[nagdu] Legislative Consideration

Sun Jan 17 22:45:27 UTC 2010

Julie,
    I agree with your point of being required to "perform" for someone. The 
guidance from the DOJ is very clear that one cannot be required to 
demonstrate the task a service animal performs. My concern expressed in my 
message was of those fraudulent animals whose owners allow them to sit in 
the shopiing carts or keep them in a bag or purse. I am of the opinion that 
the proper place for a dog is on the floor, not in a sopping cart or bag of 
some sort. The "proof" to which I refer is that allowed by law; the credible 
assertions that

1. The person is disabled;
2. The animal is a service animal;
3. a reasonable description of how the animal was trained; and
4. A reasonable description of what service the animal performs.

    I would much rather educate the public about these assessment measures 
than get a law passed; however, I believe there are many who would still try 
to get one over on them. I like that we are discussing this issue, since it 
helps us determine if we would get support from our legislators and allows 
us to hear what some of the objections might be that we would need to 
overcome while advocating for such a measure.

fraternally yours,
Marion

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Julie J" <julielj at windstream.net>
To: "NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users" 
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 11:23 AM
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Legislative Consideration

> Not necessarily.  I don't think that just because a person chooses to use 
> a very small service dog negates the possibility of it being a legitimate 
> service dog.  Examples might include hearing alert dogs and seizure alert 
> dogs.
>
> Also I absolutely do not like the idea of having to perform some sort of 
> circus act to "prove" that my dog is indeed a service dog to gain access 
> someplace.   It leaves too much interpretation up to the individual's 
> judgment.  It also hinges on the necessity of the service of the dog at 
> that exact moment.  How is that going to work for someone who uses a 
> service dog to alert to a life threatening medical condition?  Would the 
> person have to have a seizure, diabetic lapse of consciousness or loose 
> the ability to breathe from an allergic reaction in order to "prove" that 
> their dog does indeed perform a service?
>
> And of course all service dogs have moments of confusion or 
> miscommunications with the handler.  What happens when one of these occurs 
> when trying to prove the legitimacy of the service dog?  I know myself and 
> how frustrated and annoyed I would be at having to perform for someone 
> like this.  Frustrated and annoyed don't bode well for me having a good 
> moment in communicating with my dog.
>
> I was thinking about this whole thing this morning with people using 
> fraudulent service dogs and claiming disability when that is questionable. 
> In thinking back about all the news articles I have read over the past few 
> years, the one thing they all have in common is the lack of appropriate 
> behavior.  I cannot think of a single news story of someone claiming they 
> have a disability that is in question and need their dog to do xyz and the 
> dog being beautifully behaved.  I think the  issue is bad behavior.  I 
> would really like to see a law that address penalties for a person whose 
> dog causes harm to another person or damage to property.  I think that 
> would be a greater deterrent to using a service dog fraudulently or an 
> unsuitable dog.
>
> Training a service dog is an incredible lot of work.   If there were 
> penalties for dangerous or unsuitable behaviors from these dogs, I think 
> the result would be two fold.  It would deter people from training their 
> own who haven't the knowledge or skills to be successful.  And it would 
> require the programs to better screen and place dogs.    The end result 
> would be better behaved dogs and isn't that what we really want?
>
> JMHO
> Julie
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Marion & Martin" <swampfox1833 at verizon.net>
> To: "NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users" 
> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 8:49 AM
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Legislative Consideration
>
>
>> Julie,
>>    Though it is incumbant upon a person claiming protection under the ADA 
>> to show that they are a "qualified person with a disability" should 
>> litigation result, I believe it is less difficult to prove whether a 
>> service animal has been trained to perform tasks that mitigate a person's 
>> disability. The person, for instance we sw in a grocery store with her 
>> pocket dog in the cart or the one with the dog in her purse at WalMart, 
>> are examples of individuals abusing the provisions. I agree with Anne 
>> that the key is education; at the same time, such educational efforts can 
>> be enhanced by legal penalties.
>>
>> Fraternally yours,
>> Marion
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Julie J" <julielj at windstream.net>
>> To: "NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users" 
>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>> Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 3:05 PM
>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Legislative Consideration
>>
>>
>>> Who decides who is disabled and who isn't?
>>>
>>> Because right now that can only be done through court proceedings.  I 
>>> think the sort of law you are proposing will put a lot of strain on law 
>>> enforcement officers to make decisions of who is disabled and who isn't. 
>>> Unless I am missing some piece of the puzzle?
>>>
>>> Could you give a fictional example and how your proposed law would work?
>>> Julie
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nagdu mailing list
>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>>> nagdu:
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/swampfox1833%40verizon.net
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nagdu mailing list
>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>> nagdu:
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/julielj%40windstream.net
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nagdu:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/swampfox1833%40verizon.net 