Royal Caribbean banning emotional support animals

The ADA only covers true service dogs, it does not recognize emotional support animals (from ADA: Dogs whose sole function is to provide comfort or emotional support do not qualify as service animals under the ADA.), so if anyone is citing the ADA with regard to emotional support dogs, they are incorrect.

 

Emotional support dogs fall under two laws and they are the Air Carriers Access Act (ACAA), which allows animals to fly free on airlines and the Fair Housing Act (FHA), which allows emotional support animals in housing that doesn't allow animals and these are the only two laws surrounding emotional support animals and the only places they are allowed. Whereas, under ADA rules and regulations, a service dog can go anywhere, including public buildings, etc.

 

Also, there is no government national registry for a service dog and even if a state says they require an ID, the federal law (which clearly states there is no ID needed) supersedes any city or state laws.

 

The Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 requires the landlord/property manager to make a reasonable accommodation to their policies and procedures allowing the tenant to have the emotional support animal. The Air Carriers Access Act allows for mentally or emotionally disabled persons to be accompanied on flights by an emotional support animal.

This was all explained earlier in the thread but some people don’t comprehend the law.

This was all explained earlier in the thread but some people don’t comprehend the law.

If he wouldn't move his dog from my path, he'd be able to take the next trip to the moon to pick him up. I have NO problem being confrontational with D/B's.

WOW! What a tough guy you must be to kick a tiny dog to the moon. Get real and quit talking like a moron!

WOW! What a tough guy you must be to kick a tiny dog to the moon. Get real and quit talking like a moron!

In most jurisdictions someone kicking a dog is subject to arrest for animal cruelty.

Good for RCCL. The last couple of Royal Cruises I was on had multiple “emotional support” animals aboard. They were in fact the owners’ pets.

I have no issues with documented and certified service animals to help someone who absolutely requires its assistance for every day functions.

It had become out of hand on Royal, though.

Again, good for them!

An emotional support animal that goes into a public building is a fake. Emotional support dogs are not service dogs and are not covered under the ADA rules and regulations and are not allowed in public buildings. Emotional support dogs are basically pets that offer emotional support to their owners, whereas service dogs are trained to do a task for the owner who has a disability..

Yes, they are trained to do a task, but the real key is that they are also trained to be as unobtrusive as possible to those around them.

The ADA only covers true service dogs, it does not recognize emotional support animals (from ADA: Dogs whose sole function is to provide comfort or emotional support do not qualify as service animals under the ADA.), so if anyone is citing the ADA with regard to emotional support dogs, they are incorrect.

 

Emotional support dogs fall under two laws and they are the Air Carriers Access Act (ACAA), which allows animals to fly free on airlines and the Fair Housing Act (FHA), which allows emotional support animals in housing that doesn't allow animals and these are the only two laws surrounding emotional support animals and the only places they are allowed. Whereas, under ADA rules and regulations, a service dog can go anywhere, including public buildings, etc.

 

Also, there is no government national registry for a service dog and even if a state says they require an ID, the federal law (which clearly states there is no ID needed) supersedes any city or state laws.

 

The Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 requires the landlord/property manager to make a reasonable accommodation to their policies and procedures allowing the tenant to have the emotional support animal. The Air Carriers Access Act allows for mentally or emotionally disabled persons to be accompanied on flights by an emotional support animal.

Thank you for explaining the legalities.. on airlines ( and cruise ships), they could require a drs certification that the person is mentally or emotionally disabled...rather than take the travelers word they need a support animal. They are so afraid of lawsuits and bad press they just cave! But recent incidents seem to have swung public opinion the other way!

We were on a cruise this summer aboard the Allure, when some threesome entered the Coastal Kitchen and were seated for lunch. The one's, whatever you want to call it type of dog in its baby stroller was allowed in. We watched as the waiter was about to pet the little thing, but thankfully thought twice. Petting any animal and serving food would have certainly given us cause to say something to the wait staff. It would appear that enough like-minded passengers said something and it got to the right people of RCCL for them to come out with this new policy. We feel that we should all support RCCL by making mention at the time of booking that we appreciate their new animal policy. Further, that it is because of this new policy that we are re-booking with RCCL. As an aside, it is not the poor pet that should be threatened, kicked, or thrown over-board, but their 'inconsiderate of other people' owner. Not that we would ever advocate such a thing....

Sw Air will take cats....dogs...mini horses...but limits others

https://www.wfla.com/national/southwest-airlines-allowing-miniature-horses-on-its-planes-as-service-animals/1378326421

Had a little fury thing being fed off the plate next to me. I sneezd on her plate and they never came back on a 10 night cruise. Easy to fix some problems, yes I am allergic to fuzzy things.

Thank you for explaining the legalities.. on airlines ( and cruise ships), they could require a drs certification that the person is mentally or emotionally disabled...rather than take the travelers word they need a support animal. They are so afraid of lawsuits and bad press they just cave! But recent incidents seem to have swung public opinion the other way!

Acutally, I'm not sure that cruse ships fall within the parameters of the Air Carriers Act and that is why Royal Caribbean can deny emotional support dogs on their ships. Some of the airlines are now requiring a letter from a doctor stating the dog owners mental state that requires the need to have the dog fly with them....what is funny is now there are those doctors (???) who are now on line offering these letters.

Supplements their writing scripts for medical marijuana...

Supplements their writing scripts for medical marijuana...

You beat me to it. That's another joke!

Which would be illegal to ask for documentation even if the state issued the ID. Federal law trumps state law. If you question someone, they have no obligation to answer you. I have better things to do than get into arguments on a cruise, dealt with that crap for 30 years. Just go on a cruise and enjoy yourself.

Then have the Feds issue a license(similar to the "real" ID's that are coming out in the next few years) to those who need service animals. It would stop nearly all the fraud. It doesn't have to show any type of disability, just that the person needs a service animal.

Acutally, I'm not sure that cruse ships fall within the parameters of the Air Carriers Act and that is why Royal Caribbean can deny emotional support dogs on their ships. Some of the airlines are now requiring a letter from a doctor stating the dog owners mental state that requires the need to have the dog fly with them....what is funny is now there are those doctors (???) who are now on line offering these letters.

Yes, they now have "online" doctors willing(for a small fee, of course)to write that note. If a few thousand people respond to that Dr. he/she can really rake in some $$. A lot "cleaner" than prescribing all the opioids that seem to be everywhere!

Then have the Feds issue a license(similar to the "real" ID's that are coming out in the next few years) to those who need service animals. It would stop nearly all the fraud. It doesn't have to show any type of disability, just that the person needs a service animal.

And it is still illegal to ask for it

Sw Air will take cats....dogs...mini horses...but limits others

 

https://www.wfla.com/national/southwest-airlines-allowing-miniature-horses-on-its-planes-as-service-animals/1378326421

Well, that's just great! How am I now supposed to feed my Python:mad:

The ADA only covers true service dogs, it does not recognize emotional support animals (from ADA: Dogs whose sole function is to provide comfort or emotional support do not qualify as service animals under the ADA.), so if anyone is citing the ADA with regard to emotional support dogs, they are incorrect.

 

Emotional support dogs fall under two laws and they are the Air Carriers Access Act (ACAA), which allows animals to fly free on airlines and the Fair Housing Act (FHA), which allows emotional support animals in housing that doesn't allow animals and these are the only two laws surrounding emotional support animals and the only places they are allowed. Whereas, under ADA rules and regulations, a service dog can go anywhere, including public buildings, etc.

 

Also, there is no government national registry for a service dog and even if a state says they require an ID, the federal law (which clearly states there is no ID needed) supersedes any city or state laws.

 

The Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 requires the landlord/property manager to make a reasonable accommodation to their policies and procedures allowing the tenant to have the emotional support animal. The Air Carriers Access Act allows for mentally or emotionally disabled persons to be accompanied on flights by an emotional support animal.

Notice on the fine print: The Air Carriers Access Act "Allows" for the person to be accompanied. It does NOT mean "requires". This is a big difference. The carrier may refuse, the animal should it choose to. I'm fine with them caged, but they should not be allowed to roam the plane. After the Peacock/ loose Pig debacles some time ago, you'd think some common sense would prevail. There's a book by "Glenn Beck" that came out a few years ago. The "title" of that book pretty much sums up dealing with this entire "Emotional Support Animal" bunch of crap.

On our Baltic cruise on the Silhouette last year, a passenger insisted on bringing his emotional support dog (a shivering toy poodle) on our tour of the Hermitage Museum. When we arrived the museum refused to let the dog in. A verbal fistfight ensued between the guide, the museum officials and the dog owner that went on for 45 minutes while we all stood in the lobby. Finally, the dog owner and dog returned to the bus, but our tour was cut short by 45 minutes as a result. NO MORE EMOTIONAL SUPPORT DOGS!!!

That D/A dog owner should have been tossed into a Gulag for a few months!

This is one that occurred a few years ago here in NH. There's a diner about 40 miles from where we live. This guy, a supposed vet(which was never truly substantiated)brought his dog into the diner. The owner told him to leave. The guy said, but it's my Emotional Support Animal. The owner said ONLY true service animals may come in. Well, all the snowflakes went wild & protested outside & demanded a boycott. The owner lost nearly all his business to these scumbags. He then relented & allowed the damn dog inside. A shame I never went up there to teach those slack jawed yokels a little bit about the law. Once the "press" had their blood(without checking fed.law)they moved on to the next story. "Stupid is, as Stupid does" Enough on this. Let's move on.

Had a little fury thing being fed off the plate next to me. I sneezd on her plate and they never came back on a 10 night cruise. Easy to fix some problems, yes I am allergic to fuzzy things.

Good move! See, allergies aren't always bad.

This is one that occurred a few years ago here in NH. There's a diner about 40 miles from where we live. This guy, a supposed vet(which was never truly substantiated)brought his dog into the diner. The owner told him to leave. The guy said, but it's my Emotional Support Animal. The owner said ONLY true service animals may come in. Well, all the snowflakes went wild & protested outside & demanded a boycott. The owner lost nearly all his business to these scumbags. He then relented & allowed the damn dog inside. A shame I never went up there to teach those slack jawed yokels a little bit about the law. Once the "press" had their blood(without checking fed.law)they moved on to the next story. "Stupid is, as Stupid does" Enough on this. Let's move on.

Keith please, I thought you were calming down a bit but I guess not, please end it now, you’re making yourself sound really silly.

Notice on the fine print: The Air Carriers Access Act "Allows" for the person to be accompanied. It does NOT mean "requires". This is a big difference. The carrier may refuse, the animal should it choose to. I'm fine with them caged, but they should not be allowed to roam the plane. After the Peacock/ loose Pig debacles some time ago, you'd think some common sense would prevail. There's a book by "Glenn Beck" that came out a few years ago. The "title" of that book pretty much sums up dealing with this entire "Emotional Support Animal" bunch of crap.

"I'm fine with them caged..." Do you refer to the animal, the owner, either or both?

"...but they should not be allowed to roam the plane." Again, the same question:...animal, owner, either or both?

I believe there is merit in the answer, "Both" which would apply to both questions.

Thank you for a great suggestion! :evilsmile:

Keith please, I thought you were calming down a bit but I guess not, please end it now, you’re making yourself sound really silly.

Sorry, Don. After my friends & their service dog was attacked by a Pit-bull mix fake service dog, I really took it on myself about this issue. You're right. I'm getting too worked up. Lets move on. Thanks for bringing me down a bit. I'd have some emotional support Scotch, but then, I don't drink;)

"I'm fine with them caged..." Do you refer to the animal, the owner, either or both?

"...but they should not be allowed to roam the plane." Again, the same question:...animal, owner, either or both?

I believe there is merit in the answer, "Both" which would apply to both questions.

Thank you for a great suggestion! :evilsmile:

Thanks. I'm taking Don's advice(dkjretired). Time to move on from this. RCCL seems to be moving in the right direction on this subject.