18 ms·
US ends era of emotional support animals on planes
- onetimemanytime 6y agonot to be jerk or anything, but if I said that a cow or an elephant is the only thing that soothes me so accommodate them in a plane? How many other people should be inconvenienced by my issues?
- happytoexplain 6y agoNone, since it would probably be deemed infeasible. I think the tendency of engineers to extrapolate "rules" to extreme cases creates a lot of noise. Rules in law, business, and society are not the same as rules in engineering - they allow for subjectivity.
- raztogt21 6y ago"Rules in law, business, and society are not the same as rules in engineering - they allow for subjectivity." Thanks for sharing this thought.
- RegnisGnaw 6y agoPeacocks: https://www.nj.com/news/2020/12/no-your-emotional-support-peacock-cant-fly-with-you-feds-set-new-rules-for-service-animals.html https://www.nj.com/news/2020/12/no-your-emotional-support-pe... Pig https://www.cnn.com/2014/11/30/travel/emotional-support-pig-booted-flight/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2014/11/30/travel/emotional-support-pig-... Kangaroo https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mcdonalds-kangaroo-beaver-dam-wisconsin_n_6623206 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mcdonalds-kangaroo-beaver-dam...
- happytoexplain 6y agoI don't understand the point you're making. A. Your examples are of animals disallowed - not allowed. B. Those animals are obviously much more feasible, physically. C. Regardless of how feasible they are, I simply gave a reasonable answer to the question - I didn't imply that all human systems have that same answer. You should explain your thoughts, instead of only posting links with no context.
- s1artibartfast 6y agoNone, now that the rules have been clarified to disallow your cow or elephant.
- DanBC 6y agoAdjustments for disabled people need to be "reasonable". It's reasonable for a blind person to take their guide dog on a plane. It's reasonable for someone with mental illness to take their well trained support animal on the plane. It's unreasonable for someone who's struggling a bit to take their pet cow on a plane.
- TulliusCicero 6y agoWho decides what's reasonable, though? The whole thing is a big grey area. The rules should be explicit.
- llbeansandrice 6y ago> Who decides what's reasonable, though? The court system. I say something is reasonable, you do not and don't allow me on a flight so I take you to court over it and the court decides.
- TulliusCicero 6y agoThat's not good. The courts should only have to get involved in exceptional scenarios. The law itself should be more clear.
- llbeansandrice 6y agoI suppose that's your opinion but that's just not how the law works and in many cases the subjectivity is a feature not a bug. It might be a common sense thing to say that no one would ever want or have need to use a horse as a service animal, but there are miniature horses that are service animals.
- TulliusCicero 6y agoIt's not uncommon for judges to complain about laws being excessively vague, so no, it's not just my opinion. Also IIRC miniature horses being service animals is explicitly part of the law, so I'm not sure why you're using that as an example.
- devteambravo 6y agoSo let's just make assumptions then. Disabled people should have a case prepared, and always be ready to argue it in front of people. Upon challenge, by people "inconvenienced" by your accommodations, you should be able to spend 2 minutes showcasing your disability, how it came to be, and plead for said accommodations. Maybe you could edit that "not to be a jerk" bit to "I'm a jerk, hence:".
- claytongulick 6y agoWhen "inconvenienced" means a trip to the ER or landing a plane because you have severe allergies (like me) then the definition of who is being a jerk in the "emotional support animal" situation is a big more vague, no?
- dash2 6y agoTo be clear about this, your argument is that a disabled person should be able to say "I need an elephant on this plane" without having to explain why? Also, disagreeing with this point of view makes someone a jerk? :-)
- MereInterest 6y agoPlease read up on the term "Invisible Disabilities". Not every disability is obvious, not every disability is immediately provable to satisfy an adhoc request, and not every disability has immediate effects. Your suggestion would lead to people being further marginalized, if every person feels that they can barge in for 2 minutes each. Add up more and more people each stealing away 2 minutes, and that is quite a lot of time. How would that even work, too? If a random person decides that somebody's disability doesn't exist, do they then just barge in even more than usual. "I decided that your coeliac disease didn't exist, so I used wheat as a thickener. Your fault for not explaining it better."
- TulliusCicero 6y agoThis is a bit of a whoosh moment, as the person you're replying to is actually on the same side as you.
- 6y ago
- maxk42 6y agoWell the laws here are really stupid. ESAs are not covered under federal law. But service animals are. However - there is no accreditation program for service animals, so you cannot ask for proof that an animal is a service animal. You are also not allowed to ask a person what their disability is or demand they demonstrate some sort of proof of either disability or specialized training in their animal. So essentially, anyone can still claim any animal is a service animal and the airlines have to accommodate them. The ESA designation is NOT a service animal (although a service animal can also be an ESA). So this is something the airlines could easily disallow. I'm afraid we haven't seen the last of people abusing the system for their own convenience, however.
- crazcarl 6y agoThis is incorrect per the article. It clearly states "Wednesday's rule change by the US Department of Transportation now says only dogs qualify as service animals." So no, the airlines don't have to accept someone's service animal that isn't a dog.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- maxk42 6y agoI didn't say they did.
- hpoe 6y agoSo something I only recently found out myself is that there is actual no real requirements in order to register an animal as an "emotional support animal", I found that out after my sister registered her dog as an emotional support animal to get around her apartments "no pets allowed" rule. Another interesting thing is that I have a friend who builds apartments in a college town for students. The apartments for years had a strict no pet policy, however people started claiming they were emotional support animals and that the apartment had to let them keep them. So now the apartments just charge you a several hundred dollar fee each semester. If you can't beat em, join em.
- brightball 6y agoYep. The thing that bothered me more than anything about this is that you aren't allowed to ask for any type of verification, so people can just walk in with them anywhere. Never made sense to me. At least to park in a handicap space you need a hang tag or a special license plate. Why not something simple like a special collar tag or card in your wallet?
- at-fates-hands 6y agoA know in my state (Minnesota) a lot of places (apartments/condos) require the dog is a service dog, not just designated an "emotional support dog" in order to clamp down on people getting around housing requirements or taking their pets on planes.
- henrikschroder 6y agoYou are absolutely allowed to ask for verification that an animal is a real service animal, but the people who have been conflating emotional support animals with service animals want you to believe that you can't. Service animals have to be licensed, trained to perform a task or duty, and be easily identifiable. Misrepresenting an untrained and unlicensed animal as a service animal is fraud and illegal.
- CADBOT 6y agoActually, they don't need to be licensed. The only thing a business can ask is what tasks is the service dog trained to be formed. I do think it would be better off for everyone if there was a license though. I've known people with legitimate service dogs who have had that opinion even. They wish they had a document to prove their legitimacy, as they are constantly asked for a document that doesn't exist.
- meowfly 6y agoI wish there were better options for people to travel with their pets over long distances. There are plenty of horror stories of pets who have died in cargo. I would be willing to pay for a seat, or even a row, to take my dog on a cross country flight. Setting aside the absurd cases, like emotional support peacocks, I think a lot of the emotional support animal shenanigans are simply people not wanting to cargo their pet and not having the time to drive them across the country.
- fuzzmz 6y agoWe actually had to take advantage of this loophole in order to get back to Europe with our dog during the pandemic, since no airline flying from the US accepted animals in the cargo hold. But in general, yes, I'd be willing to pay for their own seat or row, just like when traveling with him by train we need to buy a special dog ticket.
- seany 6y agoI have never abused this, but I have flown with dogs a few times. It is such a huge pain in the ass. To make things worse, a lot of airline reps (you often have to call to book) really have no idea what the real rules are. Some legs have cage size restrictions, some airports have temp controlled areas, some don't (so you have to pay attention to the weather at lay overs)... the list goes on.
- gravitas 6y agoAbout a decade ago I used a service "We Move Pets", who at the time was specializing in transporting pets across North America (CA/US) for pro sports players, NBA and NHL etc. It wasn't cheap (and required I go get special vaccinations and paperwork, understandable) but it worked out great - they were passing by my city and had room on the van to take on another pet to the same destination I was going. Looks like they're out of business now after a quick Google, but maybe it'll give you some hints where to look for clues - there has to be more of these companies out there doing this kind of thing, as I was led to believe was popular/common (?) for pro sports players to want their pet with them at training camps & such (hearsay by me). As mentioned, it was not cheap but I was also paying for a kennel at the destination for a few days until I could get there myself.
- SomeoneFromCA 6y agoSupport bat. And this how a new pandemic starts.
- dagav 6y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batch_file#Batch_viruses_and_malware https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batch_file#Batch_viruses_and_m...
- 1996 6y agoI will sorely regret never using this opportunity to fly home for thanksgiving with my emotional support turkey - that would later go on to provide emotional support for the whole family https://mashable.com/2016/01/11/turkey-therapy-pet-airplane/ https://mashable.com/2016/01/11/turkey-therapy-pet-airplane/
- jessaustin 6y agoFrozen turkeys fare perfectly well in regular checked luggage. High altitude is cold, so you don't need a cooler. One year long ago I celebrated Thanksgiving in a nation that has no turkeys...
- 1996 6y agoWhat if I want it alive and fresh, as in the article?
- ed25519FUUU 6y agoIt was really a matter of time. It was obvious people were using this to simply fly with their pets rather than boarding them. It only takes a few people abusing something... (in this case, from my observation, I think it was quite more than 'a few').
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- kepler1 6y agoGood. This was rife with abuse from people gaming the system, and delegitimizing the use of support dogs by handicapped people who actually needed help. And the airlines would do nothing because they couldn't be seen as the bad guy (or it's just unfashionable to have rules that need to be respected these days).
- pjmorris 6y agoFTA, 'Trade group Airlines for America'... how many trade groups are there? What does it take to form one? What kind of influence do they carry?
- ghaff 6y agoA ton of them. Pretty much any chamber of commerce, the NFL, many of the big software foundations (though some are 501(c)(3) organizations). So they range from small and local to very big money.
- InitialLastName 6y ago> how many trade groups are there? Lots (multiple for most big industries) > What does it take to form one? "Hello, competitors in my industry. We think we can build a larger moat by lobbying for regulation that will make it harder for other competitors. Would any of you like to join us in having less competition?" > What kind of influence do they carry? C.F. Cartels
- jfengel 6y agoTens of thousands. The web site OpenSecrets has lists: https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying The even have their own trade association: https://www.taforum.org/creating-a-new-trade-association/ https://www.taforum.org/creating-a-new-trade-association/ Setting one up is easy; you just incorporate. Influence ranges from "zero" to "able to get meetings with Congresspeople on important committees". The meetings are the important part. You can't actually bribe your way to power, but you get to tell them what you want and how that benefits their constituents. That's easy for an airline, which employs a lot of people and impacts travel for everybody. They use a group to speak with one voice and (perhaps more importantly) know who to talk to (which isn't just elected representatives but also the decision making people at in the executive branch).
- pb77 6y agoI remember a radio host ranting that in his flight there was a lady with a pony as an emotional support animal, there was also a joke about a guy who registered a swarm of bees as emotional support animal. I wonder if that was the case that forced these emotional support animal in planes.
- sethammons 6y agoThere was a lady in my hometown who had a shetland pony and took the city bus with it. It was quite the double take when I saw a horse getting off a city bus!
- giarc 6y agoThat would be the least of my concern while riding a city bus.
- masklinn 6y ago> I remember a radio host ranting that in his flight there was a lady with a pony as an emotional support animal TBF miniature horses can genuinely be not just ESA but service animals. They're the only legal alternative to dogs for service animals.
- brudgers 6y agoI am not a lawyer, but I have a long standing professional interest in the ADA. It ain't over until it has been to court. The hurdle for the new agency rule is to demonstrate that this is not a violation of civil rights under the American's with Disabilities Act. For the past thirty years (almost) that's tended to be a high bar. How high? Well emotional support animals were flying because the airline industry didn't want to test it in court. The agency rule gives the airlines additional cover. But an agency rule doesn't usually trump federal statute and the ADA doesn't explicitly delegate interpretation to ordinary federal agencies. Just the DoJ and the DoJ can be challenged in the Federal courts. It might be over, but I wouldn't go all in betting on it. YMMV.
- Miner49er 6y agoHow is this so? The ADA's website very clearly says, "Dogs whose sole function is to provide comfort or emotional support do not qualify as service animals under the ADA." https://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm https://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- jsmith45 6y agoThe FAA rule here is based on the Air Carrier Access Act, which prohibits airlines from discriminating on the basis of disability, and pretty much leaves it up to the FAA to set applicable regulations. The FAA is acting under the assumption that this act gives them the ability to regulate differently than the ADA. However many of the changes made in this ruling are actually making the regulations more aligned with DOJ's ADA regulations. So if a court were to rule that the FAA needs to follow the ADA rules completely the main change would be eliminating the new optional (airlines choice) form requirement for service animals. Emotional support animals have zero protection under the ADA. They are only recognized under the Fair Housing Act (and is mostly an artifact of caselaw there) and under the FAA regulations being revised here. Unless/until courts rule that emotional support animals must be allowed as reasonable accomidations in public places under the ADA (rather than just under the Fair Housing Act) I expect this exclusion of ESAs will be allowed to stand.
- vectorphresh 6y agoA clear example of “This is why we can’t have nice things”, if ever there was one. This definitely sucks from a consumer point of view, but understandable when the focus becomes passenger safety. Service dog training can be verified and as such abusers can be filtered out of consideration.
- lotsofpulp 6y agoMerchants are not allowed to ask for proof of a dog being a service dog. https://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm https://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm >When it is not obvious what service an animal provides, only limited inquiries are allowed. Staff may ask two questions: (1) is the dog a service animal required because of a disability, and (2) what work or task has the dog been trained to perform. Staff cannot ask about the person’s disability, require medical documentation, require a special identification card or training documentation for the dog, or ask that the dog demonstrate its ability to perform the work or task.
- colejohnson66 6y ago> ... or ask that the dog demonstrate its ability to perform the work or task. How is that even supposed to work? “Hey, can you have a seizure so we can see your dog do its job?”
- volkl48 6y agoThe ADA does not cover airlines. Airlines are covered by the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA). Airlines are allowed to require specific documentation. https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/service-animals-including-emotional-support-animals https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer...
- lotsofpulp 6y agoMy mistake. But I think it might be similar to the ADA rules since the website specifies documentation only for emotional support animals or psychiatric service animals, so I assume >Airlines can request specific documentation and/or 48-hours advance notice for emotional support animals and psychiatric service animals. Also, I assume that Dept of Transportation website is now out of date with the newest rule changes requiring only service dogs.
- Ansil849 6y agoI'm finding a lot of the comments in this thread to be hurtful. Yes, many were abusing the system to register pets as service animals. No, that is not a reason to forbid the practice which was genuinely helpful to people like myself who have a phobia of flying coupled with anxiety and having a service animal genuinely helps get through a flight without the need for medication. The problem is the desire to not devote resources to verifying the legitimacy of individual claims and instead banning the practice wholesale. Honestly, why make a mockery of this? Chastise people who are obviously trolling or scamming the system.
- Miner49er 6y agoThey didn't completely forbid the practice. Dogs are still allowed. How would they verify claims? Ask for a prescription or a note from a doctor or psychiatrist? EDIT: I'm wrong, only service dogs are allowed, so they need to be trained to do a specific task to help a person with a disability. But also, I'm pretty sure verication was already technically required. From AA's website, these forms are required: - Medical / Mental Health Professional Form - Veterinary Health Form, or vaccination record with current rabies vaccination information - Confirmation of Animal Behavior Form
- paxys 6y ago> How would they verify claims? Ask for a prescription or a note from a doctor or psychiatrist? Yes?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- 1123581321 6y agoThe regulations require neither of these things.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- adkadskhj 6y ago
- bluGill 6y agoGood. I have nephews who are deathly allergic to dogs. They cannot go many places for fear of random dog encounters.
- Miner49er 6y agoService dogs are still allowed.
- content_sesh 6y agoTrue, but actual service dogs are well trained and will not randomly try to jump on or play with strangers.
- danbolt 6y agoService dogs tend to have pretty regular grooming regimens to minimize dander exposure. They're also well-trained not to make as much noise or interact with people.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- mwfunk 6y agoI'm all in favor of people who need them having emotional support animals, but for as long as this has been a thing I have been totally shocked at how many people I personally know (who I thought were better people than this) completely abusing it to bring their pets with them everywhere (planes or anywhere else where you don't normally take pets). And joking about abusing the system, and joking about how awesome it is that they can just pretend to have this need, et voila now they can take their pet everywhere. And of course, the reason this was bad was because inevitably, people abusing the system would screw it up for the people who actually need it or would benefit from it. Which is what happened.
- mindslight 6y agoI'm with you on the overall abuse of the system. But given that the alternative is often putting the animal in the cargo hold, it's understandable. It's too bad regulators haven't banned that practice while they're at it.
- Ericson2314 6y agoYeah if we make it so the best legal and ethical way to move you and your pet is take the train....hell yeah.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago> I'm with you on the overall abuse of the system. But given that the alternative is often putting the animal in the cargo hold That is hardly the only alternative. There are other forms of travel and it is quite likely that your pet will be better off at home with a sitter or boarded while you're gone.
- mindslight 6y agoI personally tend to do inconvenient things instead of justifying the least worst expedient option, but it's wrong to pretend that everyone does. From what I've read about stowing your pet, it's basically inviting animal abuse (being left to sit on a hot tarmac, etc).
- renewiltord 6y agoI kind of know why, but I think I'd like to have some sort of "super-normative" service for most things. No accommodations, no changes, no talk. You board your plane, stand on a conveyor and it takes you to your slot, you bring your own urine and poo bag if you want, the airline charges you for damage to the slot. No dogs, no cats, no nothing. No "can I get a this". For the DMV, you have a checklist and you walk up with everything on the checklist and the robot sends you off if you meet the checklist. For stores, you have full facial-recognition and single-entry gateways. Violation is a full ban from the store. Digital signed payment only, no cash. I mean, I get why it is, but for someone normative, not having to deal with people who (often for no fault of their own) have harder lives would be just so much better.
- bmgxyz 6y agoThese ideas have almost no empathy, and they frighten me. The world they describe is a dystopia.
- renewiltord 6y agoWell, if well-intentioned one could see this as yielding Pareto-optimal outcomes. We could improve service for normative users at the DMV, perhaps charging them for the privilege, and use that to serve other users better. The USPS does this already and I can't see that it's anything but good.
- throwaway201103 6y agoI'd actually support the DMV example. The same for the Post Office. I'd like a trap door at each service counter spot, and the people who show up and are packing/taping/addressing their parcels at the counter would be dropped into the basement, beaten, and thrown out the back door.
- renewiltord 6y agoFortunately, the USPS actually has this. I almost always just use the machine to buy stamps and to post my mail. Very fast.
- darth_avocado 6y agoThis is why we can't have nice things
- vector_spaces 6y agoReading the comments on this thread is genuinely depressing. It's amazing how callous people can be to simply say "good" and move on, nevermind that people actually benefited massively from this and that most of those people used it in good faith, and likely did not attempt to bring ostriches and ponies aboard. Not to mention the comments that say something to the effect of "well even if it did help a few people, it drove up prices for everyone". The implication being that disabled people only deserve accommodations (and therefore the right to participate in society) when they are convenient for everyone/companies. It's very telling that these are the responses of the community when it comes to disabled people rather than the responses we see on other threads about how some framework or Salas is dropping support for some beloved feature, i.e. responses such as "why can't we try X? Won't Y work?" I'm physically ill reading the comments here.
- HideousKojima 6y agoDo you have any hard numbers on how many people used it in good faith vs. milked the system?
- jfengel 6y agoI don't really care how many people "milked the system". It's no skin off my nose that they got away with something. The better question, I believe, is how often flights were disrupted by poorly trained animals. It certainly happened; how much? Then we can at least attempt to compare the benefits against the actual costs. The impression I get is that a lot of people don't care about the costs. They simply care that there was a rule in place that people circumvented, and they resent that a lot.
- lotsofpulp 6y agoAirline companies care about the costs. I can't speak for everyone, but I'm also not comfortable being that close to an animal from random people, especially ones that have proven they can be dangerous. If I was encountering a service animal every once in a while from a disabled person, it might be okay. But it feels like everyone other person has one, and I have no idea what the owner or trainer is like and that raises the risk profile quite a bit. There's a very high likelihood that the same people that ignore leash laws are on flights with an animal in close quarters to me.
- forscyth 6y agoWhen can we end the era of shrieking babies on planes?
- 0xffff2 6y agoI know it's totally unrealistic, but I really wish it was economically viable to run an airline that was 100% first class and had great customer service and a strict "no babies or assholes" rule. I can't afford to charter a plane for every flight, but I would definitely pay 50-100% over a regular first class ticket to never have to deal with the annoyance of flying on any major US carrier.
- jerjerjer 6y agoNo babies on flight would be awesome. No more screaming.
- spfzero 6y agoI wonder why airlines don't simply offer a higher cost flight without small children? Say, none under 5? I would happily pay more.
- UhDev 6y agoOr maybe a higher cost flight where you can bring your stupid pets.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Zelphyr 6y agoMy wife is a medical provider and she had a patient once ask her to write a release for her "emotional support chicken". Yeah; this was being abused. In case you're wondering; no, she didn't write the release. The people scamming the system (drug seekers, etc...) realized pretty quickly not to go to her because she won't give them what they want.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- 627467 6y agofor some reason, on my last long haul flight on a 250+ people airplane I counted at least 20 cats and dogs being boarded (in cabin, not hold). Only one of them was classed as a service dog. I was hoping for the worst as I never seem so many animals on a flight before but in the end the flight was almost uneventful. BUT... in the middle of the night, a cat did wandered about the isles, and the stewardess did have to go catch it and look for the owner who clearly didn't mind a wandering cat. If this trend continues (of loose animals in cabin) I bet we'll start having serious problems between pets and people inside an enclosed metal tube. Flying experience is already bad enough...
- tw04 6y agoIMO the correct path from the get-go was only allowing licensed therapy dogs. It's still not perfect, but unlike "emotional support animals" there are actually pretty strict testing guidelines. I went through it with one of my old dogs to volunteer at a children's shelter and the testing authorities that I worked with took it VERY seriously. Likely because I'm sure they'd face pretty serious backlash if a dog they passed were to attack someone at a nursing home/hospital. The support animal thing of "I just need this animal near me" without any regards to the temperament of the animal itself never made sense to me.
- logotype 6y agoWe recently relocated with our dog on a 13 hour flight. Everything went well and our dog is happy. But the process of flying with our pet is absolutely horrible. First of all, our only option was to let the dog fly in cargo. Extremely expensive (5000 USD). It’s also stressful for our dog to be in the crate in a noisy environment during “check-in” at the cargo company, sending the dog through an industrial x-ray machine, didn’t seem safe at all! The dogs are really handled like any cargo package, getting picked up by forklifts and placed to wait for extended periods of time. The only alternative option for us would be to charter a private yet, then our dog can fly in the cabin. But the price is prohibitive.
- logotype 6y agoThe flight was from Hong Kong, the cargo company is Jardine Airport Services, operating for IAG Cargo which handles pet cargo for British Airways. Like I mentioned, everything went fine, but this isn’t how it should be. We should be able to fly with our pets in the cabin. Our dog is our family member!
- Azedcepe 6y agoI wish there were more options for people travelling with pets. I don't support people abusing the system, as it hurts people who genuinely need adjustments, but when the alternative is putting them in cargo, I can understand why you'd do it.