Fake Service Dogs......

[reckless toboggan]

You could just have emotional support children, or an emotional support girlfriend/boyfriend, or an emotional support wife/husband.

Then you wouldn't have to pay for airline tickets, bus fees, hotel fees for your kids, wife/husband, girlfriend/boyfriend.

[summit]

Yup! That's exactly what people use. My grandmother-in-law ALSO does this, but at least her dog (an Italian Mastiff/Cane Corso) is incredibly well behaved and properly trained. Still not valid. I delivered her dog to her cross-country once and she told me to just use the vest and flash the badge wherever, but I absolutely refused to do that. Even at hotels, I told the check-in staff to just get me a regular room where pets were allowed and was happy to pay the fee, after first checking that pets were allowed at all. Unlike my MIL's lil' yapper, I love my grandma-in-law's dog, but it is still NOT a legit service dog. So embarrassing. That stupid vest never left the trunk on my journey across America.

Excuse me sir:


But my Italian Mastiff ESA needs to get into the middle seat with me.


Federal regulations never anticipated large breeds on planes:





Or that now euthanized 50+# pitbull ESA that mauled the guy on the Delta... that was legally allowed to be crammed in with the owner in the middle seat.

[MontuckyFried]

Excuse me sir:
...
But my Italian Mastiff ESA needs to get into the middle seat with me.

Haha. Too funny. Thankfully that's where even she draws the line. Hence why I had to deliver the dog to her. She flew and I brought her car and her dog to her. Fun little trip. Glad she doesn't fly with it. Far too many people do though.

[mtngirl79]

a blind dude I know had his legit seeing eye dog attacked at a blind people convention by another legitimate seeing eye dog.

There is also a mostly blind lady that has been having a horrible time getting on with a new dog since her first one retired. Her first replacement dog went after a probably fake service dog that was just sitting on its owners lap doing nothing wrong. No injuries, just drama.

Dude with the dog that got attacked said the reason the lady is having so many problems is because she can see a little bit and she second guesses the dog all time and it freaks the dog out.

Big dogs like great danes are used for mobility support.

https://www.servicedogproject.org/

Also had a lady that had this obese stinky dog that I was sure was a fake until she flipped out one day and the dog circled her and didnt really allow her to go anywhere and kept nudging her until she sat down and then the dog laid down with her and licked her and if she tried to get up the dog got up and got in her way.

This company trains small dogs for the hearing impaired.

https://www.pawswithacause.org/what-we-do/hearing-dogs

point being.. judge based on behavior, not appearance.

[irul&ublo]

how about an emotional support blow-up doll?

PM Rontele

[Kinnikinnick]

There is also a mostly blind lady that has been having a horrible time getting on with a new dog since her first one retired. Her first replacement dog went after a probably fake service dog that was just sitting on its owners lap doing nothing wrong.

See! Even the service dogs are pissed off at the fake service dogs!



Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[old goat]

Sometimes fake service dogs are worse than annoying. 28 stitches on the face.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.3acc80e993e2
apparently the airlines are governed by a law much more lenient to fake service animals than the ADA is.

[summit]

Sometimes fake service dogs are worse than annoying. 28 stitches on the face.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.3acc80e993e2
apparently the airlines are governed by a law much more lenient to fake service animals than the ADA is.

Yes. ADA does not care about ESAs. So a grocery store can ask "is the dog a service animal required because of a disability?" and "what work or task has the dog been trained to perform?"

If someone goes, "oh yes, of course. He is my emotional support spaniel," the store manager says, "nice, take it outside, not ADA and against health code."

But if the faker knows the right answers, the manager can't do shit unless they want to risk a lawsuit if they are wrong.

Airlines, on the other hand, are bound by ACAA. They also can only ask the question above, but if the person responds "Yes, this is Cuddles my emotional support tarantula. Here is a letter from some website... er... I mean... my social worker" then the airline has to let them on the plane. (Or the passenger can just claim a pet is a service dog). The airline has to risk losing a discrimination lawsuit to call them out on a fake ESA or fake service animal.

Landlords have to contend with the Fair Housing Act. So when the college student tells the Residential Director at the dorm, "I know you said there are no pets allowed, but this is Eviscerator, my 70lbs Emotional Support Pitbull, here is a letter from my therapist," Eviscerator gets to move into the no-pets residence hall with no extra rent or deposit. Now usually a real letter is required here vs a forgery or a internet provided "letter" as a landlord can verify the letter of need with the therapist... but its a lot easier to therapist shop for an ESA letter than it is to doc shop for narcs.

Someone pulled that on my aunt who was renting her condo. A lease was signed, then there was a pet. Oh... no pets. Well now its an emotional support animal. And then there were suddenly TWO emotional support animals for one person...

Poorly thought out regulations are too easily abused... it ends up hurting animals, the disabled, and society.

[spanky]

How about an emotional support peacock???

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/e...airplane-vgtrn

[KQ]

How about an emotional support peacock???

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/e...airplane-vgtrn

funny, just the other day I was wondering if anyone had tried an ostrich.


this spin-off article from the one you posted above is well written and a good read to understand how the disabled see fake service dogs as a threat:

We See You, Fake Service Dog Owners

I get it: You want to fly with your dog. You want to overrule your landlord's anti-pet policy, and it would be nice to bring your fur-baby into a restaurant with you. I have a dog too, and I certainly don't want her flying in the belly of a plane, subject to cold temperatures, shifting luggage, and the whims and inconsistencies of airline pet handling.

But you know who else wants to spend extra time with their dog? The visually impaired, who deserve the opportunity to live a more navigable life. Wheelchair-bound individuals who simply want more autonomy. Those who have PTSD or epilepsy and require a specially trained helper to get them through an episode or panic or seizure. Disabled people bring dogs with them because they depend on those highly-trained animals not only for independence, but survival.


That's why the Americans with Disabilities Act was legislated in 1990. People with legitimate needs required the use of dogs—again, highly-trained ones—to help them live "normal" lives, and this need was so great it had to be recognized by the federal government.

So when I was waiting for my flight at the Albuquerque Sunport, I was shocked to witness a large-breed hound-type with a bright red vest boasting service animal status squat down and unrelentingly piss all over the tile floor. The owner quickly flung his jacket to the ground, soaking up the smelly mess, while looking around to see if anyone noticed.

The thing is, a true service animal, one with years of training, would not have made that mistake. And even if they had, anyone whose daily life consists of managing that animal would know to bring their accidental-mess-kit, like the one I was required to carry for two years while raising and training a puppy with Guide Dogs for the Blind (GDB).

This was no isolated incident. In my years as a trainer I've seen countless vest-clad dogs barking, biting, peeing, jumping, and generally doing things that even a mildly-trained dog wouldn't do. During my time as a puppy raiser, the visually impaired people that joined my local GDB group repeatedly shared stories about non-service dogs that distracted their guides in places where pets were otherwise not allowed. Outside recently published a collection of data and anecdotes supporting the reality and severity of this problem.


But apparently for many, the need to bring a beloved pet into dog-free places supersedes the survival needs of the disabled. The primary ADA loophole that people exploit is about the legality of questioning the legitimacy of a service animal: "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."

While this rule maintains a level of respect and privacy for the disabled, it makes it really easy to pretend your pet is a specially trained service dog by calling it an emotional support animal, even though "dogs whose sole function is to provide comfort or emotional support do not qualify as service animals under the ADA." Whereas someone with PTSD would have a service dog that is specifically one-on-one trained to sense and respond to an oncoming anxiety attack, an ESA simply offers comfort by virtue of being there.

But to an onlooker—or more importantly, someone who could lose their job for refusing to accommodate a service animal team—there is heavy incentivization to tolerate the presence of all dogs, trained and otherwise, because questioning the dog's service legitimacy would be breaking the law. A law which, by the way, exists so that disabled people wouldn't have to be further called out or stigmatized.


Yet people are enthusiastic about pushing the boundaries of this law to meet their personal desires. And it's a more serious problem than just dismissing these people as insensitive. First off, as I mentioned, untrained animals are really good at testing the training of even the most excellent service dogs. When a dog is the literal eyeballs of a human being, distraction can be death. If a regular dog is allowed to distract a service animal in a confined area, this could mean it might miss the signs of its person's seizures, or send their person walking into a doorframe, hitting their head. That's why it's a major faux pas as a human to touch or get the attention of a working dog.

Which brings me to my second point: Most people with ostensible service animals that are neither trained nor certified will often allow and encourage people to interact with their dog. They wear the Service Dog vest, appear in places where most dogs can't go, and confuse the hell out of people when they later encounter a true service dog. Children, who struggle with animal boundaries to begin with, really get thrown for a loop when they can pet one vested dog but not the next.

Third, vendors don't enjoy having raucous canines in their establishments. I'm sure the Albuquerque airport isn't thrilled that there's a partially sopped up puddle of dog pee on their floor that someone now has to clean up, just because one person felt the rules don't to apply to them. This leads businesses to pressure legislators against ADA rules, which only ends up hurting the people it was created to protect.


This is not to say emotional support animals shouldn't be a thing. Many people benefit from their companionship and when registered for legitimate reasons, they can provide incredible therapy. It's when pet dogs are costumed up as service animals under the banner of an ESA that it becomes an ethical dilemma, hurting not only the disabled but people who genuinely need ESAs as well. Hell, I trained my own dog using GDB standards to assist with my diagnosed PTSD episodes, and even she doesn't meet the service dog certification requirements, so I don't parade her around like she does—even though she's better trained than most pups out there.

Conflating indistinguishable emotional support animals with service dogs means that a few people gain a minor benefit at the expense of the safety and security of disabled people. And that's a pretty ugly equation.

[mcski]

Buddy of mine just posted a pic of his aisle mate 's diabetic service dog on a cross country flt...it was a Great Dane

[cmcrawfo]

You didn't answer my question. You just talked about how people with money can get service dogs.

How may times / how often have you been more than just annoyed with a service dog you thought was a fake.

More than annoyed means actual damages.

Every time someone tries bring a fake service dog into a hospital, it is more than annoying. The dogs can be poorly trained, they can put other people at risk in this setting. And most of these phonies are claiming them as emotional support animals, meanwhile they are yipping or shitting... people ( patients or workers) shouldn't have to tolerate that ....

And try having the conversation about the legitimacy of their service dog, worse than trying to talk to parents about their fat kids.

...not to mention the fakes just increase the tension / potential for conflict when the one legit dog actually presents.

[summit]

Every time someone tries bring a fake service dog into a hospital, it is more than annoying. The dogs can be poorly trained, they can put other people at risk in this setting. And most of these phonies are claiming them as emotional support animals, meanwhile they are yipping or shitting... people ( patients or workers) shouldn't have to tolerate that ....

And try having the conversation about the legitimacy of their service dog, worse than trying to talk to parents about their fat kids.

...not to mention the fakes just increase the tension / potential for conflict when the one legit dog actually presents.

Oh and try to explain that they can't go into procedure areas, isolation rooms, ICU etc... waterworks, swear words, threats...

[El Chupacabra]

Emotional support peacock:

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/e...airplane-vgtrn

[cmcrawfo]

Some one brought an "emotional support" Parrot in our ED last month.... ambulance actually transported it.

Admin nightmare, SPCA, tears ... and a fucking bird at the triage desk.

[summit]

Some one brought an "emotional support" Parrot in our ED last month.... ambulance actually transported it.

Admin nightmare, SPCA, tears ... and a fucking bird at the triage desk.

Bwraaaaaak! Polly Wants Dilaudid! Raaaaaaaaaaaaawk!

[Harry]

People are becoming marshmallows.

Honestly, one has to wonder where we'd be if the people of 2018 had been alive in 1620.

No shit. Read up on David Thompson crossing the Canadian Rockies multiple times via multiple routes, drawing up a huge and incredibly accurate map, WITH HIS WIFE AND KIDS. Dude is a genuine badass, and so were his wife and kids. Nowadays roughing it means using a sleeping bag inside of your Sprinter van instead of using Egyptian cotton sheets.

[PB]

funny, just the other day I was wondering if anyone had tried an ostrich.


this spin-off article from the one you posted above is well written and a good read to understand how the disabled see fake service dogs as a threat:

We See You, Fake Service Dog Owners

I get it: You want to fly with your dog. You want to overrule your landlord's anti-pet policy, and it would be nice to bring your fur-baby into a restaurant with you. I have a dog too, and I certainly don't want her flying in the belly of a plane, subject to cold temperatures, shifting luggage, and the whims and inconsistencies of airline pet handling.

But you know who else wants to spend extra time with their dog? The visually impaired, who deserve the opportunity to live a more navigable life. Wheelchair-bound individuals who simply want more autonomy. Those who have PTSD or epilepsy and require a specially trained helper to get them through an episode or panic or seizure. Disabled people bring dogs with them because they depend on those highly-trained animals not only for independence, but survival.


That's why the Americans with Disabilities Act was legislated in 1990. People with legitimate needs required the use of dogs—again, highly-trained ones—to help them live "normal" lives, and this need was so great it had to be recognized by the federal government.

So when I was waiting for my flight at the Albuquerque Sunport, I was shocked to witness a large-breed hound-type with a bright red vest boasting service animal status squat down and unrelentingly piss all over the tile floor. The owner quickly flung his jacket to the ground, soaking up the smelly mess, while looking around to see if anyone noticed.

The thing is, a true service animal, one with years of training, would not have made that mistake. And even if they had, anyone whose daily life consists of managing that animal would know to bring their accidental-mess-kit, like the one I was required to carry for two years while raising and training a puppy with Guide Dogs for the Blind (GDB).

This was no isolated incident. In my years as a trainer I've seen countless vest-clad dogs barking, biting, peeing, jumping, and generally doing things that even a mildly-trained dog wouldn't do. During my time as a puppy raiser, the visually impaired people that joined my local GDB group repeatedly shared stories about non-service dogs that distracted their guides in places where pets were otherwise not allowed. Outside recently published a collection of data and anecdotes supporting the reality and severity of this problem.


But apparently for many, the need to bring a beloved pet into dog-free places supersedes the survival needs of the disabled. The primary ADA loophole that people exploit is about the legality of questioning the legitimacy of a service animal: "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."

While this rule maintains a level of respect and privacy for the disabled, it makes it really easy to pretend your pet is a specially trained service dog by calling it an emotional support animal, even though "dogs whose sole function is to provide comfort or emotional support do not qualify as service animals under the ADA." Whereas someone with PTSD would have a service dog that is specifically one-on-one trained to sense and respond to an oncoming anxiety attack, an ESA simply offers comfort by virtue of being there.

But to an onlooker—or more importantly, someone who could lose their job for refusing to accommodate a service animal team—there is heavy incentivization to tolerate the presence of all dogs, trained and otherwise, because questioning the dog's service legitimacy would be breaking the law. A law which, by the way, exists so that disabled people wouldn't have to be further called out or stigmatized.


Yet people are enthusiastic about pushing the boundaries of this law to meet their personal desires. And it's a more serious problem than just dismissing these people as insensitive. First off, as I mentioned, untrained animals are really good at testing the training of even the most excellent service dogs. When a dog is the literal eyeballs of a human being, distraction can be death. If a regular dog is allowed to distract a service animal in a confined area, this could mean it might miss the signs of its person's seizures, or send their person walking into a doorframe, hitting their head. That's why it's a major faux pas as a human to touch or get the attention of a working dog.

Which brings me to my second point: Most people with ostensible service animals that are neither trained nor certified will often allow and encourage people to interact with their dog. They wear the Service Dog vest, appear in places where most dogs can't go, and confuse the hell out of people when they later encounter a true service dog. Children, who struggle with animal boundaries to begin with, really get thrown for a loop when they can pet one vested dog but not the next.

Third, vendors don't enjoy having raucous canines in their establishments. I'm sure the Albuquerque airport isn't thrilled that there's a partially sopped up puddle of dog pee on their floor that someone now has to clean up, just because one person felt the rules don't to apply to them. This leads businesses to pressure legislators against ADA rules, which only ends up hurting the people it was created to protect.


This is not to say emotional support animals shouldn't be a thing. Many people benefit from their companionship and when registered for legitimate reasons, they can provide incredible therapy. It's when pet dogs are costumed up as service animals under the banner of an ESA that it becomes an ethical dilemma, hurting not only the disabled but people who genuinely need ESAs as well. Hell, I trained my own dog using GDB standards to assist with my diagnosed PTSD episodes, and even she doesn't meet the service dog certification requirements, so I don't parade her around like she does—even though she's better trained than most pups out there.

Conflating indistinguishable emotional support animals with service dogs means that a few people gain a minor benefit at the expense of the safety and security of disabled people. And that's a pretty ugly equation.

QFMFT

You can't function emotionally without your obese, untrained and ill-mannered shih-tsu ??? Wait 'til you get a load of my support ferret, which I'm now putting down your pants just to watch you dance.

[summit]

Emotional support peacock:

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/e...airplane-vgtrn

Perhaps they were worried emotional support falcons would have an issue withe peacock.

[mtngirl79]

Every time someone tries bring a fake service dog into a hospital, it is more than annoying. The dogs can be poorly trained, they can put other people at risk in this setting. And most of these phonies are claiming them as emotional support animals, meanwhile they are yipping or shitting... people ( patients or workers) shouldn't have to tolerate that ....

And try having the conversation about the legitimacy of their service dog, worse than trying to talk to parents about their fat kids.

...not to mention the fakes just increase the tension / potential for conflict when the one legit dog actually presents.

I get that a hospital is a way more sensitive environment than a bus or mall or grocery store and you can't really tell a patient to leave with their untrained dog halfway through a procedure.

Different beast.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

I get that a hospital is a way more sensitive environment than a bus or mall or grocery store and you can't really tell a patient to leave with their untrained dog halfway through a procedure.

Different beast.

It's not different at all. It's people taking advantage of a perceived loophole in the ADA. It's BS. There is a reason that pets aren't allowed in these environments and real service animals are. I love dogs and cats and most animals but they don't need to go everywhere people go.

[mcski]

I've brought dogs to visit patients in hospitals on many occasions. Not support or service animals, just dogs. The times I've been there the staff has always been fine with pet visits. I'd rather see an over abundance of animals in that setting than in a plane anyday. All the same, I still hate on all the faux service animals out there these days on planes, etc.

[spanky]

Buddy of mine just posted a pic of his aisle mate 's diabetic service dog on a cross country flt...it was a Great Dane

For the record, there is such a thing as a diabetic service dog. My cousin paid a fortune for such a dog for her type 1 son. Granted, it was a yellow lab and not Great Dane.

[summit]

I bet nobody would train a great dane as a non-mobility service dog because that's a handful most disabled folks don't need.

I bet someone with a pet great dane would lie and claim their dog was a diabetic service dog because they don't want to pay for a seat for the dog.

[mcski]

For the record, there is such a thing as a diabetic service dog. My cousin paid a fortune for such a dog for her type 1 son. Granted, it was a yellow lab and not Great Dane.

I believe it is possible although if I recall the science on dogs sensing diabetic fluctuations is not crystal clear. Having dealt w diabetics in my fam, my inclination is that they should be managing their blood sugars better themselves if they think they need a dog to stay safe