New Florida law addresses "fake" service animals with possible jail time

[Mouse_Trap]

If 'proof' for parking in a handicapped/disabled spot can be required, which of course it is in the form of a special license plate or hang-tag, I see no reason why some manner of documentation should not be required of those persons accompanied by a service animal. A wallet sized card or similar is not an undue burden to place on the individual, and is far more reliable than whether the animals vest has an insignia.

Laws prohibiting people from being asked for reasonable documentation on their need for a service animal can be amended just as easily as this new law was passed. That does not mean people should routinely be asked to provide such, but rather should the legitimacy of the animal be questioned, proof is available.

Everyone I have ever met in public with a legit service dog asks you not to touch or pet it. Most have signs on the dogs vest letting you know it is working and not to pet it.

....miniature horses...

In the UK we have the world oldest and best respected organisation for Guide Dog training.
Recently they had a TV programme about them and their work which was utterly fascinating, it followed the lives of a new litter of pups right through their training.

If the dog is wearing his vest/harness then he is working and please don't interact or interfere with him. If the dog is not wearing the vest/harness then it is fine to interact with them. The dogs are trained that this is the only time they have playtime if they wish.

Each dog is issued an ID card to identify them and their owner as a bona fide service dog and user. I believe the if card is affixed to their vest/harness at all times, thus they can easily be verified and legitimate.

One segment of the programme showed an American woman who was a huge advocate of guide horses (miniature), I have always been very sceptical about the use of horses as assistance animals and this did nothing to allay my concerns. It was clear that the horses were not suited for such work and required constant supervision and care. They filmed her attempting to get her horse on a public service bus, it was quite some scene. I thought she seemed familiar so did a search, it turns out she was in one of our major newspapers a few years ago (article worth a read) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ict-Muslim-parents-consider-dogs-unclean.html

The programme was a great reminder of the work these wonderful dogs do and the massively positive benefits they bring to their owners. If anyone wants to see the show, search for 'Me and My Guide Dog', there was two episodes. I find it terrible that people abuse the system, but they do.

The issue of 'emotional support dog' is quite another issue, I don't doubt the effect they can have on people, but, the dog is then a pet and certainly not a service animal. I think the term has been completely hijacked by people who just want to take their pet everywhere with them. I am glad to see that at last, the issue is being raised in Florida. Hopefully action will be taken.

 

[arko]

In the UK we have the world oldest and best respected organisation for Guide Dog training.
Recently they had a TV programme about them and their work which was utterly fascinating, it followed the lives of a new litter of pups right through their training.

If the dog is wearing his vest/harness then he is working and please don't interact or interfere with him. If the dog is not wearing the vest/harness then it is fine to interact with them. The dogs are trained that this is the only time they have playtime if they wish.

Each dog is issued an ID card to identify them and their owner as a bona fide service dog and user. I believe the if card is affixed to their vest/harness at all times, thus they can easily be verified and legitimate.

One segment of the programme showed an American woman who was a huge advocate of guide horses (miniature), I have always been very sceptical about the use of horses as assistance animals and this did nothing to allay my concerns. It was clear that the horses were not suited for such work and required constant supervision and care. They filmed her attempting to get her horse on a public service bus, it was quite some scene. I thought she seemed familiar so did a search, it turns out she was in one of our major newspapers a few years ago (article worth a read) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ict-Muslim-parents-consider-dogs-unclean.html

The programme was a great reminder of the work these wonderful dogs do and the massively positive benefits they bring to their owners. If anyone wants to see the show, search for 'Me and My Guide Dog', there was two episodes. I find it terrible that people abuse the system, but they do.

The issue of 'emotional support dog' is quite another issue, I don't doubt the effect they can have on people, but, the dog is then a pet and certainly not a service animal. I think the term has been completely hijacked by people who just want to take their pet everywhere with them. I am glad to see that at last, the issue is being raised in Florida. Hopefully action will be taken.

here all you have to do is go to a website that issues a certificate and everything else you want for a fee.
This is one of the many
http://usdogregistry.org/
you basically get everything you mentioned without actually having to have the dog trained to do anything

 

[bethymouse]

Wow! Come to think of it, I did notice more "service dogs" on my most recent trip. I thought it was odd that there were so many!

 

[Goofyernmost]

Now, let's get anyone who should be walking - up off of a scooter and actually walking.

Thats not legal. You cant ask that of people under the ADA.

There are plenty of people on scooters that need them for varying reasons. Tramautic Brain Injuries are one of them.

This might have been answered already as I don't, at the moment have the time to finish the thread, but, Scooters are not exclusively for the disabled. Anyone can have one of those. The fact that they can get out of them and walk is no indication of anything other then they can get up and walk. The main problem is that many (and I was one at one time) can walk, they just cannot walk the distance required in a WDW visit. Even though I am overweight, the reason for my need had nothing at all to do with that. I had a leg injury that for a time didn't allow me to walk the distance. If I wanted to see Disney I had no option but to use one. Since they are available, there was/is no need to burden a family member with pushing a wheelchair around when scooters are available. I was also keenly aware of how people look at them and how judgmental that they are about it, mostly out of ignorance, but, I suspect some jealousy involved as well. Anyway, I decided to use one because quite frankly, I don't give a rats behind how "righteous" anyone is about the topic. I wanted to go and experience it, and didn't really care what others thought about it.

When I did walk, I didn't walk with a limp or any outside indication of the problem. However, if I didn't use a scooter, I would have been caught out in the middle of the parks unable to continue because of the pain. Something that others, in their moral indignation, cannot see or gauge.

After about 3 years of physical therapy and exercise, I no longer use a scooter, but, it was a godsend when I did use it because otherwise I would have had to stay home and watch TV. So please, stop judging others about things you do not understand. One day I was able to run around WDW if I wanted too, then, in as fast as you can blink your eye, I was not even able to walk, much less run. This can happen to anybody, so maybe one should consider that before getting all upset over a situation that one has no knowledge about.

I will say this because I know it will be thrown back at me, yes, there are some that do use it because they are lazy, but, if you knew just how much effort is required to actually maneuver those things through a crowded theme park, you would be able to recognize that it is hardly effortless. Oh, yea... I also agree that the service animal thing has gone completely out of control. Even if they have emotional issues and need a psychological "dog", the person that has allergies to animal dander is suffering so others can stretch the limits of the definition. Those people have no protection or even the right to the pursuit of happiness allegedly guaranteed by the constitution. The pendulum has swung way to far in one direction. Hopefully it will swing back soon and hit a happy medium.

 

[jaklgreen]

This is actually a HUGE issue here in South Florida. So many people insist on bringing dogs (usually in strollers) every place that they go and claim its a service dog (because they know no one can ask for proof). Most don't even bother buying the vest.

I am a dog lover and I find this practice to be obnoxious.

I saw this last Oct at Epcot. The "service" dog was asleep in their fancy stroller. What kind of service can that dog be providing? This should be a national law. And there needs to be a uniform training and certification. Not only for peoples safety but also for the animal. To me, bringing an untrained dog to someplace like WDW is more torture to the dog then helpful to the person.

 

[jaklgreen]

emotional support dogs are not considered service dogs and can be denied. The dog has to be trained to perform a specific task to help with a disability, which is why they are allowed to ask what the dog is trained to do. If the owner says provide emotional support, thats not enough. Its just that business owners are afraid to challenge any obvious offenders

This is true. Emotional support dogs are NOT covered under the ADA and can be denied access. I think many many people are confused by this and use this as an excuse to bring their pets places they should not be.

 

[G00fyDad]

This is true. Emotional support dogs are NOT covered under the ADA and can be denied access. I think many many people are confused by this and use this as an excuse to bring their pets places they should not be.

Anxiety issues can be considered an emotional need. Therefore support animals that are there for anxiety reasons ARE covered under the ADA. This is already been documented and posted on this forum.

I feel that there should be national registration for support animals and documentation system that should be provided when taking an animal into a facility or organization that initially bans pets. You have to have a license to drive, you have to have a license to own a firearm. You even have to have a license to do certain jobs. I don't think that it should be that big of a deal to ask someone that has a disability for documented proof that the animal that they are bringing in is registered. Anybody that truly has a disability with some grounding in reality will understand why the card or certification is being asked for. Anybody that is going to have a problem with it is probably going to be somebody who is trying to circumvent the rules. Our society has become a society of victims instead of responsible individuals willing to do what is necessary for the betterment of others. Just because an organization or facility asks for proof of a disability people freak out. That is just ridiculous. I know that this analogy is quite far apart, but if I am pulled over in my personal vehicle and the officer asks to see my license I have to show it to them. It should be the same way with a service animal.

 

[SoupBone]

I saw this last Oct at Epcot. The "service" dog was asleep in their fancy stroller. What kind of service can that dog be providing? This should be a national law. And there needs to be a uniform training and certification. Not only for peoples safety but also for the animal. To me, bringing an untrained dog to someplace like WDW is more torture to the dog then helpful to the person.

I know this is going to rub some people the wrong way, but in this current America (USA), you can't offend anyone without being attacked. So, there's not a chance in hell that Disney will ever be able to do anything about it unless the US government itself puts forth legislation that can be enforced. It will continue to get worse too, as people realize they can't be told anything. It's going to be abused like the red cards.

 

[jaklgreen]

Anxiety issues can be considered an emotional need. Therefore support animals that are there for anxiety reasons ARE covered under the ADA. This is already been documented and posted on this forum.

I feel that there should be national registration for support animals and documentation system that should be provided when taking an animal into a facility or organization that initially bans pets. You have to have a license to drive, you have to have a license to own a firearm. You even have to have a license to do certain jobs. I don't think that it should be that big of a deal to ask someone that has a disability for documented proof that the animal that they are bringing in is registered. Anybody that truly has a disability with some grounding in reality will understand why the card or certification is being asked for. Anybody that is going to have a problem with it is probably going to be somebody who is trying to circumvent the rules. Our society has become a society of victims instead of responsible individuals willing to do what is necessary for the betterment of others. Just because an organization or facility asks for proof of a disability people freak out. That is just ridiculous. I know that this analogy is quite far apart, but if I am pulled over in my personal vehicle and the officer asks to see my license I have to show it to them. It should be the same way with a service animal.

This is from the government ADA website.
How “Service Animal” Is Defined
Service animals are defined as dogs that are individually trained to do work or perform tasks for people with disabilities. Examples of such work or tasks include guiding people who are blind, alerting people who are deaf, pulling a wheelchair, alerting and protecting a person who is having a seizure, reminding a person with mental illness to take prescribed medications, calming a person with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) during an anxiety attack, or performing other duties. Service animals are working animals, not pets. The work or task a dog has been trained to provide must be directly related to the person’s disability. Dogs whose sole function is to provide comfort or emotional support do not qualify as service animals under the ADA.

This definition does not affect or limit the broader definition of “assistance animal” under the Fair Housing Act or the broader definition of “service animal” under the Air Carrier Access Act.

Some State and local laws also define service animal more broadly than the ADA does. Information about such laws can be obtained from the State attorney general’s office.

Trained dogs for mental conditions are covered. The comfort and emotional support dogs that are not trained and are basically just your pet ARE NOT covered under the ADA. There is a big difference between trained dogs and pets that people say they want with them because it makes them feel better. Basically right now anyone can take fido around with them and claim the are "emotional support dogs" and use that as an excuse to bring their pets with them. But using them that way is not covered by ADA and can(and should) be turned away from places.

 

[G00fyDad]

This is from the government ADA website.
How “Service Animal” Is Defined
Service animals are defined as dogs that are individually trained to do work or perform tasks for people with disabilities. Examples of such work or tasks include guiding people who are blind, alerting people who are deaf, pulling a wheelchair, alerting and protecting a person who is having a seizure, reminding a person with mental illness to take prescribed medications, calming a person with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) during an anxiety attack, or performing other duties. Service animals are working animals, not pets. The work or task a dog has been trained to provide must be directly related to the person’s disability. Dogs whose sole function is to provide comfort or emotional support do not qualify as service animals under the ADA.

This definition does not affect or limit the broader definition of “assistance animal” under the Fair Housing Act or the broader definition of “service animal” under the Air Carrier Access Act.

Some State and local laws also define service animal more broadly than the ADA does. Information about such laws can be obtained from the State attorney general’s office.

Trained dogs for mental conditions are covered. The comfort and emotional support dogs that are not trained and are basically just your pet ARE NOT covered under the ADA. There is a big difference between trained dogs and pets that people say they want with them because it makes them feel better. Basically right now anyone can take fido around with them and claim the are "emotional support dogs" and use that as an excuse to bring their pets with them. But using them that way is not covered by ADA and can(and should) be turned away from places.

I think we're on the same page here, but as the other poster did you still missed my point.

 

[raven]

I believe it's against the law, here in FL at least, to even ask if an animal is a Service Animal. We've been trained not to say anything at my job.

 

[PhotoDave219]

Can you bring a service courtesan? Asking for a friend.

 

[G00fyDad]

I believe it's against the law, here in FL at least, to even ask if an animal is a Service Animal. We've been trained not to say anything at my job.

It's against the law in every state. It's a federal law mandated by the ADA.

 

[flynnibus]

You guys are interpreting the rules wrong.

They are allowed to inquire - but within specific limits

 

[G00fyDad]

You guys are interpreting the rules wrong.

They are allowed to inquire - but within specific limits

We're interpreting it correctly. They're allowed to ask if the dog is a service animal, but not what the dog does for the person. And they cannot ask for proof. That is our problem. The law should be changed to where they should have to carry a card or a certification paper that shows proof.

 

[flynnibus]

We're interpreting it correctly. They're allowed to ask if the dog is a service animal, but not what the dog does for the person. And they cannot ask for proof. That is our problem. The law should be changed to where they should have to carry a card or a certification paper that shows proof.

That's not what your last post was stating and you claiming was illegal everywhere. So again... Your making wrong statements.

They are allowed to inquire what function the animal performs - they just can't require proof/doc

From a cheat sheet for those unwilling to read the actual law

Businesses may ask if an animal is a service animal or ask what tasks the animal has been trained to perform, but cannot require special ID cards for the animal or ask about the person’s disability.

http://www.ada.gov/svcabrs3.pdf

This is consistent with the rest of the law. You can inquire what the limitations are but not what is behind those limits or require proof.

 

[G00fyDad]

That's not what your last post was stating and you claiming was illegal everywhere. So again... Your making wrong statements.

They are allowed to inquire what function the animal performs - they just can't require proof/doc

From a cheat sheet for those unwilling to read the actual law



http://www.ada.gov/svcabrs3.pdf

This is consistent with the rest of the law. You can inquire what the limitations are but not what is behind those limits or require proof.

I mispoke myself in my last message. What I meant was it's illegal to ask for a card or proof in every state.

This apparently is a very touchy subject for everybody so I'm going to stop discussing it.

 

[jaklgreen]

I think we're on the same page here, but as the other poster did you still missed my point.

Is your point that anyone who has any kind of anxiety should be able to have an untrained pet and claim that it should be covered under the ADA? If that is your point then I just don't agree with you. Everyone feels better with their pet around them, it is the sole purpose of having a pet. But to say "I need my dog with me at all times because I feel more relaxed with them" is not a valid medical need. And this is what we are seeing more and more of.

 

[G00fyDad]

Is your point that anyone who has any kind of anxiety should be able to have an untrained pet and claim that it should be covered under the ADA? If that is your point then I just don't agree with you. Everyone feels better with their pet around them, it is the sole purpose of having a pet. But to say "I need my dog with me at all times because I feel more relaxed with them" is not a valid medical need. And this is what we are seeing more and more of.

Are you kidding with me? Really? Is this a joke? Seriously, are you just messing with me here? No. That is not my point. I've made a couple of points that apparently have been getting lost on the masses. Point number one, anxiety disorders are covered under the ADA for service animals. Point number 2, idiots who try to circumvent this law can just simply say they have an anxiety disorder and use their pets to circumvent the rule. That doesn't make it right, but it's going to happen until legislation changes. I am for legislation change. I feel that everybody should have to carry a card with them if they want to take the service animal in some place that doesn't allow pets.

 

[Mouse_Trap]

here all you have to do is go to a website that issues a certificate and everything else you want for a fee.
This is one of the many
http://usdogregistry.org/
you basically get everything you mentioned without actually having to have the dog trained to do anything

Fortunately that scam does not work here. People could try, but most businesses would know what an authentic ID card looks like and they can easily be verified.

We have a national organisation's which accredits each of the organisation's which are able to train and certify assistance dogs. They maintain a central register of all the certified dogs and their owners.

They issue ID cards stating the dog and its owner, the validity and authenticity of which can be checked on their website.

Any organisation is entitled to see the ID card before accommodating to the animal. Though as fraud and abuse isn't an issue, they are unlikely to request this.
The only issue we have (reportedly) is with some Muslim taxi drivers refusing or avoiding disabled people because of their dog.

It's a perfectly reasonable system and puts no burden onto the disabled person, as such fraud and abuse of the system is unheard of.

It sounds like the US needs something similar.