, their hospitality, or their housekeeping, or that I am irrational or attention seeking. I have been accused of hypochondria (I’ve given this honest consideration, but several of my dearest family members observe that I accurately detect pet owners in blind tests by becoming sick in the presence of their clothing and effects, without advance knowledge of their pet ownership status; also, my doctor pretty much freaked out about the results of my allergy diagnostics). My friend (an RN) got super pissed when my mom asked her nicely not to bring her dog inside my house. Pet owning friends have argued and interrogated me when I offer my apologies and say I can’t stay for dinner. Last week a really nice lady brought her cute guinea pig to an event and waved it around my face. I had to figure out how to flee without hurting her feelings. I really like animals, and the whole thing sucks, but it’s mostly beyond my control. Surviving the “pet friendly” workplace is a serious problem when considering employment, and I have yet to muster the courage to be “that guy” who asks to be reseated on an airplane, in a restaurant, or complained in the college tutoring session because someone brought their dog. I'm totally willing to take one for the team if someone legit needs a seeing eye dog or something. I just wish that my friend who took her “emotional support animal” on the airplane believed that she was, on average, making several people on each flight sick as a trade off. When I told her I had pet allergies, she said she cured hers with mindfulness and meditation. I’m still not totally sure which one of us is superstitious, but I promise, I actually really did like her dog.

HillaryBriss 9y ago

true story: guy goes to a restaurant (in California), sits at the counter, notices that another customer has their dog sitting on that same counter. guy tells the waiter that he would never come there again if the restaurant continued to let customers sit their dogs on top of the counter where people eat. (guy has a compromised immune system and wants to avoid the bacteria present in dog feces). waiter tells the guy "that would be fine. never come back." i guess that's just the way it works these days. makes me wonder about restaurant tables, chairs and counters now.

sgarman 9y ago
Not liking dogs isn't a protected class so the private business (restaurant) can do whatever they want. Now if they are violating health codes (sounds like they were) that's different.
- PostThisTooFast 9y ago
  Being an asshole isn't a "protected class" either, so I guess patrons can just shove animals off eating surfaces at will.

lxmorj 9y ago

Ugh. Pet laws are so terrible. They're made out of laziness and a weird inability to confront the actual problem. I have a pretty damn good dog. Lots of people have shit dogs. Rather than actually address bad behavior, we decide to tell everyone with a dog "no dogs here". "Some people with dogs are inconsiderate, and we don't want to deal with that, so all people cannot bring their dogs". In particular airlines have constructed a ruleset which (incorrectly) assumes small dogs can be only so inconvenient/irritating to other passengers and that larger dogs will be ok in the cargo space. I have an ESA certificate to fly with my ~40lb Wheaten. Once, on a three hour flight, I took my seat well before the woman next to me. When we landed and my pup got out from her curled-up, fuck-this-engine-noise position under the seat, the woman jumped, laughed, and said "I THOUGHT YOU HAD A FUR BAG!". That is to say - while she isn't a perfect dog, she's pretty chill and well-behaved. I got the certificate online, and without lying. That said, the quiz amounts to a longwinded version of "Do you get anxious? Does it get worse when traveling? Does your dog make you feel better?" To which I think most humans who have dogs would say "Triple yes." I've looked at each argument that what I'm doing is immoral, and found a rationale suggestion otherwise. "People are allergic!" For $100 a tiny shedding dog can ride in a very-not-dander-proof container. My dog is non-shedding. "They can be noisy!" So can your toddler. So can above tiny dog. Mine isn't. "It's like parking in a handicap spot!" No silly, my dog takes up my foot space, no one else's "The airline is losing money!" My dog & I weigh less combined than plenty of people who pay the same fare. I've also offered to buy a seat for my dog and leave her in a large crate on the seat. No takers. "The guy next to you doesn't want a dog around!" See answer 1. Also, 90% of people are happy to be distracted from the horror of flying. Anyone who isn't can easily trade seats, since more than 50% of people are happy to sit by the pup. All in, my choices are: - don't have a dog - have a smaller dog - risk my dog dying under the plane / guarantee she's terrified - don't travel - get an ESA certificate

cakedoggie 9y ago
Or, you know, don't travel with your dog. Like most people who fly.
exclusiv 9y ago
Good points. The airlines definitely push you to register the pets even if you don't want to. I have a hypoallergenic 5 lb dog. She fits under the seat. On most flights they don't care if she is out of her carrier and the only reason we've kept her out is because she either makes an annoying whine or she will sound like a tiny monkey which disrupts passengers. It's not a bark by any measure but it's very noticeable to the point where people don't even know what kind of animal is making the noise. We've drugged her with Childen's Benadryl and another option from the vet before which usually helps but we'd rather not have to resort to it. We pay $75 each way to take her. It's usually completely subjective on the enforcement of any policy. On the last flight the first attendant took selfies with her and oodled over her for at least 5 minutes. Then the next attendant on the same flight yelled at us for having her out of her carrier (saying it's gate to gate). We usually walk her throughout the airport on her leash. Anyway, our options are - we can put her in her carrier and others will be disturbed if they don't have noise cancelling headphones or want to use the available earplugs, or we could keep her out of her carrier with no risk to anyone and she'll be completely fine and look out the window in awe like a child. I understand a few bad dogs can ruin it for all but there should be some discretion allowed and the way they enforce any such policies is confusing and not optimal for all parties. They took my money to allow her but is it really ideal to force me to keep her in her carrier and disrupt passengers?

goldenshale 9y ago

Seriously, is this a problem that needs fixing? Are emotional support dogs really causing society harm? Being able to bring an animal to work with you, for example, has a positive impact on many people and animal's lives, and it in no way discredits or disrespects more skilled or necessary service dogs. Maybe a good solution is to have a dog license with various levels of acceptance. If your dog is licensed then they must be proven to be well behaved in normal circumstances.

qq66 9y ago
Did you read the article? Some of these dogs have attacked other people and dogs. If people are getting attacked by dogs they will lobby for policy that gets these dogs banned. Legitimate service animals, genuinely necessary emotional support animals, and fake emotional support animals are all likely to get swept up in the resulting inquisition.
- arwhatever 9y ago
  I'd need some statistics to be convinced that the anecdotes in the story are actually commonplace, to be sure we're not banning 90 million people and their dogs because of one bite. I live in Seattle and people take dogs everywhere, and I seldom or never see any issues. My initial reaction when I see articles like this is to feel like this is nothing more that people wanting to shove rules down each other's throats (and to think pretty snarkily that people can move to Kansas City if they like) but then, my lack of observation of obviously fake service dogs causing any sort of problems, is it itself anecdotal.
pfarnsworth 9y ago
Except some people are violently allergic to dogs, so if a coworker brings their dog to work, it actually impacts other people. At work, someone brought their dog into the cafeteria and it was roaming around the food area, etc, which is not cool. I have 3 coworkers that registered their dogs as service dogs, just so they could bring them on planes and bring them to work. They have no psychological issues, they simply wanted the convenience of bringing their dogs whereever they wanted. It's pure selfishness.

abakker 9y ago

I guess, why should we allow more than the bare minimum of dogs in public buildings. I don't like dogs much, and I'm mildly allergic to them. I've never had a bad interaction with a real service dog, but this article glosses over the part where some people might not want dogs in a restaraunt or on their flight at all. I know I don't.

marchenko 9y ago
I think the question of pets in public spaces is a bit of a culture-clash issue. I was raised with well-loved, well-trained dogs, but I would never have considered taking them to a grocery store or restaurant. There are a lot of people whose enjoyment of public spaces is impeded by the presence of animals - one person's emotional support animal is another's source of anxiety, and often for good reason. I think it is reasonable to expect people to tolerate the broad spectrum of humanity encountered in public, including those at difficult developmental stages, but extending this tolerance to other species is a matter for debate.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

wbillingsley 9y ago

> My dogs are as important to me as my friends and family. The first criteria my girlfriend and I apply to where we eat, drink, and travel is whether our dogs can enjoy it with us. Eek, the article lost me here. Much as I have a very dear dog that is "part of the family", I do tend to think it's important for people to remember that no your dog is not as important as your family. It is a dog, not a four-legged human. Time in the back yard while you're out is just fine, and it would probably enjoy occasional trips to a dog-of-leash area to chase other dogs much more than "enjoying a restaurant"...

bby 9y ago
Some dogs are more important than family. Not all of us are human centric.
jamesrcole 9y ago
> it's important for people to remember that no your dog is not as important as your family I think it is an accurate statement to say that, for some people, pets are as important as their family. What is it that you think these people are not remembering? Some people might not have children, and their pets are like their children. Some people don't have any other family.
- haswell 9y ago
  It's absolutely an accurate statement that for some people, pets are as important as their family, or pets are their family. For various reasons, me and my SO will never be able to have kids. The dogs are our family. That said, we're responsible pet owners. We don't pretend they're service dogs. We'll take the dogs to pet friendly venues but we won't bend the rules and take them places that we should not. Replying to the parent comment, it's important to remember that not everyone has the same family situation.
  - wbillingsley 9y ago
    SO = family. I would honestly be very surprised if even you would be game to tell him/her that they are only on the level of importance to you as one of your dogs. Or that if there were a fire, you'd be rushing out the door with a dog and leaving your partner to the flames... While I'd say "nice try" at trying to imply some sort of assumption and claim a diversity moral high ground, children are not the only kind of family (nor even did anything in my post even mention children), and whatever relations or friends you might have, yes I absolutely would hope that you would consider their needs as more important than those of your pets.

praptak 9y ago

Maybe there could be an officially recognized vest or badge for proper service animals? That would spare the people who actually need them the possibly embarrassing questions while simultaneously filtering out abusers. Got a badge, no questions asked. Forge the badge, get fined or go to jail.

thraxil 9y ago

My ex had narcolepsy and had a service dog to help her. She (the service dog) did a number of things for her including detecting and alerting her to an oncoming cataplectic attack, giving her a little extra time to get somewhere safe. Her training was extensive and very expensive and she was incredibly well behaved. She was a ten pound miniature poodle though (my ex was allergic to dogs and poodles are naturally somewhat hypoallergenic (also very smart)) so she faced a lot of skepticism. Seeing what she went through on a regular basis, the fake service dog trend that's arisen since has really annoyed me. On another note, I've been living in Europe and the UK for the last few years and one of the interesting cultural differences I've noticed is how common it is over here to just allow dogs in restaurants and pubs and on public transportation. That seems to be the default and only some places have "no dogs allowed" signs up. If the US would take a similar approach, maybe people wouldn't feel the need to fake service animal status.

NhanH 9y ago
Just for a counter viewpoint, I have lived in Asia for most of my life and the US in the last couple of years. I greatly appreciate the fact that dogs and pets are not allowed by default in certain places in the US. Regardless of how smart you think a dog is, most of them are barely, if ever, trained.
- config_yml 9y ago
  Is dog training not mandatory in the US?
  - sokoloff 9y ago
    Almost nothing is mandatory in the US. ;) Dog training is certainly not mandatory (at least in any place in the US I've lived).
    - croon 9y ago
      Indeed. Which is a fair ideal. Legally mandated contracts aren't necessary, as long as social contracts are honored. Unfortunately the "complete freedom" usually amounts to complete freedom of personal responsibility.

kelnos 9y ago

I've always wondered about the prohibition on asking for proof that the animal is actually a service animal. Why is that considered too much of a burden for a disabled person? We don't let people into bars unless they provide proof that they're over the legal drinking age; why should we let animals into restaurants without proof that they have a legal right to be there? It's somewhat ironic, since I see people flaunting their fake "service animal ID cards", which, according to the law, aren't required. I really really wish more businesses would at least ask the "what task is this animal trained to perform?" test. I imagine it would weed out a lot of the fakers on the spot. I think a lot of people are "passive liars" in that they're ok putting on a fake ID tag and presenting it when asked, but will have a harder time actually lying about the animal's service-related capabilities.

jmull 9y ago
It's because there is no official system for licensing/registering service animals so there's no way to provide proof. So the law explicitly sets up an honor system, where you have to accept it if someone says they have a service animal.
- Shivetya 9y ago
  even in systems where there is an official system, think temporary handicap stickers, abuse can be rampant in certain areas. From outright fraud of fake stickers/mirror hangers to just always using a relatives car which has a sticker. the fix is in enforcement backed by real fines. nothing disgusts me more than watching obviously healthy people run from handicap spaces into stores and back out only to watch the little old lady have to hobble from further out because all the spaces are taken. we live in a society where there are people who will abuse a system because they can or they feel entitled to do so because of some perceived offense. considering the technology available today there is zero reason we cannot provide RFID or similar tags that cannot easily be spoofed that is on the dogs collar. where I am we have to have rabies tags on dogs so adding another tag is a non issue
  - JBlue42 9y ago

GordonS 9y ago

Through work, I work with a development team in India. The hotel I always stay at in Mumbai, the Renaissance, has a 'security dog' at the entrance. Every time a car wants to get inside the hotel complex, a security guy opens your door and a bored-looking labrador just sits there. It's quite obviously just a normal, hot, bored labrador. Every time I get back to the hotel after work I have to go through this ridiculous charade. It's so stupid it honestly makes me cringe with embarrassment every time!

PostThisTooFast 9y ago

Business owners can't interrogate offenders, but other patrons can. So... simply pose as an employee and deny access to any assholes who don't have good answers to the questions you're legally allowed to ask: Is this dog required for a disability? What tasks is it trained to perform? If they don't have a damned good answer, then ask them to take their animal outside.

qstyk 9y ago

"My dogs are as important to me as my friends and family." That's not sweet, it's sick. House on fire, can only save one... Dog or Friend - Friend (time spent deciding, 0 seconds) Dog or Family - Family (time spent deciding, 0 seconds) Dog or Total stranger - Total stranger (time spent deciding, 0 seconds)