Emotional Support Animals

You're blaming the airlines for requiring larger animals to fly in the hold? Where else does one keep a large dog? In a seat? Or in a hold section that is climate controlled? Bringing an animal on a plane is a problem that justifies $150.

 

 

Who cleans up after it? The flight attendant who has to clean up dog poo or urine from the aisle because a cross country flight was too long for the animal?

 

 

And if I don't care to have Fido or Fluffy stretching into my floor space am I a mean and selfish person to complain?

 

People with allergies to pet dander fall under the ADA as well, but it seems that those with service/support animals trump that disablity.

You may think they haven't been allowed on but most of the animals on board fit that category.

 

Hopefully the cruise lines will stop this stuff.

You misunderstood my comments. I have no desire to have Poopsie next to me or under my seat. I think the airlines brought on the abuse by their laziness and unwillingness to follow their own policies. When gate attendants don't follow the policies and flight attendants pet cutesy Poopsie instead of ignoring it, they validate the fraud.

The only authenic service animals I have seen onboard were leader dogs. The rest were pets being presented as service dogs especially as diabetic alert dogs since the passenger can't be required to show proof they are indeed diabetic so it is the perfect scam. Dog never "alerts" since the person never has a diabetic crisis. I find most people are unable to understand what is required to level an animal to a service animal. The airlines and cruise lines both fall for "it keeps me calm" especially the airlines. So, yes I hold the airlines especially accountable for accepting having your dog to pet on board meets the criteria of a service animal or emotional support animal. The Flight attendants who then move you and Poopise up to First Class because another passenger whose eyes are burning because of allergies has been mentioned with wrath on more than one survey and email.

By charging $150 for a pet to ride in the cabin instead of $25 is motivation for people to lie. Once the airline accepts the pet as a service animal or ESA and grants the pet free reign onboard, then the airline forces even a doubting Flight Attendant to treat the pet as more deserving than the other paying humans for fear of a lawsuit.

When I say they aren't allowed on board, I hope to reach those who are considering passing off a pet as an ESA.

Comparing the airlines to cruise ships is apples to oranges. The cruise lines have to allow service dogs onboard because of the ADA. Airlines have to allow service dogs onboard because of the ADA as well, but additionally they have to allow ESA's (emotional support animals) onboard because of the ACAA (Air Carrier Accessibility Act). ESA's are not granted the same protection as service animals, even legitimately prescribed ESA's, except in two cases: air travel under the ACAA, and housing under the FHA (Fair Housing Act). ESA's, despite what many who have them, or many who have their pets impersonate them, are not guaranteed access to any public space, under any Federal law. This is because a "service animal" performs a task or tasks that assist the disabled person, the same way a wheelchair or walker does. An ESA assists the person by its mere presence, and this is explicitly described as not being a service animal under the ADA.

 

Personally, I feel the airlines made a mistake in allowing general pets in carriers to be in the cabin and not the hold.

 

As noted, all Delta's new requirements will do is open a new cottage industry of "medical professionals" to issue certificates. What it does in a positive direction is place the liability for the dog's actions on the passenger, not the airline. Once an owner of one of these fake ESA or service dogs gets sued by their seatmate because Fluffy bit them, this is what will slow down the scamming.

Delta requires that the one form be completed by a licensed professional and include the professional's license number and the state where it is issued, confirmation that the person is under the professional's care and treatment for a condition that is in the DSM, the "bible" of mental health professionals.

Claims of a "new cottage industry of 'medical professionals'" are really exagerated. I really don't see much of an industry developing. If some out there believe that licensed medical and mental health professionals will jeopardize their livelihood for this, I think you are kidding yourselves. Heck even the few crooks in the professions want to hang on to their licenses so they can continue to perpetrate their lucrative scams.

Here is a link to a very simple synopsis of Service Animals from the US Justice Department.

https://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm

These new development is a major concern to me. I have trouble seeing at night (an old people problem, apparently) and I need my Nigerian Association of Voodoo Doctors, Inc. (NAVD.COM) certified night vision support bat with me to avoid running into things. What am I going to do now????????

I really have to apologise to all the good people like you who will be affected by this policy change.

I really should have not let my emotional support snakes loose on that plane.:o

I really have to apologise to all the good people like you who will be affected by this policy change.

 

I really should have not let my emotional support snakes loose on that plane.:o

And I apologize for letting my Service Mongoose loose who ate your snakes...

Delta requires that the one form be completed by a licensed professional and include the professional's license number and the state where it is issued, confirmation that the person is under the professional's care and treatment for a condition that is in the DSM, the "bible" of mental health professionals.

 

 

 

 

Claims of a "new cottage industry of 'medical professionals'" are really exagerated. I really don't see much of an industry developing. If some out there believe that licensed medical and mental health professionals will jeopardize their livelihood for this, I think you are kidding yourselves. Heck even the few crooks in the professions want to hang on to their licenses so they can continue to perpetrate their lucrative scams.

Absolutely , just call those who advertise on billboards for medical marijuana cards or worker comp injuries.. And if the airline is not going to call each medical professional to confirm, the information is worthless.

And I apologize for letting my Service Mongoose loose who ate your snakes...

So you're the one who named their mongoose Samuel L. Jackson.

:D

I kid you not, someone tried to board a flight at Newark today with a service peacock. Friend works there and posted photos. No idea whether they ultimately got to board.

Computer says, "No".

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42880690

Once an owner of one of these fake ESA or service dogs gets sued by their seatmate because Fluffy bit them, this is what will slow down the scamming.

And I apologize for letting my Service Mongoose loose who ate your snakes...

Take care - my emotional support cheetah can outrun your Service Mongoose.

These new development is a major concern to me. I have trouble seeing at night (an old people problem, apparently) and I need my Nigerian Association of Voodoo Doctors, Inc. (NAVD.COM) certified night vision support bat with me to avoid running into things. What am I going to do now????????

lol

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Just saw a news story about how a number of airlines are cracking down on the spreading practice of "certified" Emotional Support Animals being brought aboard planes.

 

 

 

They are now going to require advance certification from legitimate licensed professionals - rather than the "get your comfort animal certification in 24 hours so she can fly free for you" operators.

 

 

 

Does anyone think it is likely that cruise lines will follow suit? I have not seen anywhere near as many "support animals" on ships as on planes ( which are now very common), but even the few questionable critters now seen might be the "foot in the door" leading to the sort of widespread abuse the airlines are now trying to cap.

It’s got to stop before these lunatics trying to make a point or cheat system (take your pick) take over.

The flight attendants want these “emotional pets” off their planes. Not their job to protect them nor their responsibility. Flight attendants are for passengers safety, not pets.

This is stemming from the face attack last year on Delta.

Air traffic privatization will stop all emotional pets. Flight attendant and pilots unions will have their say out if government control.

I fly a lot and one flight there was a emotional support dog with his head on my co-workers feet. Who was he/she supporting?

Service animals, different story. They will always be allowed.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

If you haven't seen this, you should give it a read of the abuse of cruisers on the subject of service dogs. Clearly the ones who feed their pet at table, or don't clean up its mess in the dining room are not keeping animals who are trained to perform a service. https://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=2584297&highlight=pets

And it all comes down to litigation. Airlines and cruise lines are only allowed to ask the minimum of questions, and rarely refuse because of the threat of a law suit.

That’s why the airlines will have the pet owner of an emotional support dog sign a statement stating the dog is well behaved. Hence no liability to airlines, all on the owner.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

A passenger at Newark tried to board a United flight this week with this and was ultimately denied. Sorry pic so small, its a peacock...

The peacock story was just on Good Morning America. They had a video of it on the person's shoulder walking around the airport. Just what I want - the tail feathers in my face the entire flight. Thank goodness they said NO.

That’s why the airlines will have the pet owner of an emotional support dog sign a statement stating the dog is well behaved. Hence no liability to airlines, all on the owner.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Given the realities of our litigious society, I do not think an airline can escape liability for having let an animal they permitted to board injure a passenger.

That is part of the reason why they are finally trying to control the absurdity which has arisen from lenient acceptance of the emotional support BS .

At some point a person who cannot stand the idea of flying without changing the environment of flying needs to be told to take the train.

Damn, if they didn't allow the peacock on board, I guess I'll have to give up my notion of having my support buffalo on my next flight.

At some point a person who cannot stand the idea of flying without changing the environment of flying needs to be told to take the train.

If you need the animal to "see" for you because you are vision impaired, by all means, you should be allowed and encouraged to bring them along.

If your animal can detect an on-coming seizure or sudden drop in blood sugar, please, please have them with you.

If you need emotional support, there is therapy and drugs for that.

I saw the emotional support peacock story just now. Good lord.

What's next, "This is Eric, my emotional support halibut"? (With a nod to Monty Python.) We have to draw a line somewhere.

I knew someone who briefly worked with a wild animal rescue service. She drove halfway across the US with an injured bald eagle in her car. It stayed in motel rooms with her. If you want to bring awkward animals with you, it's going to be awkward. Them's the breaks.

From NatGeo a little piece on this topic, any animal could be an emotional support animal- but should they?

The woman with a peacock is professionally a performance artist. The peacock has its own Instagram page (which conveniently gets mentioned in many of the articles). I think that says a lot.

The woman with a peacock is professionally a performance artist. The peacock has its own Instagram page (which conveniently gets mentioned in many of the articles). I think that says a lot.

Not really.

Sloopsailor, what it says is this woman was perhaps trying to drive hits to her social media pages. Accounts with many followers make big $. Crazy as that sounds. Also she maybe looking for bookings and of course that means $.

Sent from my SM-G920R4 using Forums mobile app