# Changes to ADA Service Dog Law



## elly1210 (Jan 4, 2009)

ADA Service Dog Changes Effective on Ides of March | Dog Star Daily

I believe I saw a sticky on this not sure if it is the same. Mods if you want to delete if it is or merge that is OK.


----------



## W.Oliver (Aug 26, 2007)

Seems the administration of this issue still falls a bit short.....it would be complete with a national registry of qualified ADA service animals, that would offer consistent public recognition.


----------



## elly1210 (Jan 4, 2009)

What do you mean? Can you explain more? 

I read that these animals are only qualifed
"Not only will these new regulations substantially limit the types of animals that will qualify as service animals under the ADA _to dogs (and miniature horses in some cases),_ but they help clarify the different definitions and legal entitlements between service dogs and emotional support dogs.

Not sure if that was what you referring to.


----------



## W.Oliver (Aug 26, 2007)

A national registry for purebred dogs is the AKC.....there is no national registry for service dogs. There are at least a couple of seeing eye dog groups, a few therapy dogs groups, and on and on. A single national registry that recognizes qualified/trained canines would be ideal in my view. I would let someone else worry about the ponies.


----------



## Andaka (Jun 29, 2003)

But many service dogs are "home schooled". How would they be evaluated by your national registry?


----------



## ILGHAUS (Nov 25, 2002)

> I believe I saw a sticky on this not sure if it is the same.


A lot of the info on this is in various stickies but that is fine. It is important enough to be out to everyone's attention again as the date -- March 15 -- is less than a week away. 

Here in FL emails went out to many animal first responders today from the top with an attached article again explaining for those who are not familiar with the terms.

I think it is great as this hurricane season we don't need to worry about all the different animal species that may be presented in mass care shelters etc. In my area the old service snakes (if we had any) would be so out of luck. No longer can be claimed as service animals so not allowed in a shelter for people and no pet-friendly sheltering that I am aware of allow them. No service lizzards, bunnies, pot-bellied pigs, etc. etc. hurray. 

The new updated explanation is stronger in the explanation that emotional support and making the owner "feel good" does not make a service dog. So hopefully by-by to many of the *huggers* with their untrained dogs in public.


----------



## ILGHAUS (Nov 25, 2002)

Important enough to repeat again ....

“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.”


----------



## wildo (Jul 27, 2006)

ILGHAUS said:


> providing non-violent protection or rescue work


What does this mean in the context of a disability? I assume this is not referring to a PPD, as that would be potentially violent protection. Just curious.


----------



## ILGHAUS (Nov 25, 2002)

Protection as a Guide Dog stopping its handler from stepping in front of a car, into a hole, wacking their head on something.

A dog trained to lie across its handler during a seizure.

A dog trained to search for help or to seek out a particular person during certain circumstances.

It would be so helpful if the update would have done away with the term *protection* and many people did write in about this during the time the public was being asked to. Many organizations also requested that term be changed or at least expanded on.


----------



## W.Oliver (Aug 26, 2007)

Andaka said:


> But many service dogs are "home schooled". How would they be evaluated by your national registry?


I'm not sure that is so much the point as simply an administered, national, organization...registration...common vest/patch for those animals that meet the ADA requirements regardless if they are home schooled.

I have traveled with dogs and there is always a great deal of confusion on the topic. My dogs are working dogs, but they are not service dogs. I feel too many folks make service dog claims that truly are not service dogs. To me, that is like parking in a handicap spot, really no difference. Conversely, I have witnessed folks with genuine service dogs get grief over their animal in a public venue, and that is an even worse condition.

So my point isn't about criteria, but rather, formal recognition...identification, so those with genuine need can exercise their rights unencumbered.


----------



## Lin (Jul 3, 2007)

but the type of registration you're asking for... How will it be supported? Who pays to keep the registry? Does that fall on the service dog owner, many of whom are living off disability checks?

Who makes sure the dogs registered ARE service animals? If there's any testing involved, again who pays for that? That would rule out many disabled individuals with owner trained dogs. 

If there isn't any testing involved... How is that any different than it is right now, where people can pay scam companies money and print out fake certifications? Or ****, probably photoshop a certification? If theres no testing and you're just registering the dog the way you register with a city or county, what stops non service animals from being registered?

Many people have the same/similar suggestions. But it comes down to money. There is no money to run any type of national service dog registry. And to require those with the service animals to pay, diminishes the rights of the disabled.


----------



## W.Oliver (Aug 26, 2007)

Lin said:


> but the type of registration you're asking for... How will it be supported? Who pays to keep the registry? Does that fall on the service dog owner, many of whom are living off disability checks?


The ADA is government regulation....they established rules, without a body to administer the controls. Tax regulation resulted in the IRS, immigration regulation resulted in the INS, prohibition regulation resulted in the ATF.....who administers the regulation established by the ADA? Is it unreasonable the Justice Department or some other branch control a registration of service dogs? I am not suggestion some insurmountable hurdle, but more common recognition.


----------



## Lin (Jul 3, 2007)

W.Oliver said:


> The ADA is government regulation....they established rules, without a body to administer the controls. Tax regulation resulted in the IRS, immigration regulation resulted in the INS, prohibition regulation resulted in the ATF.....who administers the regulation established by the ADA? Is it unreasonable the Justice Department or some other branch control a registration of service dogs? I am not suggestion some insurmountable hurdle, but more common recognition.


You didn't answer any of my questions though. IRS agents, INS, ATF, they're all jobs that require money. Where would the money come from to regulate the ADA? Do taxes increase to cover it, or are service dog owners required to pay? If the latter, that rules out many people from being able to have a service dog. With the former, do you really expect that to be approved? I really don't think its comparable to IRS, INS, ATF etc. The disabled are the minority and there is no public safety etc issues involved.


----------



## elly1210 (Jan 4, 2009)

This is right in the ADA Update

*subside. Note that dogs trained to provide aggressive protection (i.e., attack dogs) will NOT qualify as a service dog.*


----------



## elly1210 (Jan 4, 2009)

Lin said:


> You didn't answer any of my questions though. IRS agents, INS, ATF, they're all jobs that require money. Where would the money come from to regulate the ADA? Do taxes increase to cover it, or are service dog owners required to pay? If the latter, that rules out many people from being able to have a service dog. With the former, do you really expect that to be approved? I really don't think its comparable to IRS, INS, ATF etc. The disabled are the minority and there is no public safety etc issues involved.


ADA is a law, and is without a budget. Different titles of the act are enforced by different agencies which are directly funded by Congressional bills (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Department of Justice.) And some provisions of the individual titles are further enforced and funded by the US General Fund. A tax credit for ADA purposes is a tax that is not received by the General Fund.

So who funds it, US taxpayers do.

This was the best explanation I could find when I researched. I realize Yahoo doesn't always have the best answers but this one seems very good Who funds the Americans with Disabilities Act? - Yahoo! Answers


----------



## Lin (Jul 3, 2007)

elly1210 said:


> ADA is a law, and is without a budget. Different titles of the act are enforced by different agencies which are directly funded by Congressional bills (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Department of Justice.) And some provisions of the individual titles are further enforced and funded by the US General Fund. A tax credit for ADA purposes is a tax that is not received by the General Fund.
> 
> So who funds it, US taxpayers do.
> 
> This was the best explanation I could find when I researched. I realize Yahoo doesn't always have the best answers but this one seems very good Who funds the Americans with Disabilities Act? - Yahoo! Answers


Sorry, I think I wasn't clear. I was specifically referring to setting up a registry as W. suggests. I do not believe charging taxpayers to set up an agency to govern service dogs would go over very well. It would be incredibly expensive to set up some sort of federal service dog testing, and if that cost fell on the parties with the service dogs that would be diminishing rights and many people who have no other option than owner trained dogs, would lose the option of owner trained dogs. 

If a federal registry is created without any sort of testing to "prove" status as a service dog, well its not any different than the set up we currently have. It falls greatly on the individual to decide if their dog meets the qualifications for a service dog. We have people who's dogs do NOT meet the qualifications that purchase fake SD certificates or vests with patches. So what would be the purpose to set up a registry, without mandatory testing, where you just register your dog the same way you register ownership with your city or county? There is no true regulation there.


----------



## ILGHAUS (Nov 25, 2002)

Lin is asking some very good questions and some that have been given a lot of thought by many over time. So far no answers have been accepted enough to make any inroads.

Besides who would give the tests for registry there is the question of where. What about large or very rural areas where you may have one SD? Does the handler and dog need to travel to another section of the state to be tested? Does the evaluator travel? PWDs with very limited areas they are able to go to -- are they going to be required to pay for their transport? Is the government going to send an evaluator to their neighborhood? 

And who is going to pay for saleries, facilities, and the mountains of paperwork and red tape that we all know is going to follow? 

Should the evaluations and registrations be done by a government agency or by the private sector? As SDs are individually trained to meet the needs of their handler what are the requirements going to be? Are there going to be different standards for guide dogs, for hearing alert dogs, for mobility dogs, for PSDs, etc. Are evaluators around the country going to evaluate the same? Look at just the difference in evaluators for a CGC. 

I believe there needs to be something done to weed out the fakers but exactly what is that? Before any such undertaking really even begins, I really think there needs to be a large push to educate, to educate on what a proper SD is and to educate on the amount of training that is in truth needed for a team. Any *facility* that advertises SD training need to be under strict rules on what is acceptable and what is not. There should be harsh enforced penalities for those that send unacceptable dogs out to work with PWDs. There should be harsh enforced penalities for those people who lie in order to fly their dog for free or to be able to take Mopsy out shopping or to dinner with them.


----------



## W.Oliver (Aug 26, 2007)

Lin said:


> You didn't answer any of my questions though. IRS agents, INS, ATF, they're all jobs that require money. Where would the money come from to regulate the ADA? Do taxes increase to cover it, or are service dog owners required to pay? If the latter, that rules out many people from being able to have a service dog. With the former, do you really expect that to be approved? I really don't think its comparable to IRS, INS, ATF etc. The disabled are the minority and there is no public safety etc issues involved.


Where do you want it to come from? Still not my point. Make it part of the government, another agency or department, which would then make it comparable to the IRS, INS, ATF or any other government funded function.

All I am saying is the circle has not been completed...the ADA has defined and regulated, but failed to enforce.

....and so we don't get wrapped around the axle with the concept of enforcement...as applied here, would simply be acting upon in an official capacity.

Do you see my point or are you stuck on $$?


----------



## Lin (Jul 3, 2007)

ILGHAUS said:


> I believe there needs to be something done to weed out the fakers but exactly what is that? Before any such undertaking really even begins, I really think there needs to be a large push to educate, to educate on what a proper SD is and to educate on the amount of training that is in truth needed for a team. Any *facility* that advertises SD training need to be under strict rules on what is acceptable and what is not. There should be harsh enforced penalities for those that send unacceptable dogs out to work with PWDs. There should be harsh enforced penalities for those people who lie in order to fly their dog for free or to be able to take Mopsy out shopping or to dinner with them.


:thumbup:



W.Oliver said:


> Where do you want it to come from? Still not my point. Make it part of the government, another agency or department, which would then make it comparable to the IRS, INS, ATF or any other government funded function.
> 
> All I am saying is the circle has not been completed...the ADA has defined and regulated, but failed to enforce.
> 
> ...


I guess you could say I'm stuck on $$. The point is, you can't just say there should be something without explaining HOW that would actually be put into work. Yes, there SHOULD be something done. But, what?! As ILGHAUS pointed out, these are not new questions. These are the same ones that get asked every single time someone suggests some sort of federal registry. As a service dog user I definitely think something should be done to weed out the fakers. But also, as a service dog user, I don't want to see the rights of the PWDs diminish. 

I constantly use Canada as an example. Because I have a friend in Canada with a service dog. And up there the laws are different, service dogs are required to come from federally recognized training organizations and carrying certification at all times for public access. Weeds out fakers, yes. But also weeds out many people who now don't have the option of a service dog. What about the people who can't afford a service dog from a training organization, or would rather train their own dog than spend years on a waiting list? Yes, years. What about the people who already have a dog and want to get a SD but no organizations are willing to place a SD in a home with a pet dog? What about the people who aren't willing to return a SD to the organization upon retirement? I feel like I'm beating a dead horse, I say the exact same thing constantly in threads here. For many of the reasons above, I will only ever have owner trained service dogs. And thats pretty expensive itself to take the dog through training. I know I've spent a couple thousand on Tessa's training. That may not seem like a lot to someone who is into dog sports, but for someone who is disabled its a LOT. 

You just can't have everything. Ying and yang, if you start messing around with stricter guidelines its going to hurt someone somewhere. Either taking away rights, or taking away options. Much of it comes down to money. If there was an easy solution to the problem someone would have found it by now.


----------

