AA kicks passenger off airplane after he has allergic reaction to "emotional support" pet

FlyingElvii · Fri Sep 06, 2019 9:47 pm

slider wrote:
This emotional support bullshit has gone too far.

We can't go a single day without this being in the news now. Our entire society has became emotionally incontinent.

It will take an act of Congress, and that simply is not going to happen.
Too many lawyers who make thier entire livings off of ADAa lawsuits, even if they have to create an ADA situation themselves.
Look it up, there are firms that specialize in this.

ikramerica · Fri Sep 06, 2019 10:49 pm

Was at target when an arm tattooed millennial snowflake looking woman (yes, she just had an air about her) walked by with her midsize ESA dog. It had a harness and official looking jacket. I wondered to myself what was so wring that she couldn’t handle being at a nearly empty Target at 8:30AM.

That said, as someone who has raised and trained both “seeing eye” and southeastern guide dog pups, it was obvious this dog WAS trained professionally. The dog was all business, wasn’t looking around or sniffing, walked along side the woman with a slack lead, anticipating and adjusting to her moves. She didn’t have to talk to it or direct it.

Most ESAs I’ve seen were well behaved but I doubt they had training.

Chemist · Fri Sep 06, 2019 10:53 pm

I'm waiting for the day when somebody's emotional support dog bits another passenger's emotional support horse.

hpff · Fri Sep 06, 2019 10:55 pm

ricport wrote:
slider wrote:
This emotional support bullshit has gone too far.

We can't go a single day without this being in the news now. Our entire society has became emotionally incontinent.

I wish they would allow for upvotes, as I would upvote this a million times.

There was another story this week about a miniature horse on an AA flight. The ADA & ACAA are well-meaning laws that go too far. Most people agree that reasonable accommodations need to be made for the disabled, but when you start allowing miniature horses on commercial flights, things have definitely gone haywire and become unreasonable.

Oh please. There's a large subset of people who abuse this so they can take their pets in the cabin/around town. And then the small number of people who actually need an emotional support animal get shamed

Flaps · Fri Sep 06, 2019 11:13 pm

Don't blame the airline or its staff. They walk a very fine line between what is reasonable and what is legal. If you want to blame someone and you want change look no farther than the federal government and the ADA. Good luck with that.

HP69 · Fri Sep 06, 2019 11:31 pm

AA once again proves its incompetence. Yawn.

EA CO AS · Fri Sep 06, 2019 11:37 pm

HP69 wrote:
AA once again proves its incompetence. Yawn.

By complying with federal law? What part of that exhibits incompetence, exactly?

AEROFAN · Fri Sep 06, 2019 11:47 pm

vetjetatl wrote:
So, if there's a peanut allergy on the plane everyone needs to be mindful of the allergic person, but if there's a dog allergy the passenger needs to deal with it. How does this make any sense?

evank516 · Fri Sep 06, 2019 11:49 pm

MrBretz wrote:
When I get nervous on a flight, I use my emotional support drug called Xanax. 1/2 of one usually works. Bad turbulence has caused the popping on an entire pill.

That's the kind of emotional support I'd like :rotfl:

speedbird52 · Sat Sep 07, 2019 12:02 am

AtomicGarden · Sat Sep 07, 2019 1:52 am

727LOVER wrote:
EA CO AS wrote:
Right, wrong, or indifferent, you cannot legally ask a person with an emotional support or service animal to leave the airplane because of another passenger’s allergy. You try to make a reasonable accommodation such as reassigning the allergic person to another seat, or in a worst case scenario, another flight, but “the one who complains is the one who moves,” generally speaking. You can’t move or remove the person with the animal unless they pose a safety risk to all.

Boston757 wrote:
Unfortunately the emotional support animals stay. If one of the crew members has an allergic reaction that crew member goes. Even for the fake emotional support animals. If all the passengers have allergies to it they all have to get off to. It’s crazy!!!

If this is the law....why doesn't this guy's lawyer know this?

He wants to sing "I fought the law... and I won" (Dead Kennedy's take on the classic)

alfa164 · Sat Sep 07, 2019 3:03 am

ztarizona wrote:
The ADA laws are what they are. If you disagree with them and you are in the United States, you have two senators and a House member you can petition for changes. Also, "seeing eye dog" is a trademarked term specific to a certain type of animal for the blind. There are other disabilities a person might have that require their use of a service animal that have nothing to do with eyesight. It is not very common for service dogs to bite people. Your insinuation that the government and the airline should collude together to systematically violate the ADA requirements without proper debate or discussion by Congress, who enacted the law, is an interesting take!

To be correct, the ADA laws are not what governs airline practice; it is the Air Carrier Access Act which, although it does not impose the identical requirements that the ADA might impose, supposedly provides similar requirements for persons with disabilities.

That may turn out to be a good thing for the airlines, because modifying or amending the ACAA requirements may prove much easier than asking Congress to rehash the provisions of the more voluminous ADA.

Virtual737 · Sat Sep 07, 2019 3:32 am

If you have an emotional condition whereby you think you need an ESA to be able to take a flight then perhaps flying is not for you. If you have a condition whereby you need the ESA at your destination then it can travel in the hold, with all the lower class pets.

I have an emotional fear of Y class seats. I shall attempt to lobby the politicians until I'm provided a more suitable seat at someone else's inconvenience.

45272455674 · Sat Sep 07, 2019 4:33 am

Virtual737 wrote:
If you have an emotional condition whereby you think you need an ESA to be able to take a flight then perhaps flying is not for you. If you have a condition whereby you need the ESA at your destination then it can travel in the hold, with all the lower class pets.

I have an emotional fear of Y class seats. I shall attempt to lobby the politicians until I'm provided a more suitable seat at someone else's inconvenience.

Perhaps the condition also stops you taking a bus as well, because similarly confined space / or the sufferer is anxious about the unknown, or other people approaching them or certain situations cause them to have flashbacks. There are such cases, and some of those people have done their duty to protect your freedom. So let’s give them a bit of respect. They aren’t gaming the system, the dog they have is a legitimate service animal.
‘

Virtual737 · Sat Sep 07, 2019 5:28 am

cpd wrote:
Virtual737 wrote:
If you have an emotional condition whereby you think you need an ESA to be able to take a flight then perhaps flying is not for you. If you have a condition whereby you need the ESA at your destination then it can travel in the hold, with all the lower class pets.

I have an emotional fear of Y class seats. I shall attempt to lobby the politicians until I'm provided a more suitable seat at someone else's inconvenience.

Perhaps the condition also stops you taking a bus as well, because similarly confined space / or the sufferer is anxious about the unknown, or other people approaching them or certain situations cause them to have flashbacks. There are such cases, and some of those people have done their duty to protect your freedom. So let’s give them a bit of respect. They aren’t gaming the system, the dog they have is a legitimate service animal.
‘

BIG difference between a service animal and an emotional support pet.

grbauc · Sat Sep 07, 2019 6:11 am

DLSANMan wrote:
Honestly he is going to lose.
1. He was offered a seat in the First Class cabin. He declined
2. He was offered a seat in coach with compensation. He declined.
3. The pet in cabin’s owner (ESA) was also a paid F customer attempted to change seats in her cabin of payment to “diffuse” the situation
4. When asked to come off the plane (after 40 mins) he refused. At that time a F customer came forward and offered a seat to the girl with the dog. The plaintiff says that was insufficient.
5. He claims AA didn’t get his meds because there wasn’t time. If you have allergies that are life threatening, why would you check your bag with those meds?

To be honest, He was the least common denominator to be removed and rebooked.
This was not because he was African American. This was a safety measure after declining very fair offers. He deemed himself unfit to fly based on his actions.

All the bias people clamoring for the ESA to be shot hung and it looks like we have a person that believes the world travels around him.

grbauc · Sat Sep 07, 2019 6:13 am

vetjetatl wrote:
So, if there's a peanut allergy on the plane everyone needs to be mindful of the allergic person, but if there's a dog allergy the passenger needs to deal with it. How does this make any sense?

Might want to read the articles.

happytraveller · Sat Sep 07, 2019 6:18 am

slider wrote:
This emotional support bullshit has gone too far.

We can't go a single day without this being in the news now. Our entire society has became emotionally incontinent.

Exactly. Well said. This business has got far too far out of hand and is crazy.

grbauc · Sat Sep 07, 2019 6:26 am

WIederling wrote:
WA707atMSP wrote:
This passenger should not have been forced to change seats, or be downgraded to the main cabin, because he was allergic to an "emotional support" pet.

If the allergic already shows symptoms the area is contaminated. removing the pet ( of whatever status )
probably won't help much.

Move the allergic but be polite about it.

It appears the allergic passenger was just looking to cause a problem. Has with all these Bias infected judging treads we don’t have all the story most likely nothing good will come out of it.

wiggy · Sat Sep 07, 2019 6:50 am

what is it about us airlines kicking people off the plane for random reasons it stupid

rbavfan · Sat Sep 07, 2019 7:30 am

slider wrote:
This emotional support bullshit has gone too far.

We can't go a single day without this being in the news now. Our entire society has became emotionally incontinent.

rbavfan · Sat Sep 07, 2019 7:39 am

slider wrote:
This emotional support bullshit has gone too far.

We can't go a single day without this being in the news now. Our entire society has became emotionally incontinent.

Please note every comment about the ladies dog by AA has said Service Animal, not Emotional Support Animal. AA knows the difference. So I'm betting it was not an ESA. Also if he was having that severe a reaction in such a short time, removing the dog would be no help as the dog hair would still be around.

I have no problem with Service Dogs or Service Miniature Ponies free in the cabin. But ESA's dogs or cats need to stay in a carrier under the seat. They are allowed on planes but ESA's are supposed to be in the carriers, not on your lap.

All other animals are not allowed.

PS the lady with the emotional support fish that claimed the airline (WN) made her flush it in Denver. BS. Talked to a TSA agent about it. TSA would not let it past the checkpoint as she had it in more than 12 oz of water. The airline most likely never saw it till she made the claim on the news. She wasted her 15 min of fame.

Veigar · Sat Sep 07, 2019 7:55 am

What the hell is an EMOTIONAL support pet????

B777LRF · Sat Sep 07, 2019 8:00 am

Can't wait till the day someone's emotional support salmon has a run in with another someone's emotional support grizzly. Preferably within the confines of a CRJ or Jungle jet.

45272455674 · Sat Sep 07, 2019 8:09 am

Virtual737 wrote:
cpd wrote:
Virtual737 wrote:
If you have an emotional condition whereby you think you need an ESA to be able to take a flight then perhaps flying is not for you. If you have a condition whereby you need the ESA at your destination then it can travel in the hold, with all the lower class pets.

I have an emotional fear of Y class seats. I shall attempt to lobby the politicians until I'm provided a more suitable seat at someone else's inconvenience.

Perhaps the condition also stops you taking a bus as well, because similarly confined space / or the sufferer is anxious about the unknown, or other people approaching them or certain situations cause them to have flashbacks. There are such cases, and some of those people have done their duty to protect your freedom. So let’s give them a bit of respect. They aren’t gaming the system, the dog they have is a legitimate service animal.
‘

BIG difference between a service animal and an emotional support pet.

Is there however? That service animal serves an emotional support function. So is it a service animal or not?

Finn350 · Sat Sep 07, 2019 9:18 am

vetjetatl wrote:
So, if there's a peanut allergy on the plane everyone needs to be mindful of the allergic person, but if there's a dog allergy the passenger needs to deal with it. How does this make any sense?

If there is a peanut allergy in the plane, it is the allergic person that should be removed. In fact on a Finnair flight a couple of years ago a passenger demanded that no peanuts served or eaten on rows immediately in front of and back of her. In the end she had to be removed from the plane as the carrier couldn’t guarantee her safety on the plane.

SQ22 · Sat Sep 07, 2019 9:26 am

Veigar wrote:
What the hell is an EMOTIONAL support pet????

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_support_animal

Have a read here and pay in particular attention to the following notice:

The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject.

Finn350 · Sat Sep 07, 2019 9:29 am

I looked at British Airways policy. They allow service animals only in the cabin and don’t recognize emotional support animals. Is it only the US airlines that recognize emotional support animals is in the first place?

https://www.britishairways.com/en-us/in ... -with-pets
https://www.pettravel.com/airline_pet_r ... irways.cfm

rbavfan · Sat Sep 07, 2019 10:06 am

ricport wrote:
slider wrote:
This emotional support bullshit has gone too far.

We can't go a single day without this being in the news now. Our entire society has became emotionally incontinent.

I wish they would allow for upvotes, as I would upvote this a million times.

There was another story this week about a miniature horse on an AA flight. The ADA & ACAA are well-meaning laws that go too far. Most people agree that reasonable accommodations need to be made for the disabled, but when you start allowing miniature horses on commercial flights, things have definitely gone haywire and become unreasonable.

It's the ACAA that allows the ESA's. And it needs to be fixed.
The ADA clearly states:
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.

Also Miniature Horses live 25-30 years and do not loose their training during most of that time. Dogs loose their training in 5-6 years on average and have to be replaced more often. This makes Miniature Horses a much cheaper long term option. They can do everything the dogs can and can go longer without a bathroom break. Look up https://onemileatatime.com/coolest-service-animal-ever/

rbavfan · Sat Sep 07, 2019 10:09 am

DLSANMan wrote:
Honestly he is going to lose.
1. He was offered a seat in the First Class cabin. He declined
2. He was offered a seat in coach with compensation. He declined.
3. The pet in cabin’s owner (ESA) was also a paid F customer attempted to change seats in her cabin of payment to “diffuse” the situation
4. When asked to come off the plane (after 40 mins) he refused. At that time a F customer came forward and offered a seat to the girl with the dog. The plaintiff says that was insufficient.
5. He claims AA didn’t get his meds because there wasn’t time. If you have allergies that are life threatening, why would you check your bag with those meds?

To be honest, He was the least common denominator to be removed and rebooked.
This was not because he was African American. This was a safety measure after declining very fair offers. He deemed himself unfit to fly based on his actions.

Also if he is removed from the flight AA has to remove his luggage before the flight can leave per the patriot act based regs.

Virtual737 · Sat Sep 07, 2019 10:13 am

cpd wrote:
Virtual737 wrote:
cpd wrote:

Perhaps the condition also stops you taking a bus as well, because similarly confined space / or the sufferer is anxious about the unknown, or other people approaching them or certain situations cause them to have flashbacks. There are such cases, and some of those people have done their duty to protect your freedom. So let’s give them a bit of respect. They aren’t gaming the system, the dog they have is a legitimate service animal.
‘

BIG difference between a service animal and an emotional support pet.

Is there however? That service animal serves an emotional support function. So is it a service animal or not?

No. The Soi dogs down the road from me serve to annoy me, but they are not service animals either.

https://www.nsarco.com/blog/esa-vs-service-dogs.html

rbavfan · Sat Sep 07, 2019 10:16 am

vetjetatl wrote:
So, if there's a peanut allergy on the plane everyone needs to be mindful of the allergic person, but if there's a dog allergy the passenger needs to deal with it. How does this make any sense?

By the reverse of the peanut allergy pushback. After all the top allergy specialist in the world commented on WN airlines removal of peanuts by noting peanut dust does exisst in a way that it will trigger the allergy. The person has to touch the peanut or item it has touched has to contact the mouth in some way ie: they eat a peanut. He also noted there has never been a peanut reaction on a plane the was not contact with the nuts as the cause as the Enzyme that causes the reaction is inside the peanut.

rbavfan · Sat Sep 07, 2019 10:19 am

MrBretz wrote:
DLSANman, in reading other accounts of the incident, the things you stated were slightly different. I’m sure the lawyers will find the real facts.

In any case, I know 3 people who have ESAs. All are to avoid the airline fee. Two told me that. The third did not. He’s a male, has a manual labor type job, is a great guy, and you would love to have him around if you were in an altercation. In my personal circle, it is BS.

I like the Washington State law mentioned. They do he same thing at some national parks, BTW.

True the national parks follow the ADA, ie ESA's are not covered. Besides I love my dog so much I take him where he can bark at a bear. Hope you can run faster than your ESA when he pisses off the bear. Or hope you recover from the rabies bite that makes them have to put your ESA down.

rbavfan · Sat Sep 07, 2019 10:27 am

PatrickZ80 wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
WA707atMSP wrote:

This passenger should not have been forced to change seats, or be downgraded to the main cabin, because he was allergic to an "emotional support" pet.

It should have been the "emotional support" pet that was moved, not the other passenger.

It's clear you don't understand the CFR on this one. See 14 CFR 382.117.

It doesn't matter what the CFR says. It's not about how it is, it's about how it should be. And in this case, that could mean the CFR is wrong and needs to be changed.

Wow you missed his point. The CFR is right until it is legally changed. It's a federal regulation, not a I emotionally feel it should not be so I don't have to do it. I would bet based on your statement if you cheat on every rule you boss has at work.

rbavfan · Sat Sep 07, 2019 10:30 am

Boston757 wrote:
Unfortunately the emotional support animals stay. If one of the crew members has an allergic reaction that crew member goes. Even for the fake emotional support animals. If all the passengers have allergies to it they all have to get off to. It’s crazy!!!

The odds of everyone having allergies on the plane deflate your statement more than a Patriots football.

rbavfan · Sat Sep 07, 2019 10:39 am

727LOVER wrote:
EA CO AS wrote:
Right, wrong, or indifferent, you cannot legally ask a person with an emotional support or service animal to leave the airplane because of another passenger’s allergy. You try to make a reasonable accommodation such as reassigning the allergic person to another seat, or in a worst case scenario, another flight, but “the one who complains is the one who moves,” generally speaking. You can’t move or remove the person with the animal unless they pose a safety risk to all.

Boston757 wrote:
Unfortunately the emotional support animals stay. If one of the crew members has an allergic reaction that crew member goes. Even for the fake emotional support animals. If all the passengers have allergies to it they all have to get off to. It’s crazy!!!

If this is the law....why doesn't this guy's lawyer know this?

He does, thats why its now they used the dog issue as an excuse because I'm black. The Lawyer knows the other argument will not hold up.

rbavfan · Sat Sep 07, 2019 10:42 am

Bradin wrote:
While I am not intimately familiar with the gentlemen's allergy, I don't believe the gentlemen would have been able to stay on the plane. Pet dander and hair would have been all over the place.

Bingo. You win the dog allergy fact lottery.

rbavfan · Sat Sep 07, 2019 10:52 am

alfa164 wrote:
wetpantsmcgee wrote:
My view on the topic is if/when there will be backlash for the doctors issuing these letters. If there were more scrutiny involved in physicians' "prescriptions", it would become far more difficult for scammers to avoid fees.

In line with that, the rules should clearly state that the "doctor" must have personally seen and examined the "patient" - no more apply-on-line-and-get-your-certificate-here scams. Then if someone at the airlines were willing to take the time to check the "prescriptions" from these (often on-line) "doctors" - and locate those that clearly could have never personally seen the "patient" - then a lawsuit for fraud might put a number of them out of business.

Or even a complaint to their state Medical Association or licensing board... that would make them think twice.

The updated regulations for the ACAA note it now has to be on letterhead from a doctor you are being treated by. It has to be less than a year old & they must be notified before the day of the flight. Seems the airlines are going to start checking up on the letters. And that online card you can show is already being refused as it's not a government or Dr. Issued card.

If they prove it's fake they can file fraud charges against the passenger. A couple charges & Social Media blasting it out would cut back on it really fast. Any takers out there?

rbavfan · Sat Sep 07, 2019 11:02 am

ztarizona wrote:
WA707atMSP wrote:
I'm not normally a fan of lawsuits, but I hope this passenger and his lawyer rip AA apart.

https://atlantablackstar.com/2019/08/29 ... -to-a-dog/

This passenger should not have been forced to change seats, or be downgraded to the main cabin, because he was allergic to an "emotional support" pet.

It should have been the "emotional support" pet that was moved, not the other passenger.

Hopefully, if AA loses this lawsuit, and the other pending lawsuits about "emotional support" pets, they will work with the US Government to ensure that no animals other than seeing eye dogs are in the cabins of aircraft.

However, it will probably take the child or grandchild of a high profile government official being bitten by an "emotional support" pet before any action is taken.

The ADA laws are what they are. If you disagree with them and you are in the United States, you have two senators and a House member you can petition for changes. Also, "seeing eye dog" is a trademarked term specific to a certain type of animal for the blind. There are other disabilities a person might have that require their use of a service animal that have nothing to do with eyesight. It is not very common for service dogs to bite people. Your insinuation that the government and the airline should collude together to systematically violate the ADA requirements without proper debate or discussion by Congress, who enacted the law, is an interesting take!

Except the ADA does not allow ESA's. So complaining to your senators & house member won't correct this problem as it's not used by the airlines. Only the ACAA does so quit blaming the ADA for emotional support dogs.

rbavfan · Sat Sep 07, 2019 11:11 am

Chemist wrote:
I'm waiting for the day when somebody's emotional support dog bits another passenger's emotional support horse.

They messed that one up in most of the articles on the horses. The horses are Service Animals that perform a physical function just like the Service Dogs. Emotional Support animals do not perform a physical function for the person. Also PTSD/ADHD dogs perform a physical function specific to that persons trigger issues. PTSD/ADHD dogs are not emotional support animals.

rbavfan · Sat Sep 07, 2019 11:16 am

cpd wrote:
Virtual737 wrote:
If you have an emotional condition whereby you think you need an ESA to be able to take a flight then perhaps flying is not for you. If you have a condition whereby you need the ESA at your destination then it can travel in the hold, with all the lower class pets.

I have an emotional fear of Y class seats. I shall attempt to lobby the politicians until I'm provided a more suitable seat at someone else's inconvenience.

Perhaps the condition also stops you taking a bus as well, because similarly confined space / or the sufferer is anxious about the unknown, or other people approaching them or certain situations cause them to have flashbacks. There are such cases, and some of those people have done their duty to protect your freedom. So let’s give them a bit of respect. They aren’t gaming the system, the dog they have is a legitimate service animal.
‘

Yes and PTSD dogs are trained to distract the person and get them thinking about something other than whats causing the flashback. They do a physical function, they are not an ESA. They are protected under both ADA & ACAA.

rbavfan · Sat Sep 07, 2019 11:19 am

B777LRF wrote:
Can't wait till the day someone's emotional support salmon has a run in with another someone's emotional support grizzly. Preferably within the confines of a CRJ or Jungle jet.

A grizzly won't fit in a CRJ. lol

blueflyer · Sat Sep 07, 2019 11:52 am

rbavfan wrote:
B777LRF wrote:
Can't wait till the day someone's emotional support salmon has a run in with another someone's emotional support grizzly. Preferably within the confines of a CRJ or Jungle jet.

A grizzly won't fit in a CRJ. lol

If the plane doesn't fit the support animal, bring a bigger plane...

jagraham · Sat Sep 07, 2019 12:04 pm

ztarizona wrote:
WA707atMSP wrote:
I'm not normally a fan of lawsuits, but I hope this passenger and his lawyer rip AA apart.

https://atlantablackstar.com/2019/08/29 ... -to-a-dog/

This passenger should not have been forced to change seats, or be downgraded to the main cabin, because he was allergic to an "emotional support" pet.

It should have been the "emotional support" pet that was moved, not the other passenger.

Hopefully, if AA loses this lawsuit, and the other pending lawsuits about "emotional support" pets, they will work with the US Government to ensure that no animals other than seeing eye dogs are in the cabins of aircraft.

However, it will probably take the child or grandchild of a high profile government official being bitten by an "emotional support" pet before any action is taken.

The ADA laws are what they are. If you disagree with them and you are in the United States, you have two senators and a House member you can petition for changes. Also, "seeing eye dog" is a trademarked term specific to a certain type of animal for the blind. There are other disabilities a person might have that require their use of a service animal that have nothing to do with eyesight. It is not very common for service dogs to bite people. Your insinuation that the government and the airline should collude together to systematically violate the ADA requirements without proper debate or discussion by Congress, who enacted the law, is an interesting take!

ADA laws cover allergies too. This would truly be a no win situation for AA except that the allergic passenger refused any reasonable accommodation (apparently kicking the dog off the plane was the only acceptable solution to him), and for some reason he packed his lifesaving meds in checked luggage. He might have had a case but he's going to lose in court because of his actions.

In the end, there has to be some rulings on conflicting disabilities. Right now it's on a case-by-case basis, which is not good for those who have to deal with these situations.

vegas005 · Sat Sep 07, 2019 2:05 pm

No pets in the cabin..the country has gone insane...

StudiodeKadent · Sat Sep 07, 2019 2:31 pm

phlswaflyer wrote:
slider wrote:
This emotional support bullshit has gone too far.

We can't go a single day without this being in the news now. Our entire society has become emotionally incontinent.

100% AGREE! Emotional support dogs are BS - and I love my dog more than anything, but I would NOT do that to another passenger.

I add my agreement.

Look, people have issues and that's fine. But therapy animals/emotional support animals are clearly being abused here. Some people are treating "momentary emotional inconvenience" as an attack on their mental health. I know its nice to cuddle a puppy, but you don't need to always have a puppy available to cuddle in order to survive a flight on a plane.

Our culture seems to have decided that PTSD is a fashion statement, and so people without it are faking it. This clearly doesn't help actual PTSD sufferers.

MrBretz · Sat Sep 07, 2019 2:46 pm

I found this on the Zion NP website

“Service Animals
The 2010 revision to Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) defines a "service animal" as a dog or small horse that has been individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability, including a physical, sensory, psychiatric, intellectual, or other mental disability.

Dogs that are not trained to perform tasks that mitigate the effects of a disability, including dogs that are used purely to provide comfort or emotional support ("therapy animals"), are considered pets.

Service animals in training and pets are subject to the park's pet regulations and are not allowed on shuttles or trails (except the Parus Trail). Falsely portraying a pet as a service animal is considered fraud and is subject to federal prosecution.”

I offer this information because I have watched it being enforced at this particular park entrance. It would appear to me that the US airlines could adopt something similar. In other words, no pets in the cabin. Or it might be only crated pets in cabin if they are crated, fit under the seat, and stay there during the flight.

ck8msp · Sat Sep 07, 2019 3:21 pm

A lot of people want to paint one size fits all judgment on ESA and indeed some dogs in general. One poster mentioned Europe. I just returned from a 35 day trip by RV across Europe. I encountered well behaved dogs, not ESA or service animals at several restaurants. They were welcomed and tolerated and behaved well laying down on the floor and minding their own business. In fact in a very busy restaurant down in the Bodensee in Germany, the wait staff brought a little beagle a water bowl inside the restaurant before the patrons. NO ONE SEEMED TO CARE. It was wonderful. I asked the owner about this and he said, "most dogs are behaved better than the children that come in." Harsh, but probably true.

Not all dogs cause allergies, my Biewer Terrier gets regularly groomed and does not shed. On a flight from MSP-TUS I had my dog in coach on a paid fee. I was in a window seat and he was asleep in his carrier. The woman on the aisle seat was griping during the flight about being allergic to dogs. Towards the end of the flight, I lifted his carrier and put it on the tray table and let him poke his head out (I know, against the rule, but he is 6 pounds and wasn't going anywhere). She was shocked at first but then had to admit she did not even know he was there. I have flown first class on Delta too with him and unless they physically saw him, they did not even know he was there.

Lastly, I have a priest friend who has battled a couple people who claim they are allergic to incense at funerals and other Masses. One time, he brought the censor out and started waiving it around. A couple people in the front row started to cough and make exaggerated motions. He then paused, and lifted the lid too show it was empty. Was it appropriate? Maybe not, but point made. Some people are genuinely allergic and some people are emotionally allergic. We all need to be responsible for our emotional and physical health, and if we are deathly allergic, always carry the proper medicine.

The airline was in a no win situation, the complainer was wrong. I am also a T1 diabetic and could probably get a true service dog that detects low glucose. I am not bothering because there is a technological solution using a CGM. However, if my dog was trained to detect and alert, how is it not my right to travel with him? The end result is the same, a dog in the cabin. One paid, one didn't.

Ionosphere · Sat Sep 07, 2019 3:45 pm

Shame on the other passengers in First Class that wouldn't switch seats. I doubt PHX-AUS is a meal flight.

DarthLobster · Sat Sep 07, 2019 3:58 pm

Yet another idiotic customer service failure that everyone is going to forget about in 3 days.

Mods, please just give this shit it’s own forum.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net