Quote:
Originally Posted by CFrance
Posters can argue/debate ad nauseum, but the arguments would be better placed to congressmen to make changes. The ADA law vis-a-vis service dogs is too weak and leaves too much opening for fraud. I personally see nothing wrong with some sort of agency certifying service dogs, issuing a tag, and requiring their owners to carry papers. I realize that also would be open to counterfeit, but I think it would weed out most of the cheaters. I also see nothing wrong with a merchant asking to see proof of certification.
Legitimate service dogs perform more than just seeing-eye tasks. They open doors, detect seizures, alert their owners to certain dangers such as the onset of diabetic coma--the list goes on. Some can push a button on a phone or other alert device. It would be impossible to demonstrate some of these tasks to anyone in a store or restaurant who asks.
The tags could be made to be read with the same equipment stores use to check for counterfeit money. The training agencies could cover the costs of the tags and certification for those unable to pay at the time they equip the disabled person with a dog. Grants and donations help.
It's time the ADA people cleaned up this particular law, in my opinion.
It's also time people stopped gaming the system. It's giving the rest of us responsible dog owners a bad name. We know where and where not to take our dogs, and why.
|
I agree with you. Guide dogs for the blind are pretty obvious that they are performing a function. But, there are many animals that perform functions for those whose disability is not so obvious. This is the area the cheaters (scammers) exploit. This is why I believe that any establishment open to the public should be able to ask the owner of a service animal to provide proof (license) they (the animal) is legit. There should be penalties for those who try to scam the system.
Truly responsible pet owners sadly often get unfairly lumped in with the "bad guys", and they don't deserve that.