Jump to content

DOT: No more emotional support animals on aircraft


fyree39
 Share

Recommended Posts

Those who truly needed this service and those who scammed the system only have themselves to blame.

I applaud the new changes also.

 

I only include those who truly need the service because THEY are the ones who saw the scammers and didn't fight hard enough to correct the wrongs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is about damn time.  I am sorry if some people have genuine problems - but it is not possible to make all problems go away.  While people genuinely needing emotional support may have to suck it up - there has to be some balance:   how many people should be hurt in small ways to accommodate others?

 

There has long been a standard - of “Utilitarian” ethics - that which does the greatest good to the greatest number is the course to follow.  While it might make sense to inconvenience ten people in a small way to assist one needy person, it might not make sense to similarly inconvenience five hundred people to similarly assist that one needy person.

 

Even when “emotional support animals” were permitted, lines were still drawn:  pigs and cats and birds were acceptable — but not cows, camels and elk.  There always has been a line drawn - now it is simply being drawn more intelligently.

 

 

p.s. Very often the best help to a person needing emotional support is simply telling him to suck it up and deal with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most cruise lines already have rules restricting animals to service animals only. However, unlike airlines all they can do is ask what service the animal provides. People lie.....

 

But, if they can't fly with Fifi, perhaps Fifi won't be on a cruise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, navybankerteacher said:

p.s. Very often the best help to a person needing emotional support is simply telling him to suck it up and deal with it.

I met a man in a US airport (can't remember where) who had PTSD from his military service and had a "service animal." I assume this kind of animal will continue to be allowed. These dogs are specially trained in certain places and then given to the disabled person. I watched them on the airplane. The dog laid down between the man's legs and the seat in front and never moved. Now THAT I support.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all have varying opinions but the worst one I saw was the little foo foo dog wheeled around in a stroller. If it was tethered in its stroller, how would it be able to signal that its owner's blood sugar was low? 

This dog had a new outfit every day. The owner said the dog was for her diabetes, but then we saw her eating a soft serve ice cream cone in the buffet, and she also had a cone  for her doggie to lick. The dog was sitting on the furniture next to her. She loved for other people to fuss over her dog. Sorry, this situation evokes no sympathy, and It seemed the lady just liked the attention. 

 

I fully support service dogs and am very pleased to see them accommodated. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Markanddonna said:

We all have varying opinions but the worst one I saw was the little foo foo dog wheeled around in a stroller. If it was tethered in its stroller, how would it be able to signal that its owner's blood sugar was low? 

This dog had a new outfit every day. The owner said the dog was for her diabetes, but then we saw her eating a soft serve ice cream cone in the buffet, and she also had a cone  for her doggie to lick. The dog was sitting on the furniture next to her. She loved for other people to fuss over her dog. Sorry, this situation evokes no sympathy, and It seemed the lady just liked the attention. 

 

I fully support service dogs and am very pleased to see them accommodated. 

The relationship between eating ice cream and diabetes is not really a factor in either case if one is thinking conventionally, medically.

 

While an excessive amount of ice cream can be a contributing factor, it is not a major factor in this dis-ease.

 

Dog on public use furniture would be an issue, though, for me.

 

bon voyage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bo1953 said:

The relationship between eating ice cream and diabetes is not really a factor in either case if one is thinking conventionally, medically.

 

While an excessive amount of ice cream can be a contributing factor, it is not a major factor in this dis-ease.

 

Dog on public use furniture would be an issue, though, for me.

 

bon voyage

If you are serious about being a responsible person who insists upon an alleged dog for your alleged diabetes, I would think you and your dog eating ice cream doesn't send a sincere message that you are truly diabetic or that you are a good and effective advocate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Markanddonna said:

If you are serious about being a responsible person who insists upon an alleged dog for your alleged diabetes, I would think you and your dog eating ice cream doesn't send a sincere message that you are truly diabetic or that you are a good and effective advocate.

My point is, essentially, ice cream really has nothing to do with rather one has diabetes or not, to a great degree.

 

Parochial medical advice thought that 'sugar' was the cause of T2 and subsequently determined that it is not. While I agree that sugar is not good for most individuals with T2 or not, it is not the overwhelming contributing factor in the disease one way or another. There are other foods which are worse for diabetics, which many overlook and think moderation is the key, even ice cream.

 

Now, if ice cream is good for the Service Dog, is a different issue of which I cannot comment as I have not researched it.

 

bon appetit and bon voyage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hold your horses (and pigs and turkeys and....)

 

The new regulations are more of a "what are the airlines allowed to do" as opposed to federal restrictions on carriers.  Previously, they could not ban by species -- now they are allowed to ban anything other than canines.  Further, they can now restrict to only trained service animals - meaning that a generic ESA dog (aka pet) may not cut it.

 

The big question is what each carrier will choose to do.  Carrier XX might be quite strict, while YY might be more liberal. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, FlyerTalker said:

Hold your horses (and pigs and turkeys and....)

 

The new regulations are more of a "what are the airlines allowed to do" as opposed to federal restrictions on carriers.  Previously, they could not ban by species -- now they are allowed to ban anything other than canines.  Further, they can now restrict to only trained service animals - meaning that a generic ESA dog (aka pet) may not cut it.

 

The big question is what each carrier will choose to do.  Carrier XX might be quite strict, while YY might be more liberal. 

 

Then I will choose to use carrier XX :classic_wink:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, FlyerTalker said:

Hold your horses (and pigs and turkeys and....)

 

The new regulations are more of a "what are the airlines allowed to do" as opposed to federal restrictions on carriers.  Previously, they could not ban by species -- now they are allowed to ban anything other than canines.  Further, they can now restrict to only trained service animals - meaning that a generic ESA dog (aka pet) may not cut it.

 

The big question is what each carrier will choose to do.  Carrier XX might be quite strict, while YY might be more liberal. 

 

Anyone can bring an untrained ESA dog if they pay, correct?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/4/2020 at 8:17 AM, Markanddonna said:

We all have varying opinions but the worst one I saw was the little foo foo dog wheeled around in a stroller. If it was tethered in its stroller, how would it be able to signal that its owner's blood sugar was low? 

This dog had a new outfit every day. The owner said the dog was for her diabetes, but then we saw her eating a soft serve ice cream cone in the buffet, and she also had a cone  for her doggie to lick. The dog was sitting on the furniture next to her. She loved for other people to fuss over her dog. Sorry, this situation evokes no sympathy, and It seemed the lady just liked the attention. 

 

I fully support service dogs and am very pleased to see them accommodated. 


Problem with these little foo foo dogs is all the owner has to do us say the dog is a service animal and there is not much the airlines or cruise line can do. The ADA forbids asking for documentation and there is no such thing as a registry of service animals or specific training requirements.   It should also be remembered that service animals and ESAs are two totally different things and should not be confused or lumped together.

 

Ironic  thing is I read the order from DOT and it is contrary to The ADA  which is a law. Interesting to see what happens.

Edited by dkjretired
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It boils down to this: if you want people to take you seriously, treat it like a working service dog, not your child.  We have all seen legitimate service dogs and their owners ask strangers to not interact with the dog because it is actively working.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dkjretired said:


Problem with these little foo foo dogs is all the owner has to do us say the dog is a service animal and there is not much the airlines or cruise line can do. The ADA forbids asking for documentation and there is no such thing as a registry of service animals or specific training requirements.   It should also be remembered that service animals and ESAs are two totally different things and should not be confused or lumped together.

 

Ironic  thing is I read the order from DOT and it is contrary to The ADA  which is a law. Interesting to see what happens.

This is what the DOT document states:

  • No longer considers an emotional support animal to be a service animal;
  • Requires airlines to treat psychiatric service animals the same as other service animals;
  • Allows airlines to require forms developed by DOT attesting to a service animal’s health, behavior and training, and if taking a long flight attesting that the service animal can either not relieve itself, or can relieve itself in a sanitary manner;

Why do you think this is in conflict with the ADA?  The ADA clearly says that emotional support dogs are not service animals.

 

Are you suggesting that requiring a passenger to fill out a form as indicated above is a violation?  The form completion does not require any proof, so I am not sure how it can be an ADA violation.  The ADA clearing says an emotional support dog is not a service animal.  They seem to be total agreement, but I am not an expert.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.....and on a lighter note....

 

Many years ago I was a flight attendant for a brief time.  I had a blind gentleman in Business Class with a German Shepherd which lay at his feet.  You would never have known it was there.  I served his meal, he asked what everything was and where and then was quite happy eating.  It was a nine-hour flight and I offered to get some water for the dog.  He declined.  I said it was no trouble.  He looked at me with his blind eyes and said "Maybe that's not a good idea".  Long pause.  Ah!!  Yes, quite!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, jagoffee said:

This is what the DOT document states:

  • No longer considers an emotional support animal to be a service animal;
  • Requires airlines to treat psychiatric service animals the same as other service animals;
  • Allows airlines to require forms developed by DOT attesting to a service animal’s health, behavior and training, and if taking a long flight attesting that the service animal can either not relieve itself, or can relieve itself in a sanitary manner;

Why do you think this is in conflict with the ADA?  The ADA clearly says that emotional support dogs are not service animals.

 

Are you suggesting that requiring a passenger to fill out a form as indicated above is a violation?  The form completion does not require any proof, so I am not sure how it can be an ADA violation.  The ADA clearing says an emotional support dog is not a service animal.  They seem to be total agreement, but I am not an expert.

 

 

There are also provisions that require documentation which is absolutely forbidden in the ADA. The third paragraph directly violates ADA, not allowed.

Edited by dkjretired
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dkjretired said:

There are also provisions that require documentation which is absolutely forbidden in the ADA. The third paragraph directly violates ADA, not allowed.

This is what the ADA says on the subject:

  • 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.

This is what the DOT document says:

  • Allows airlines to require forms developed by DOT attesting to a service animal’s health, behavior and training, and if taking a long flight attesting that the service animal can either not relieve itself, or can relieve itself in a sanitary manner;
     

iI do not think anyone is asking for a medical certification or training documentation nor is it implied.  
Are you thinking that requiring a passenger to attest is the same as asking for document to prove what they say.

 

What  is very clear is that both the DOT and ADA clearly disallow an “emotional support dog” from being considered a service dog.  

 

Anything is possible, but it does not seem likely that the DOT would create a policy/guideline in conflict with the ADA as you suggest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, jagoffee said:

This is what the ADA says on the subject:

  • 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.

This is what the DOT document says:

 

  • Allows airlines to require forms developed by DOT attesting to a service animal’s health, behavior and training, and if taking a long flight attesting that the service animal can either not relieve itself, or can relieve itself in a sanitary manner;
     

iI do not think anyone is asking for a medical certification or training documentation nor is it implied.  
Are you thinking that requiring a passenger to attest is the same as asking for document to prove what they say.

 

What  is very clear is that both the DOT and ADA clearly disallow an “emotional support dog” from being considered a service dog.  

 

Anything is possible, but it does not seem likely that the DOT would create a policy/guideline in conflict with the ADA as you suggest.

 

Like I said it will be interesting to see what happens but that section is clearly in violation of the ADA.  Also, who decides if the documentation is legit, there is not standard of training for service dogs and there is no registry of service dogs in the US.  I can go on the internet and get an official looking certification for a few dollars.  Since this is the federal government, I am not surprised that one department would try to pass a regulation off that is clearly in violation of a LAW.  

 

By the way, here's another small problem in these regulations, according to the US Justice Department and their interpretation of the ADA, the only animals allowed as service animals are dogs and in some cases Miniature horses.

 

Here's a link to the DOJ directive interpreting ADA.  Please note it specifically states that you cannot ask for medical documentation.  

 

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

Edited by dkjretired
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, dkjretired said:

 

Like I said it will be interesting to see what happens but that section is clearly in violation of the ADA.  Also, who decides if the documentation is legit, there is not standard of training for service dogs and there is no registry of service dogs in the US.  I can go on the internet and get an official looking certification for a few dollars.  Since this is the federal government, I am not surprised that one department would try to pass a regulation off that is clearly in violation of a LAW.  

 

By the way, here's another small problem in these regulations, according to the US Justice Department and their interpretation of the ADA, the only animals allowed as service animals are dogs and in some cases Miniature horses.

 

Here's a link to the DOJ directive interpreting ADA.  Please note it specifically states that you cannot ask for medical documentation.  

 

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


Just to clarify:

You believe this DOT statement is a violation of the ADA?

 

Allows airlines to require forms developed by DOT attesting to a service animal’s health, behavior and training, and if taking a long flight attesting that the service animal can either not relieve itself, or can relieve itself in a sanitary manner;

 

I assume you feel that asking a passenger to complete this form is asking for medical documentation?

I do not think that it is, but when an airline decides to implement it, we will know soon enough.

 

It looks to me like if a passengers wishes to lie in writing by signing the form and saying their emotional support dog is a trained service dog, they can. No proof or documentation required.

 

I keep trying to understand why you feel so confident that the DOT is violating the ADA.  I am going to assume it is because you think needing to sign the form swearing to the requirements listed above is a violation.
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Thank You for 25 Years - Click for Fun Stuff!
      • Forum Assistance
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...