Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
PITingres wrote:The part that really makes me angry is that there are people with valid emotional issues who fly with properly trained support animals. This sort of nonsense makes their life that much harder, since now they are lumped in with the jerks.
Flighty wrote:I 100% blame the airline. It is your choice to be involved in this idiotic situation to make a few bucks. What about the emotions of everybody else?
PITingres wrote:The part that really makes me angry is that there are people with valid emotional issues who fly with properly trained support animals. This sort of nonsense makes their life that much harder, since now they are lumped in with the jerks.
PITingres wrote:The part that really makes me angry is that there are people with valid emotional issues who fly with properly trained support animals. This sort of nonsense makes their life that much harder, since now they are lumped in with the jerks.
frmrCapCadet wrote:Emotional support animals do need to be trained and certified. They should also meet certain size requirements, and they should carry liability insurance. A small well trained/chosen dog or cat can be almost invisible to other passengers.
jumpjets wrote:A question if I may.
Passenger A has a bad animal fur allergy - travelling in close proximity in a confined space to say a cat would cause a bad reaction.
Passenger B needs an emotional support cat and can't travel without.
They both book seats on the same flight in the same class of travel. The allergy sufferer can't fly if the cat is on board and the emotional needs passenger can't if it isn't. How does the airline decide which passenger would have to be bumped from the flight?
jumpjets wrote:A question if I may.
Passenger A has a bad animal fur allergy - travelling in close proximity in a confined space to say a cat would cause a bad reaction.
Passenger B needs an emotional support cat and can't travel without.
They both book seats on the same flight in the same class of travel. The allergy sufferer can't fly if the cat is on board and the emotional needs passenger can't if it isn't. How does the airline decide which passenger would have to be bumped from the flight?
Bradin wrote:Emotional support squirrel? This is absolutely nuts...
No, that is b.s. Animals are unsanitary, can cause or carry allergens, and normal people shouldn't have to put up with somebody's pet on the plane while the normal person would have to check them in a carrier in baggage like a civilized person.
spinotter wrote:PITingres wrote:The part that really makes me angry is that there are people with valid emotional issues who fly with properly trained support animals. This sort of nonsense makes their life that much harder, since now they are lumped in with the jerks.
IMHO, the concept of emotional support animals is a complete aberration and should not be supported by any laws whatsoever.
PITingres wrote:spinotter wrote:PITingres wrote:The part that really makes me angry is that there are people with valid emotional issues who fly with properly trained support animals. This sort of nonsense makes their life that much harder, since now they are lumped in with the jerks.
IMHO, the concept of emotional support animals is a complete aberration and should not be supported by any laws whatsoever.
I suggest you better educate yourself. I happen to occasionally work with a gentleman (who is, by the way, one of the most intelligent people I've met, and I work in a field full of smart people) who has intermittent emotional issues. His (properly trained!) support dog can detect a panic attack coming on and alert him to take the appropriate meds, which take time to work, or otherwise deflect the problem. Did I mention that he is a multi-million-mile flyer?
Given a choice between working with someone like this guy even with his issues, which he treats appropriately with the help of an ESA, or working with someone who makes sweeping dismissive generalizations from a lack of knowledge, I know who I'd pick.
An emotional support animal is an animal that provides comfort just by being with a person. Because they have not been trained to perform a specific job or task, they do not qualify as service animals under the ADA.
PITingres wrote:The part that really makes me angry is that there are people with valid emotional issues who fly with properly trained support animals. This sort of nonsense makes their life that much harder, since now they are lumped in with the jerks.
crownvic wrote:I had a passenger on a Frontier LAS-MCO flight sit next to me carrying a 50-60 pd dog with no service ID of any kind . The dog sat on his lap facing me the whole flight as I was in the window seat and he had the middle seat. For the entire flight I endured drooling, dog breath and gas for 4.5 hrs and all he did was pet him and say what a good boy. When I notified Frontier of my displeasure they said there was nothing they could do. Since then, I have had at least 12 flights in Frontiers market, their fares were cheaper and I chose not to use them...I will never fly Frontier again.....
pjc747 wrote:PITingres wrote:The part that really makes me angry is that there are people with valid emotional issues who fly with properly trained support animals. This sort of nonsense makes their life that much harder, since now they are lumped in with the jerks.
No, that is b.s. Animals are unsanitary, can cause or carry allergens, and normal people shouldn't have to put up with somebody's pet on the plane while the normal person would have to check them in a carrier in baggage like a civilized person. Unless you need a professionally trained animal because you are blind, deaf, or suffer from a severe disability: paralysis, parkinson's, epilepsy, etc. And because there are so few of these, and their utility is obvious, everyone is perfectly happy to allow them to do their job wherever they may go. But just because you are unhappy does not mean you are entitled to subject everyone to your animal.
PSAatSAN4Ever wrote:Emotional Support Animals: what started out as therapy animals for veterans and others with PTSD from traumatic events has morphed into a three-ring circus because some entitled jerk found a way to game the system and bring any kind of animal, big or small, onto an airplane for free.
But the most ridiculous part of this - and there are a LOT of ridiculous things about "emotional support animals" (versus licensed and trained service animals) - is that the problem could be fixed in literally three minutes by the U.S. congress by saying that Emotional Support Animals can only be dogs or cats (I'll leave the details to others), must be licensed and trained, and must fit within a certain amount of space. Federal regulation, signed into law, no exceptions. No more squirrels, no more peacocks, and no elephants. If it doesn't fit, you and it don't fly, period, end of discussion.
In this era of utterly dysfunctional politics, it is going to take a major incident to change this system. Until that happens, I guess we should all prepare for the next bubonic plague started by fleas from your seatmates emotional support squirrel.
frmrCapCadet wrote:Emotional support animals do need to be trained and certified. They should also meet certain size requirements, and they should carry liability insurance. A small well trained/chosen dog or cat can be almost invisible to other passengers.
ER757 wrote:PSAatSAN4Ever wrote:Emotional Support Animals: what started out as therapy animals for veterans and others with PTSD from traumatic events has morphed into a three-ring circus because some entitled jerk found a way to game the system and bring any kind of animal, big or small, onto an airplane for free.
But the most ridiculous part of this - and there are a LOT of ridiculous things about "emotional support animals" (versus licensed and trained service animals) - is that the problem could be fixed in literally three minutes by the U.S. congress by saying that Emotional Support Animals can only be dogs or cats (I'll leave the details to others), must be licensed and trained, and must fit within a certain amount of space. Federal regulation, signed into law, no exceptions. No more squirrels, no more peacocks, and no elephants. If it doesn't fit, you and it don't fly, period, end of discussion.
btbx11 wrote:ER757 wrote:PSAatSAN4Ever wrote:Emotional Support Animals: what started out as therapy animals for veterans and others with PTSD from traumatic events has morphed into a three-ring circus because some entitled jerk found a way to game the system and bring any kind of animal, big or small, onto an airplane for free.
But the most ridiculous part of this - and there are a LOT of ridiculous things about "emotional support animals" (versus licensed and trained service animals) - is that the problem could be fixed in literally three minutes by the U.S. congress by saying that Emotional Support Animals can only be dogs or cats (I'll leave the details to others), must be licensed and trained, and must fit within a certain amount of space. Federal regulation, signed into law, no exceptions. No more squirrels, no more peacocks, and no elephants. If it doesn't fit, you and it don't fly, period, end of discussion.
Thanks, I agree 100%! Except, keep in mind that dogs trained to assist with PTSD ARE Service Animals as defined by the ADA. And actual Service Animals don't need to be licensed. They do need to be trained to perform a specific task.
speedbird52 wrote:pjc747 wrote:PITingres wrote:The part that really makes me angry is that there are people with valid emotional issues who fly with properly trained support animals. This sort of nonsense makes their life that much harder, since now they are lumped in with the jerks.
No, that is b.s. Animals are unsanitary, can cause or carry allergens, and normal people shouldn't have to put up with somebody's pet on the plane while the normal person would have to check them in a carrier in baggage like a civilized person. Unless you need a professionally trained animal because you are blind, deaf, or suffer from a severe disability: paralysis, parkinson's, epilepsy, etc. And because there are so few of these, and their utility is obvious, everyone is perfectly happy to allow them to do their job wherever they may go. But just because you are unhappy does not mean you are entitled to subject everyone to your animal.
Being unhappy is completely different to being clinically depressed. Fun fact: Humans are far less sanitary than animals.
pjc747 wrote:PITingres wrote:The part that really makes me angry is that there are people with valid emotional issues who fly with properly trained support animals. This sort of nonsense makes their life that much harder, since now they are lumped in with the jerks.
No, that is b.s. Animals are unsanitary, can cause or carry allergens, and normal people shouldn't have to put up with somebody's pet on the plane while the normal person would have to check them in a carrier in baggage like a civilized person. Unless you need a professionally trained animal because you are blind, deaf, or suffer from a severe disability: paralysis, parkinson's, epilepsy, etc. And because there are so few of these, and their utility is obvious, everyone is perfectly happy to allow them to do their job wherever they may go. But just because you are unhappy does not mean you are entitled to subject everyone to your animal.
Aptivaboy wrote:No, that is b.s. Animals are unsanitary, can cause or carry allergens, and normal people shouldn't have to put up with somebody's pet on the plane while the normal person would have to check them in a carrier in baggage like a civilized person.
I can guarantee you that my cats are cleaner and more hygienic than the average slob flying basic economy. They're also far better behaved.
Denver772 wrote:jumpjets wrote:A question if I may.
Passenger A has a bad animal fur allergy - travelling in close proximity in a confined space to say a cat would cause a bad reaction.
Passenger B needs an emotional support cat and can't travel without.
They both book seats on the same flight in the same class of travel. The allergy sufferer can't fly if the cat is on board and the emotional needs passenger can't if it isn't. How does the airline decide which passenger would have to be bumped from the flight?
Passenger A gets bumped. Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/27/trav ... -know.html
I've seen this in numerous other news stories as well, I am searching for them now.
pjc747 wrote:PITingres wrote:The part that really makes me angry is that there are people with valid emotional issues who fly with properly trained support animals. This sort of nonsense makes their life that much harder, since now they are lumped in with the jerks.
No, that is b.s. Animals are unsanitary, can cause or carry allergens, and normal people shouldn't have to put up with somebody's pet on the plane while the normal person would have to check them in a carrier in baggage like a civilized person. Unless you need a professionally trained animal because you are blind, deaf, or suffer from a severe disability: paralysis, parkinson's, epilepsy, etc. And because there are so few of these, and their utility is obvious, everyone is perfectly happy to allow them to do their job wherever they may go. But just because you are unhappy does not mean you are entitled to subject everyone to your animal.
pjc747 wrote:PITingres wrote:The part that really makes me angry is that there are people with valid emotional issues who fly with properly trained support animals. This sort of nonsense makes their life that much harder, since now they are lumped in with the jerks.
No, that is b.s. Animals are unsanitary, can cause or carry allergens, and normal people shouldn't have to put up with somebody's pet on the plane while the normal person would have to check them in a carrier in baggage like a civilized person. Unless you need a professionally trained animal because you are blind, deaf, or suffer from a severe disability: paralysis, parkinson's, epilepsy, etc. And because there are so few of these, and their utility is obvious, everyone is perfectly happy to allow them to do their job wherever they may go. But just because you are unhappy does not mean you are entitled to subject everyone to your animal.