Is this really a service dog?

[larryz]

There ARE standards in place. All we need now is a certification and enforcement framework.

IAADP Minimum Training Standards for Public Access - The International Association of Assistance Dog Partners (IAADP)

IAADP Minimum Training Standards IAADP’s overall mission is to foster the assistance dog movement in the USA and other countries. As part of this mission, we seek to promote the responsible use of access rights in the disabled community. IAADP Minimum Training Standards for Public Access For...

www.iaadp.org

 

[correcaminos]

Most places have some sort of humane society and so there is no reason why they can not have certified personnel that are trained to put the dog through it's paces. I obviously did not mean to have just any volunteer certifying the animal. I think that most people understood that. There are not as many service dog schools as their are humane societies so it is a convenience thing. Just like any other licensing, there needs to be a government standard and protocol. They would do the same thing that the schools do to test out the service animal to make sure that it can behave as it is supposed to. There are some, very few cases that people need an ESA. Like a soldier with PTSD. They very much qualify as needing a service animal. The ridiculous ones where people are just using it as an excuse to take their "fur baby" with them everywhere could be weeded out this way because the animal would need to be trained properly. There is no reason why the schools can not be involved in the certification if they have an approved person that can test the dog out. Just like drivers ED taking the place of going to the DMV. It comes down to there having to be a standard to these animals and providing a license to be able to have a service animal.

You must have missed my comment. In no way is a humane society qualified to okay a working animal period. Sorry but that's taking animal lovers who give abandoned ones home a power they never should have. Even a vet may not be qualified to know how well a dog is working. Health yes but only trainers should do this.

There are service animals for PTSD. In no way should and ESA be given same considerations. Period. They are not the same and never should be.

I'm okay with schools being involved in the process but someone would have to give them accreditation. Same with trainers checking an animal.

And again I am for this but you are over simplifying and not requiring enough for the actual dog. Holding a license is not enough. That license should belong to the dog and handler not handler alone or you will get fake service animals.

 

[jaklgreen]

You must have missed my comment. In no way is a humane society qualified to okay a working animal period. Sorry but that's taking animal lovers who give abandoned ones home a power they never should have. Even a vet may not be qualified to know how well a dog is working. Health yes but only trainers should do this.

There are service animals for PTSD. In no way should and ESA be given same considerations. Period. They are not the same and never should be.

I'm okay with schools being involved in the process but someone would have to give them accreditation. Same with trainers checking an animal.

And again I am for this but you are over simplifying and not requiring enough for the actual dog. Holding a license is not enough. That license should belong to the dog and handler not handler alone or you will get fake service animals.

I really don't think that you are understanding what I am saying. Go back and re-read what I posted. I was saying that an accredited person(again, not some volunteer that works there)can be stationed at the Humane society to do the testing. The testing that shows that a dog is ready to be a service animal and conforms to all of the standard behaviors. I don't know what is wrong with your local humane society, but there is nothing wrong with ours. I was saying that a person needs medical proof that they require a service animal and that the animal is trained and tested out by qualified people that go by the standards that the government(with help from the training schools) can come up with. I was using the Humane society as a testing facility because most bigger communities have one and it would be more of a convenience. You are so hung up on that one little fact for some reason as if they are going to kill the dogs or something. It can be anywhere, have it at the local YMCA, it does not matter. It only matters that the animal is tested to the proper service animal standards and are approved as such.

 

[correcaminos]

I really don't think that you are understanding what I am saying. Go back and re-read what I posted. I was saying that an accredited person(again, not some volunteer that works there)can be stationed at the Humane society to do the testing. The testing that shows that a dog is ready to be a service animal and conforms to all of the standard behaviors. I don't know what is wrong with your local humane society, but there is nothing wrong with ours. I was saying that a person needs medical proof that they require a service animal and that the animal is trained and tested out by qualified people that go by the standards that the government(with help from the training schools) can come up with. I was using the Humane society as a testing facility because most bigger communities have one and it would be more of a convenience. You are so hung up on that one little fact for some reason as if they are going to kill the dogs or something. It can be anywhere, have it at the local YMCA, it does not matter. It only matters that the animal is tested to the proper service animal standards and are approved as such.

Honestly i read your post. I think you think one way and I another. I have loved ones who use service animals and have worked with our local school with my family. I also have friends at shelters. What you are suggesting doesn't mesh together at all based on what I've seen, in my opinion. Your basically now suggesting that someone either is stationed at a shelter or travels. I love our shelters a lot, but I do not see any good that would come out of it using that as is. A state licensing would be required and likely have either locations to go to or require appointments with someone traveling. Or we can skip that step and just hand out a license at a school and leave it to them to check animal status.

I seem to have struck a nerve with you and I'm sorry for that. I just don't see your suggestion as good after watching the process. That's all. We don't have to agree.

I would love to see licenses given, but realize it will be a complicated process to implement nation wide.

 

[jaklgreen]

Honestly i read your post. I think you think one way and I another. I have loved ones who use service animals and have worked with our local school with my family. I also have friends at shelters. What you are suggesting doesn't mesh together at all based on what I've seen, in my opinion. Your basically now suggesting that someone either is stationed at a shelter or travels.

I seem to have struck a nerve with you and I'm sorry for that. I just don't see your suggestion as good after watching the process. That's all. We don't have to agree.

I would love to see licenses given, but realize it will be a complicated process to implement nation wide.

Then how would you suggest that there be a standard in testing and licensing the service animals? Shouldn't there be a government agency that has oversight on this? I doubt that there will be enough people applying for a service dog license(after the initial time period) to have some kind of permanent facility. You keep talking about a service dog school and how they should do it. But those a few and far between and those would also need to have some kind of standard and licensing. The fact of the matter is that the government screwed up by not putting into place some kind of system in the beginning. What started out as something great in helping the blind, has morphed into this farce of emotional support crap. A good first step would be to make all of those that have/need a service animal to get a form form the doctor, like they do for the parking pass.

 

[thomas998]

I am more than aware of what is needed for HC tags and also how getting a service dog works. They are not remotely the same method or steps, and nor should they be. Getting a service animal is a multi step thing. The licensing should be with the dog, not the human. the dogs are in need of training and then the humans train additionally with them for 2-4 weeks. The dogs can also be deemed unfit for use during schools. They try to match as best as possible but sometimes dogs just are not a good fit for their handlers. I'd want those dogs to be checked, not as much as the handler only. They really are working as a team, but since it is the last step, the card should only be given then or you will get con artists. Without that, any con artist could get a doc to sign off and then use a pet that isn't legit. If you've ever gotten a HC tag, you'd know it's not that hard to get.

Remember also service dogs are not just guide dogs too. They all have different jobs.

I think those of us with first hand knowledge realize how incredibly difficult this would be to do. Not that it couldn't be done or that we're against it. We just know it's not at all the same as a HC tag. So don't think I'm against it, you are just way over simplifying a process. Like how often should dogs be certified for? Who would do this? How can you make sure all those could have it done without stress of travel?

This is just complicated and not what you are implying. And again please don't think a vest would be enough to show. Not all animals can wear the same type. A card with a picture of the proven trained dog would be better or that vest could be put on anything.

My point of forcing the person that "needs" the animal to get a license doesn't solve the issue of whether the dog is properly trained. But it would likely cut the number of people doing it to game the system to leave their pets at home, which is all that really needs to happen. If you really needed a service animal you would get one that was trained because you really do need it... but if you were just wanting to take fido on the plane with you then that isn't going to work as the doctor isn't to hand out the forms like candy. In fact you would probably want to require the emotional support animal owners to get psychiatrists to sign off on it which would further reduce the number of con-artists just buying vests... Getting a simple license to use the service animal isn't going to fix everything only eliminate most of the fraud which is what is causing the problems for most people. I don't think I ever heard of anyone being bitten by a guide dog, ever. It really is just the emotional support dogs that are causing problems.

 

[correcaminos]

My point of forcing the person that "needs" the animal to get a license doesn't solve the issue of whether the dog is properly trained. But it would likely cut the number of people doing it to game the system to leave their pets at home, which is all that really needs to happen. If you really needed a service animal you would get one that was trained because you really do need it... but if you were just wanting to take fido on the plane with you then that isn't going to work as the doctor isn't to hand out the forms like candy. In fact you would probably want to require the emotional support animal owners to get psychiatrists to sign off on it which would further reduce the number of con-artists just buying vests... Getting a simple license to use the service animal isn't going to fix everything only eliminate most of the fraud which is what is causing the problems for most people. I don't think I ever heard of anyone being bitten by a guide dog, ever. It really is just the emotional support dogs that are causing problems.

I think we see eye to eye on this. Honestly the ESAs are a huge issue along with those passing off pets as working dogs. It's all crappy for those who really need it and those who have to deal with the fakes out there. I do think handing out a license for a dog might help but hey I could be wrong. I would offer it only from a school personally as they, in my eyes, can see good fits or not.

It's a huge problem sadly but I blame it on entitled people.

Then how would you suggest that there be a standard in testing and licensing the service animals? Shouldn't there be a government agency that has oversight on this? I doubt that there will be enough people applying for a service dog license(after the initial time period) to have some kind of permanent facility. You keep talking about a service dog school and how they should do it. But those a few and far between and those would also need to have some kind of standard and licensing. The fact of the matter is that the government screwed up by not putting into place some kind of system in the beginning. What started out as something great in helping the blind, has morphed into this farce of emotional support crap. A good first step would be to make all of those that have/need a service animal to get a form form the doctor, like they do for the parking pass.

Maybe you missed it, but I've said a few times to let the schools handle it and accredit the schools. It's time consuming and harder to do though than more think. You'd need a government agency to accredit the schools and then the schools would offer it.

That would handle the need for a license. To be honest no doctor or license is needed prior. That to me will cause issues. To get into a school one must apply and be vetted to get in. It removes the doctor step and removes the need to have licenses handed out to those who will in turn only use pets to get it. Being blunt here, doctors do not always know what is needed for all handicaps and knowing the schools, it is wiser to leave it up to them.

Now we'd need a process for self or private training. I suppose in those cases the government agency would have to privately test to see if a dog is seemingly properly trained. It would be much harder as it should be time consuming to test. I suppose detailed records of all the training done should be required too.

Please also remember these are not all guide dogs. There are many service dogs out there for specific needs. These services help many beyond blind. Only one friend is blind who uses them. Two other friends have different disabilities as well. The school I help with is specifically for guide dogs though the school my blind friend attends is for many types.

My whole point is this is complex and there are many issues to deal with before just implementing a nationwide standard. That's all I've ever tried to say and why just having a doc give a license is actually not in the best interest. It leaves out a super important step which the animal has to prove as well.

 

[TheGuyThatMakesSwords]

SO tempted to have my dear wife buy an EBAY Vest, labeled "Emotional Support Husband" . Glad to wear this, if I can get into WDW free, and use those little lawn areas .

 

[jaklgreen]

To get into a school one must apply and be vetted to get in. It removes the doctor step and removes the need to have licenses handed out to those who will in turn only use pets to get it. Being blunt here, doctors do not always know what is needed for all handicaps and knowing the schools, it is wiser to leave it up to them.

I see what you are saying here, but I don't think that a dog training school can determine whether a person needs a service dog. They are not physicians and as it stands, anyone who can pay for it can go and buy one. I can tell you that I am diabetic and need a dog to watch my levels. How are you going to determine if I am lying or not? And I obviously know that they are not all guide dogs. I have said from the beginning that it should be a multi step program. The first is that the person gets the form from the doctor, and the second is that every dog used, is trained and tested and licensed as such. I don't know why you keep thinking that I have said otherwise. If we require a doctor to sign off on having a parking pass, you would think that having something as important as a service animal should have more of a standard of proof then a stupid parking pass.

That's all I've ever tried to say and why just having a doc give a license is actually not in the best interest. It leaves out a super important step which the animal has to prove as well.

 

[correcaminos]

I see what you are saying here, but I don't think that a dog training school can determine whether a person needs a service dog. They are not physicians and as it stands, anyone who can pay for it can go and buy one. I can tell you that I am diabetic and need a dog to watch my levels. How are you going to determine if I am lying or not? And I obviously know that they are not all guide dogs. I have said from the beginning that it should be a multi step program. The first is that the person gets the form from the doctor, and the second is that every dog used, is trained and tested and licensed as such. I don't know why you keep thinking that I have said otherwise. If we require a doctor to sign off on having a parking pass, you would think that having something as important as a service animal should have more of a standard of proof then a stupid parking pass.

Oh my goodness, do you really think a school that is giving you an animal worth about $30-50k with little to no money from the handler doesn't know how to find the right animal for a handler and vice versa? That they'd give one to a faker? Service Animal Schools already determine who gets in and gets the animal and who doesn't. It has been this way for a long time too. Considering the animals are often given for free or offered at a fraction of a cost I am not going to even suggest changing and forcing them to pick people that they don't know will fit the animals. They fit based on need, size, ages and even allergies. Asking them to change would be wrong.

Physicians have little to nothing to do with treatment for the blind as an example. In fact even depending on cause of vision loss, eye doctors have little say with it either. In fact one of my friend's stupid doctors suggested she get sterilized because she couldn't take care of kids. Tell that to hers now.

I really don't want to sound rude, but I think you are simply not aware of how it is done and why. As able bodied people we feel certain ways about medicine and don't realize the blind are capable and no doctor needs to specially help them. The schools take 4 weeks for new handlers and 2 for experienced in some cases. They know how to work with animals and handlers to make it work. They know how to vet properly to find those in needs. Physicians in many cases do not. They should not be involved from all I've seen.

Your method is putting training in the hands of doctors who are not anywhere remotely able to get the nuances of service animals. Trainers are because that is their job.

 

[jaklgreen]

Service Animal Schools already determine who gets in and gets the animal and who doesn't. It has been this way for a long time too. Considering the animals are often given for free or offered at a fraction of a cost I am not going to even suggest changing and forcing them to pick people that they don't know will fit the animals. They fit based on need, size, ages and even allergies. Asking them to change would be wrong.

Physicians have little to nothing to do with treatment for the blind as an example. In fact even depending on cause of vision loss, eye doctors have little say with it either. In fact one of my friend's stupid doctors suggested she get sterilized because she couldn't take care of kids. Tell that to hers now.

I really don't want to sound rude, but I think you are simply not aware of how it is done and why. As able bodied people we feel certain ways about medicine and don't realize the blind are capable and no doctor needs to specially help them. The schools take 4 weeks for new handlers and 2 for experienced in some cases. They know how to work with animals and handlers to make it work. They know how to vet properly to find those in needs. Physicians in many cases do not. They should not be involved from all I've seen.

Your method is putting training in the hands of doctors who are not anywhere remotely able to get the nuances of service animals. Trainers are because that is their job.

But a doctor can diagnose you as blind, that is all that they would need to do. And blind people can benefit from a service animal. So then only the people with the doctor's form can get a service animal. Just like you need a doctor's form for a parking pass. That would cut down on just anybody training their own service dog because they would still need that doctor's note to license them. Which we all know that people do. You say that I don't understand, but I think that you are too close to the situations since you are in the "know" about one service dog school. I don't want anyone that trains dogs for a living deciding on whether I need a service dog or not. They can do their job and match people to the right dog and train them in what needs to be done. But for them to be the deciding factor on if a family gets a service dog is wrong, IMO.

 

[jaklgreen]

Oh my goodness, do you really think a school that is giving you an animal worth about $30-50k with little to no money from the handler doesn't know how to find the right animal for a handler and vice versa?

Re-read my post. That is the opposite of what I said. I said that they should most definitely match the animal to the person and do all of the training required. But they should not be the ones to decide IF I get one or not. Unless they can show, without a doubt, that the person is wholly unqualified to have an animal. NVM. It is like talking to a brick wall with you. I am done.

 

[THE 1HAPPY HAUNT]

If Snoop Dogg enters the park can he be considered a service dog?

 

[RobWDW1971]

If Snoop Dogg enters the park can he be considered a service dog?

Well, if he's distributing then he can be providing emotional support for others.

 

[Cesar R M]

Well, if he's distributing then he can be providing emotional support for others.

but most of the time he's only "supporting" himself emotionally

 

[Smiley/OCD]

For those interested, there was a story on NJ1015.com, (the NJ talk radio station) about a man with a legit. service dog, who was at the Christiana, DE, mall on December 22...a kiosk vendor had 2 "emotional support" dogs, unleashed next to his booth. The 2 dogs proceeded to attack his dog, causing injuries to his animal. If I knew how to post the article, I would in a heartbeat. If you get the chance, check it out...yet another reason to reign this problem in and deal with it once and for all.

 

[ServiceDogHandler]

I realize I'm entering this conversation rather late in the game. As someone who works a DAD (Diabetic Alert Dog) with retrieval for other disabilities who travels extensively, I feel inclined to speak up a little.

I do not know this dog. The kit it is wearing appears to be either from a legit program or purchased online as a package. This is irrelevant because generally speaking a dog is not required to be vested at all. Most of us do it to keep from being judged. Imagine if you saw this dog doing what its doing "naked" with no gear. I bet it would be even worse.

When we travel and are staying at a non-pet friendly accommodation, she will wear her vest anytime we step out of the room. Wether to pee or get a little excercise. My dog does indeed know the cue "get it/that" she also knows 40 individual names. The get it/that is used for something she doesnt have a name for yet.

Imagine working your tail off for 10 hours straight and not being able to decompress? Thats cruel. My girl navigates crowds, lines, pushy people, all while keeping a nose out for me. My blood sugar drops more frequently at the parks because I'm way more active and may not eat as regularly. She is on it! We tend to go back to the hotel and switch into off mode and relax at midday. She has a release cue to know that even though shes still vested its ok to sniff, play and roll around if she wants. This is what helps her keep her sanity.

As far as toileting, she goes on command where I ask her too before we initiate play. And shes always on a lead under voice command even if it is 10ft.

 

[jaklgreen]

I realize I'm entering this conversation rather late in the game. As someone who works a DAD (Diabetic Alert Dog) with retrieval for other disabilities who travels extensively, I feel inclined to speak up a little.

I do not know this dog. The kit it is wearing appears to be either from a legit program or purchased online as a package. This is irrelevant because generally speaking a dog is not required to be vested at all. Most of us do it to keep from being judged. Imagine if you saw this dog doing what its doing "naked" with no gear. I bet it would be even worse.

When we travel and are staying at a non-pet friendly accommodation, she will wear her vest anytime we step out of the room. Wether to pee or get a little excercise. My dog does indeed know the cue "get it/that" she also knows 40 individual names. The get it/that is used for something she doesnt have a name for yet.

Imagine working your tail off for 10 hours straight and not being able to decompress? Thats cruel. My girl navigates crowds, lines, pushy people, all while keeping a nose out for me. My blood sugar drops more frequently at the parks because I'm way more active and may not eat as regularly. She is on it! We tend to go back to the hotel and switch into off mode and relax at midday. She has a release cue to know that even though shes still vested its ok to sniff, play and roll around if she wants. This is what helps her keep her sanity.

As far as toileting, she goes on command where I ask her too before we initiate play. And shes always on a lead under voice command even if it is 10ft.

Of course working dogs are absolutely allowed to be "off" the clock and decompress, as you say. The issue with this specific video is that, while working dogs can go wherever their owners do, if they are not in a working capacity, they need to follow the rules that every other dog follows. Disney does not allow dogs onto the sand to play, just because the dog is a service dog, does not mean that those rules do not apply to them. I know people feel like their dogs should be able to, but that is not the same thing. And even service dogs, no matter how well trained, still need to follow leash laws. You are not above the law.

 

[ServiceDogHandler]

When we go places, we are often given a run down of where we are and are not allowed. It is possible that she did not know that her dog shouldnt be there.

As for leash laws and the ADA.. there are stituations that allow a SD to be worked off leash if wearing a leash interfears with its ability to task. But it stil must be under verbal control. Not saying thats the case here... but the rule does exist. Again, I'm fully aware that we are being judged every moment we are out in public and all it takes is for her to have one derpy dog moment and we get branded fake. Its exhasuting, but it is what it is

 

[crawale]

Well because I am staying at Beach Club in 30 days and spent quite a bit of money for a vacation and I don't want dogs barking, running around the beach, lifting their leg, pooping and not having owners pick it up.

Service dogs are different. They are very well trained. They aren't hopping up on furniture, they aren't barking, they aren't lifting their leg whenever they feel like it.

I had my entire trip booked at Yacht Club because some co-workers of mine had their trips booked at that resort as well. When they got back earlier this year in February they told me that the CM's did not enforce where the dogs were allowed to go at the resort. They saw dogs on furniture in the lobby, and walking around on the main boardwalk and near the boardwalk door to the resort. The dogs are supposed to be in only certain designated areas. Needless to say I cancelled Yacht Club and ended up going with Beach Club because my kid loves that pool, or I would have stayed either at Boardwalk or somewhere else.

And I get irritated when people try to take advantage of the Service Dog system so they can bring their pets to the resort. So yes the video really bothered me. Just being honest.

It is not fair if you have a child with allergies. If people need these emotional support animals then they are too unstable to leave home and should stay there. Dogs were only supposed to be allowed at the Yacht Club - not the Beach Club. Not everyone loves animals.