I struggled with whether or not to post this article. In the US, we are being flooded with fake SDs because it is very easy for anyone to buy a service dog (SD) vest and certification for their pet. The ADA requires businesses to admit all SD teams as long as the owner is able to answer two basic questions. Only if the dog is being a nuisance: barking, attacking, pottying, and such, is the business allowed to deny access. Poorly behaved, fake SDs cause businesses to dislike SDs. Aggressive fake SDs try and occasionally succeed in attacking other SDs in the room. Assistance Dog International has created a set of minimum standards for SDs as well as a Public Access Test, but unless you are a SD program affiliated with them, these are only ideals. There are certain groups of SD owners for which passing these tests would be nearly impossible, such as special education children. There are many SD owners, trainers, and organizations trying to find a solution to the problem of fake SDs, but it seems as if there is no answer that does not invade some type of SD and owners rights. And there are those of us with legit SDs who do not want to play 20 questions with a business in order to prove that we are disabled and our SD is legit. Hence, my best answer is education. For businesses, what exactly must a SD do in order to be labeled a nuisance? How does the business document the problem so that it will stand up in court? For the SD owner, how do they know what is and is not acceptable behavior in public? It is not just fake SDs that make properly trained SDs unwanted; it is also poor quality programs and trainers. If you unknowingly end up with one of these trainers, the information you are taught is often only what they want you to know. And then there are the reporters. Some like Mike Averill, label a therapy/facility dog as a SD. He does an excellent job of describing animal-assisted therapy, but calls the dog a SD throughout the article. People who know very little or nothing about SDs, read his article and think they know what a SD does. Using his description, all SDs appear to be fake. It is because he mis-labeled the dog that I debated posting his article. My only solution is one that is age old: education. Reporters need to know the different type of working dogs and their jobs before writing or speaking about them. While Averills article is one of the most disturbing because of how excellently he details he what Abby does, he is definitely not the first to mix up SD terminology. Ideally the DOJ should set up a website clearly explaining to prospective and actual SD owners what is required to train a SD and how they should behave in public. My choice of the DOJ is because they handle SD complaints. There needs to be an official source that owners and businesses can turn to for information. Additionally, there could be lawyers who speak at conventions, informing businesses about their responsibilities and rights. I know a legal firm in the hospitality industry which offers this. Other steps may need to be taken, but accurate information can only help. If everyone involved with SDs, in any way, are speaking different languages, there is little hope. Please remember when you read this article that Abby is not a SD, Most likely she is a therapy dog, but she could also be a facility dog, or a type of dog I do not know.
Posted on: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 06:09:33 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015