DOJ posts new definition of service animal

[DeafDoc1]

Service animal means any dog that is 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. Other species of animals, whether wild or domestic, trained or untrained, are not service animals for the purposes of this definition. The work or tasks performed by a service animal must be directly related to the handler´s disability. Examples of work or tasks include, but are not limited to, assisting individuals who are blind or have low vision with navigation and other tasks, alerting individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing to the presence of people or sounds, providing non-violent protection or rescue work, pulling a wheelchair, assisting an individual during a seizure, alerting individuals to the presence of allergens, retrieving items such as medicine or the telephone, providing physical support and assistance with balance and stability to individuals with mobility disabilities, and helping persons with psychiatric and neurological disabilities by preventing or interrupting impulsive or destructive behaviors. The crime deterrent effects of an animal´s presence and the provision of emotional support, well-being, comfort, or companionship do not constitute work or tasks for the purposes of this definition.

Department of Justice, 28 CFR Part 35, Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in State and Local Government Services

Pah! No more service snakes, emotional support cats, or other abuses of the ADA that have made it so much harder on people with legitimately trained service dogs.

 

[VamPyroX]

I agree.

They should also have service dogs tested frequently to ensure they're doing their jobs. I know some people who get a service dog and spoil them so bad that they stop acting like service dogs. Yet, they still have the right to go around with their service dogs because they're "service dogs". :roll:

 

[DeafDoc1]

Agreed, but at this time there are no certifying tests or documents needed to prove the dog is trained. People self-train dogs all the time; a few even do a good job. There are organizations pushing right now for a national certifying body and minimum performance testing. Better organizations already do this for their graduates.

 

[Bottesini]

So that means it is limited to dogs, but people who slap a vest on their pet dog still will be within the law without any certification required?

 

[DeafDoc1]

Well, there is a paragraph discussing the use of miniature horses. And there is an opportunity to "challenge" a person to prove/state the animal "works" to ameliorate a disability. But you are right, there's still no muscle behind it.

 

[jillio]

Service animal means any dog that is 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. Other species of animals, whether wild or domestic, trained or untrained, are not service animals for the purposes of this definition. The work or tasks performed by a service animal must be directly related to the handler´s disability. Examples of work or tasks include, but are not limited to, assisting individuals who are blind or have low vision with navigation and other tasks, alerting individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing to the presence of people or sounds, providing non-violent protection or rescue work, pulling a wheelchair, assisting an individual during a seizure, alerting individuals to the presence of allergens, retrieving items such as medicine or the telephone, providing physical support and assistance with balance and stability to individuals with mobility disabilities, and helping persons with psychiatric and neurological disabilities by preventing or interrupting impulsive or destructive behaviors. The crime deterrent effects of an animal´s presence and the provision of emotional support, well-being, comfort, or companionship do not constitute work or tasks for the purposes of this definition.

Department of Justice, 28 CFR Part 35, Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in State and Local Government Services

Pah! No more service snakes, emotional support cats, or other abuses of the ADA that have made it so much harder on people with legitimately trained service dogs.

You know, I agree with this. I have many clients who have pets who serve a therapeutic purpose...but they are not service dogs. I have had some of these clients ask me to give them a letter for their landlord that would identify their pet as a service animal, to get around restrictions on pets in residence, and I always refuse to do so.

 

[Beowulf]

Awww, does that include my pet flea named Spot?

 

[DeafDoc1]

You know, I agree with this. I have many clients who have pets who serve a therapeutic purpose...but they are not service dogs. I have had some of these clients ask me to give them a letter for their landlord that would identify their pet as a service animal, to get around restrictions on pets in residence, and I always refuse to do so.

There is a grey zone that the DOJ has acknowledged. The ADA governs public access, but realizes there are situations where emotional support dogs may be granted residential access separate from public access granted to service dogs:

The difference between an emotional support animal and a psychiatric service animal is the work or tasks that the animal performs. Traditionally, service dogs worked as guides for individuals who were blind or had low vision. Since the original regulation was promulgated, service animals have been trained to assist individuals with many different types of disabilities.

In the final rule, the Department has retained its position on the exclusion of emotional support animals from the definition of "service animal." The definition states that "[t]he provision of emotional support, well-being, comfort, or companionship, * * * do[es] not constitute work or tasks for the purposes of this definition." The Department notes, however, that the exclusion of emotional support animals from coverage in the final rule does not mean that individuals with psychiatric or mental disabilities cannot use service animals that meet the regulatory definition. The final rule defines service animal as follows: "ervice animal means any dog that is 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." This language simply clarifies the Department´s longstanding position.

The Department´s position is based on the fact that the title II and title III regulations govern a wider range of public settings than the housing and transportation settings for which the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and DOT regulations allow emotional support animals or comfort animals. The Department recognizes that there are situations not governed by the title II and title III regulations, particularly in the context of residential settings and transportation, where there may be a legal obligation to permit the use of animals that do not qualify as service animals under the ADA, but whose presence nonetheless provides necessary emotional support to persons with disabilities. Accordingly, other Federal agency regulations, case law, and possibly State or local laws governing those situations may provide appropriately for increased access for animals other than service animals as defined under the ADA. Public officials, housing providers, and others who make decisions relating to animals in residential and transportation settings should consult the Federal, State, and local laws that apply in those areas (e.g., the FHAct regulations of HUD and the ACAA) and not rely on the ADA as a basis for reducing those obligations.


This "loophole" may allow for home placement of emotional support dogs, but the grey zone is the abuse of the owner by trying to stretch the definition.

 

[jillio]

There is a grey zone that the DOJ has acknowledged. The ADA governs public access, but realizes there are situations where emotional support dogs may be granted residential access separate from public access granted to service dogs:

The difference between an emotional support animal and a psychiatric service animal is the work or tasks that the animal performs. Traditionally, service dogs worked as guides for individuals who were blind or had low vision. Since the original regulation was promulgated, service animals have been trained to assist individuals with many different types of disabilities.

In the final rule, the Department has retained its position on the exclusion of emotional support animals from the definition of "service animal." The definition states that "[t]he provision of emotional support, well-being, comfort, or companionship, * * * do[es] not constitute work or tasks for the purposes of this definition." The Department notes, however, that the exclusion of emotional support animals from coverage in the final rule does not mean that individuals with psychiatric or mental disabilities cannot use service animals that meet the regulatory definition. The final rule defines service animal as follows: "ervice animal means any dog that is 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." This language simply clarifies the Department´s longstanding position.

The Department´s position is based on the fact that the title II and title III regulations govern a wider range of public settings than the housing and transportation settings for which the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and DOT regulations allow emotional support animals or comfort animals. The Department recognizes that there are situations not governed by the title II and title III regulations, particularly in the context of residential settings and transportation, where there may be a legal obligation to permit the use of animals that do not qualify as service animals under the ADA, but whose presence nonetheless provides necessary emotional support to persons with disabilities. Accordingly, other Federal agency regulations, case law, and possibly State or local laws governing those situations may provide appropriately for increased access for animals other than service animals as defined under the ADA. Public officials, housing providers, and others who make decisions relating to animals in residential and transportation settings should consult the Federal, State, and local laws that apply in those areas (e.g., the FHAct regulations of HUD and the ACAA) and not rely on the ADA as a basis for reducing those obligations.


This "loophole" may allow for home placement of emotional support dogs, but the grey zone is the abuse of the owner by trying to stretch the definition.

Right. And I try to do anything I can to discourage such abuse. It simply makes it more difficult for those that are not abusing the system.

I have found, in most cases, that the ADA does not even need to be invoked in the case of an emotional support animal for those with mental disorders. An honest letter to the landlord explaining that the pet was recommended for therapeutic reasons, and a quick outline of what the therapeutic benefits for the individual are is generally sufficient to gain any landlord's cooperation in allowing the pet to remain. At least, in my experience that has been true. The goal is still reached, but it is done so by staying within the guidelines of the ADA and simply being honest. IMO, that is also a positive message to provide to clients regarding finding solutions to problems. Kills 2 birds with 1 stone, so to speak!:P

 

[deafdyke]

jillo, that's good. I still don't get why anyone would need a hearing ear dog. Seeing Eye and other animals yes....but a hearing ear dog, especially when you have everything else?

 

[whatdidyousay!]

I had a client that had trained monkey , the guy was in a W/C and the monkey would pick up things , get food for the guy etc.

 

[OnQSiberians]

jillo, that's good. I still don't get why anyone would need a hearing ear dog. Seeing Eye and other animals yes....but a hearing ear dog, especially when you have everything else?

There are simply things that a Service Dog can do that all the electronic device just cannot. For one, your dog still works when batteries and electricity fail… A dog can smell someone outside and warn you in a subtle way. For those who are older and all alone, they provide security and support. Also, a lot of people who inquire with me about Hearing Dogs have multiple disabilities, where hearing is just one task that is being mitigated.

 

[OpheliaSpeaks]

Disabled and elderly individuals who may benefit from the companionship of a pet, are permitted Emotional Support Animals in residential housing where the Fair Housing Act is implemented. The ADA does not and never has applied to housing situations. It is the Fair Housing Administration Act (FHAA) that defines Emotional Support Animal (ESA) and outlines who may have one, how to request a reasonable accommodation to keep one and what the procedure is for the landlord. Not all housing is covered under the FHAA.

 

[CJB]

I had a client that had trained monkey , the guy was in a W/C and the monkey would pick up things , get food for the guy etc.

I have a friend who has this same time of service animal. The dog limitation makes no sense to me because it leaves out a lot of people who have actual service animals that just aren't specifically dogs.

 

[CJB]

There are simply things that a Service Dog can do that all the electronic device just cannot. For one, your dog still works when batteries and electricity fail… A dog can smell someone outside and warn you in a subtle way. For those who are older and all alone, they provide security and support. Also, a lot of people who inquire with me about Hearing Dogs have multiple disabilities, where hearing is just one task that is being mitigated.

My pet dog does this for me all the time and he's not specially trained. He already lets me know when someone comes in the room and alerts me to sounds I don't hear naturally. I don't see why a dog needs special training for it. It's not a like a guide dog that needs to be highly trained from day one.

 

[dogmom]

<this is not relating to the debate over whether there is an actual "need" for hearing alert dogs, just in response to CJB's ques.>
From my experience as a volunteer working with service dogs and my background as a trainer, in terms of purely why a dog may need particular training to be a hearing alert or signal dog, the dogs who do this kiind of work need to alert not to just things like doors, maybe someone being in the room or calling your name, wanting your attention - but also things like babies crying, microwaves beeping, pots boiling, telephones ringing, alarms of other various kinds going off <say someone has some medication on a timer or something> and they need to consistently do this, with other distractions, and possibly with all members of the family as in, telling the dog to "get daddy" to let him know if the baby is crying or if another member of the family may have fallen and hurt themselves <say there's a 10 yr. old in the house>. These are things that many average dogs may otherwise learn to ignore in a household. The signal dog also needs to do this regardless if the handler is indoor or outdoors, if some meat fell off the counter or they found an exciting bug in the grass, if there's a storm going on and there's no power - whatever distracting or difficult circumstances - if someone has applied for a signal dog from an outside agency, that dog is trained in the background described. A lot of times service dogs in general are also taught the cue "go get help" regardless of where they are - say the handler happens to have a seizure or tripped and fell and broke something...whatever - the dog has been specifically taught to leave the person's side and go find ANOTHER person and lead them back to the individual who needs assistance.
And sometimes signal alert dogs are cross-trained to alert to things like on-coming seizures or for other situations. Service dogs in general out in public are also taught to leave dropped food and its wrappings alone <which may be poisonous or inappropriate for the dog to eat>, including food left in a curious toddler's outstretched hand, to specifically "go under" a table, bench or chair and lay there and not move <including for chasing squirrels, other dogs running by, etc.> until the handler releases the dog to move. These are things that the average pet dog, attempting to do service dog tasks, would likely have difficulty with.

 

[jillio]

My pet dog does this for me all the time and he's not specially trained. He already lets me know when someone comes in the room and alerts me to sounds I don't hear naturally. I don't see why a dog needs special training for it. It's not a like a guide dog that needs to be highly trained from day one.

Any dog, trained or not, will alert you to sound in the environment. You just need to be aware of the cues they give.

 

[KristinaB]

There are times when I wish I qualified for a service dog, but right now, we aren't allowed to have a dog in MIL's house and I don't there are too many other people in the house.

I have more than just my hearing loss to deal with. I fall every so often and these days I am having more vision problems. The house is too small to keep my cane with me all the time.

 

[CJB]

Any dog, trained or not, will alert you to sound in the environment. You just need to be aware of the cues they give.

My point exactly. I can feel him shift when he's sitting next to me (or even at the end of the bed or couch) or feel his head turn in the direction of the sound or sight when I'm playing with him. He naturally alerts me to a lot of the sounds dogmom listed. He bugs me if something like the microwave is beeping or if the doorbell rings or if someone is knocking. And if I want him to be consistent all I have to do is positively reinforce him.

My pet dog also knows not to touch food unless I specifically tell him it's okay.

I just don't think the training for a hearing dog is nearly as rigorous as for a guide dog so I'm not sure they need the classification of a service animal. I think any well-trained pet dog could do the job.

 

[somedeafdudefromPNW]

Usually hearing dogs are guide dogs that failed to meet the criteria but still need a place to work. They're not the same as your average dogs, at least here in Canada. The aura is different with the hearing dogs compared to home-trained dogs. I remember the CNIB wanted me to get a hearing dog at the time, because I don't qualify for a guide dog, but still needed some assistance with seeing things and they know that the hearing dogs provided are basically dogs that fell short of qualifications of a guide dog. So, in roundabout way, I could get an uncertified guide dog.

Either way, I am too stubborn to accept one.