Therapy Chickens
 

This is a hard one.

Adorable three-year-old autistic boy may be forced to give up 'therapeutic' pet chickens because the town thinks they 'don't belong' | Mail Online

I have to go with a no. I have sympathy for the child and his family, but that weighed against the right so all the people that bought knowing that no farm animals would be allowed.

And who says a chicken HAS to be a farm animal? I hope they
sue the town using the ADA. C'mon, ACLU, where are you when
someone needs your support.

Well, I say a chicken is a farm animal and in this case, it is a large pen full so chickens in the back yard. The ACLU is great in theory, but in reality, they discriminate against the majority. Sorry, but I don't know what the ADA is. I grew up on a farm, and the smell of chickens is very unpleasant even from a distance.:spoken:

Maybe a chicken is a farm animal, if it lives on a farm. Maybe it's a
therapy animal if a doctor says it is. I also grew up on a chicken farm,
and to this day, the smell of chicken manure brings back pleasant
memories.

BTW, ADA stands for the Americans with Disabilities Act, which is a
Federal law.

ADA as in "I ada chicken sandwich for lunch!

Not hard at all....

If these therapy chickens actually do benefit him as stated by his doctor then he should be allowed at least a couple to help him with his condition. We make exceptions and overlook most everything for one reason or another and this child should be no different. Chickens can live on a farm or not, just like dogs, and they are by no means any less sanitary. Let's see we can keep Boa Constrictors/Pythons but not chickens even with the required permit????

I think we can expect to see this decision reversed, and maybe some egg on the town council's face. :1rotfl:

After all he doesn't live in Beverly Hills.

Or maybe...just maybe...they should move to somewhere more accommodating? Somewhere more rural...

Are we really supposed to accommodate EVERYONE? Really? How about the other autistic kid who likes elephants. Or the one who wants a pony? If you're going to make an exception and move the line...how far? pheasant? peacock? ostrich? And they should sue to get them?

Are there always going to be exceptions? Then why bother with regulations? How about your neighbor is autistic and loves bright purple houses...think he should sue to have it?

Your acting with emotion, there are consequences. They knew there are restrictions when moving in. They de facto agreed, if not in writing, to restrictions when they purchased the house. They had the option to locate somewhere else, without the restrictions. Like buying here in TV and expecting the freedoms of living in unincorporated county areas.

These chickens apparently bother the neighbors and THAT is why they want them removed. I believe you can do what you want as long as nobody else is affected by your actions. You can't blare your radio and you can't have roosters crowing.

Just my cold hearted opinion...

I also saw this piece on the news and wondered if the family had considered that it might be the bond of the child with a living, nonthreatening animal that was working, not just the bond of the boy with just chickens. I think they should see if they could substitute another animal that might be acceptable, like maybe a bunny (if zoning allows) or a dog that would be an affectionate companion. I am a former special education teacher and I have worked with autistic children as well as having used my own dogs in a therapy dog capacity to work with children and adults with disabilities. Animals can often reach a spot that people can not. I am not sure it has to ONLY be a chicken.

Didn't see any mention of neighbors being bothered unless I missed it. More likely just more small town (less than 20K) government wanting to run the show.

Two-three chickens in a town of 16K people, doesn't appear they're about to be overrun.

If the boy loves the chickens and has grown attached to them then he should be allowed to keep them. After having them for a year and ripping them from him now would be cruel. If they had denied the permit up front it might have been more understandable.

Puzzling why we would want to try and force a dog on him because someone might think it is better for him because that's what everyone else likes.


In December of 2012, DeBary enacted a one-year test run allowing families in residential areas to keep three chickens.
The program was created after the Hart family, who purchased chickens after researching the positive affect of animals on autism, asked for permission to keep their chickens.
keeping a coop is no easy task. Residents wishing to maintain chickens must obtain a city permit.
It also costs between $500 and $800 per year to keep a coop with proper fencing.
The DeBary council's decision to discontinue residential coops will affect the only two loving homes in the community who decided to care for chickens.
One application for a backyard coop was from the Hart's and another was from a woman who wanted to use the chickens for eggs.


Read more: Adorable three-year-old autistic boy may be forced to give up 'therapeutic' pet chickens because the town thinks they 'don't belong' | Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

The last line in your rant says it all.
I truly feel sorry for you.
Compassion is not your strong suit. :ohdear:

Eggs--actly!!:a040::mademyday::thumbup::pepper2:

Compassion must not interfere with the law. Don stated every thing correctly.

Posted previously,
I think we can expect to see this decision reversed, and maybe some egg on the town council's face. :1rotfl:

Today:
From the latest news it looks like the chickens will be staying. Laws get changed to accommodate most everything else so this is a no brainer. The council meets on the 18th to vote again...


Family thinks autistic Debary toddler will get to keep his thera - FOX 35 News Orlando

Therapy Chickens Will Be Staying
 

The therapy chickens will be staying, the vote was unanimous to let the young boy keep them. :coolsmiley:

The City Council of DeBary, Fla., unanimously approved a resolution on Wednesday evening that allows the parents of 3-year-old J.J. Hart to raise the three hens in their backyard as a reasonable accommodation under the Federal and Florida Fair Housing Acts. The resolution notes that “the chickens are primarily utilized for the purpose of enhancing the child’s life.”


Happy update: Boy with autism can keep 'therapy chickens' - TODAY.com

I'm not reading any of your posts. nananaah.
Get a psychologist to determine whether the animals are service animals.
In my work with the courts, nothing could help make an informed decision like an expert opinion or 3 if it's contentious.

oh darn, I read the post before mine and I am glad, but chicken poop is still chicken poop.

More like therapy or comfort animals than service animals..Note the article is about therapy chickens not service chickens.

The parents say they have been a big help to him which is good enough reason to allow them to this child.

Always supporting the underdog.

Let the boy and his family move to an area where chickens are allowed.

Would you want a couple to move in next door to you in The Villages and one of the couple keeps several chickens and a rooster in the back yard saying they are needed for her to remain calm during periods of stress - and she threatens to sue anyone under auspices of the Americans With Disabilities Act who questions her.

I think the boy should be allowed to keep couple of chickens but not a whole coop of noisy smelly birds. Question: if it'a a pet do you allow it in the house? If it's a farm animal you probably don't

Apparently they are now living in an area where this family is allowed to have chickens. No need to move. Live with it.

Very interesting when reading response to CHICKENS OR

A HIDDEN FENCE in the back yard.

Chickens COULD be a nuisance visually, smell and their sounds can be annoying to some and against the rules. A hidden fence is against the rules.

Since it has no impact on me, I do not care one way or another.

Make the chicken a little "service chicken" vest and it will be allowed anywhere!

This might be a slight thread drift, but somebody please educate me about the trend in service dogs. I see many little -- I mean like toy, and pocket-sized -- dogs with service animal vests in restaurants and other places where animals would be otherwise prohibited. On a recent cruise, I saw a morbidly obese woman in wheelchair (some of the time) with a service lap dog. So, I wonder what are these little dogs trained to do? And when out at sea, where do the do their business?

It might not impact you today but say the guy next door to you puts up a fence and cites the fence that is already there as a defense (no pun intended) - and wins. Then you are impacted.

Z

Fake service dogs a growing problem - NBC News.com

"It's an easy law to break, and dog cheats do. By strapping a vest or backpack that says "service animal" to their pet, anyone can go in stores and restaurants where other dogs are banned, creating growing problems for the disabled community and business owners and leading to calls for better identifying the real deal."

Fence thread is that way-------->

Where's TheVillageChicken when you need'em?

That could get egg-citing. I'm sure he would have something foul to say

But his comment was /\ that way.

You have to keep up with the direction.

I have no control on thread hijacking.

Z

Why didn't you just ask the lady those questions? Chances are she would have been telling you the dog is an emotional support to her. As for where the dog goes - it probably was box trained or fake grass trained to a spot in her cabin. Ships charge a substantial extra fee for pets for the extra cleaning that is needed.

Yes, lots of people just buy the service dog vests and papers off of websites. It is a problem but some people think rules are just made for the other guy.

The problem was they allowed it for a year and after he was attached to them they wanted to jerk the rug out by suddenly making it illegal and forcing him to give them up even though they proved beneficial to him. It would have been reasonable had they not have been any benefit to not allow them beyond the first year.

They should have not allowed it in the first place and kept it a no chicken town if the plan was to not allow it after one year regardless. In this case having to move to where they were allowed would have been the right option.

Important Information Taken From the Article:

While DeBary residents still won’t be able to raise chickens in their backyards,
the resolution passed on Wednesday specifically allows the Harts to keep the

three hens

while J.J. lives at the home.

http://www.today.com/moms/boy-autism...des-2D11775878