[nagdu] acceptance of owner training was Arkansas School Refuses To Hold Leash For 7-Year-Old Boy's Service Dog

Tami Jarvis tami at poodlemutt.com
Mon Jul 14 21:57:34 UTC 2014


Well, the ones you mention exist. But in my travels in my urban days, I 
ran across mostly owner-trained non-guide service dogs who were 
top-notch in task training and public behavior. The owners/handlers were 
very well-informed about the laws, rights and responsibilities and the 
importance of public etiquette. If they bothered with patches, it was in 
the hope (generally vain) of keeping folks from mauling their dogs all 
the time. They knew dang well patches and vests have nothing to do with 
public access and were all about educating on that score as they went, 
in addition to all the extra self-advocacy owner-trainers have to do. 
Most, but not all, refused to get ID cards just to avoid the hassles, 
again preferring to educate against the tide of all those program dog 
users who insist on showing their IDs and miseducating like the wind. 
There were also program reps who regularly went around miseducating 
about IDs and access rights, so that caused a lot of resentment about 
having to even think about whether to get one or create one just to save 
time and hassle. When the reps had been, a simple shopping trip of two 
or three stops could extend into another day! Standing on one's 
principles and refusing to have to do with an ID was putting your money 
-- and a ridiculous amount of your time -- where your mouth is. Crazy.

I don't go around bothering people about their dogs and I especially do 
not ask about their disabilities! But if one treats others with respect, 
they will discuss those common interests of dog use, training, 
responsibility and the like. I have yet to run across someone with an SD 
with or without patches, OT or otherwise that was not in the legal 
definition. The people I've run across who do slap a patch on their dog 
or who just claim it to be a service dog are able-bodied and go around 
telling anyone in earshot exactly what they are doing. Their dogs are as 
likely as not to be as well-behaved as most service dogs. What is going 
on with dogs and what they are wearing that I do not hear or otherwise 
perceive, I do not know, except that they are not bothering me if I do 
not even know they are there. /lol/

There have been some questionable teams that I have heard about, so I 
don't know if they are as questionable as what I hear. In other words, 
person A has dog B that he/she claims is a service dog for a disability 
that he/she claims, but person C who is telling me all this just isn't 
so sure about either, so what do I think of that? Um... Should person A 
have dog B in the grocery store if person C isn't sure about it? Um... I 
guess if I ever meet person A with dog B and have a conversation that 
reveals any information, I will have an opionion, but I will not share 
it with person C because I think they are nosey and should stay out of 
other people's business. /lol/

I'm not saying I'm not aware that there are fakes and that some of those 
fakes cause real problems. Then again, I know full well that not all 
claimed or equipped service dogs that cause problems are fakes. Some are 
real dogs with all the best credentials having a bad day. Some are doing 
what they should which somebody thinks is a mistake. Some are just plain 
badly handled and so their training is not what it was. And so on.


On 07/14/2014 12:07 PM, Darla Rogers via nagdu wrote:
> Dear Julie,
> I'm worry a lot more about people :higher on the status of disability:
> training their dogs better than we can; hell!  Most of them just buy a
> harness and/or a patch; put a  too-long leash on it and call it done.
> <giggle>
> Now, one wonders if some of them even have a disability, but I better stop
> or Marsha will pin my ears back.
> Darla & Happy Huck
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Julie J via nagdu
> Sent: Monday, July 14, 2014 1:54 PM
> To: Danielle Antoine; NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide
> Dog Users
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] acceptance of owner training was Arkansas School
> Refuses To Hold Leash For 7-Year-Old Boy's Service Dog
> I think owner training is more accepted than it once was, but to say that it
> is "accepted" as in the same way service dogs from programs are accepted...I
> don't think so.
> The folks on this list tend to be more accepting of owner training, but even
> here there are people who think it is dangerous and the dog won't be trained
> to the same level as a progam dog.
> If you talk about owner training a guide dog as a blind person on email
> lists for other types of service dogs, you will generally meet with great
> resistance.  I think because blind people are near the bottom of the social
> status disability ladder.  So blind people couldn't possibly train their own
> guides.
> I've had blind people, who are cane users, say pretty awful things about my
> choice to owner train.  Mostly that happened in the beginning though.  I
> guess enough people have seen my dogs work, at least in my home area, that
> it's no longer an interesting topic of conversation.
> Sighted people I encounter in my day to day life couldn't care less, for the
> most part.  Mostly they see a blind person and a dog and they fabricate the
> rest of the story based on what they saw on TV.  The part about my having
> trained the dog doesn't come up very often.  Generally I don't bring it up.
> Sometimes people ask though, and I am very open about the fact that I
> trained him.  I think a lot of times they want to know where I got the dog
> because they have some knowledge or affiliation with some program or
> another.  When they find out I trained him, they are astonished that it is
> legal/possible or they want to know if it's legal.  I'm not sure what the
> immediate response of, "is that legal", says about our culture...too many
> laws?...too much restriction on our freedom?...a statement about what
> disabled people's place in society?  I don't know.
> Then we get to service dog programs...there are a couple that don't react
> like beligerant idiots about owner trained dogs, but the rest...well, I'll
> just stop there.  The short version is that most of the guide and service
> dog programs do not like the idea of owner training.
> anyway, that's my opinion based on my personal experience.  It will be
> interesting to see what other owner trainers have experienced.
> Julie
> Sent from my iPad
>> On Jul 14, 2014, at 1:24 PM, Danielle Antoine via nagdu <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
> wrote:
>> Tami,
>> I like how you dissected my points. that's what I was looking for.
>> Buddy, whether or not it was your intention you came at me like the
>> enemy! Any veteran who has worked in the service dog arena personally
>> or who has availed themselves of the many lists know that a specific
>> program does not have to be named and that owner-training is
>> recognized and acceptable. I, myself, am not in the right situation in
>> life to take it on. It is a lot less trouble for me, at this point to
>> just attend a training program for my nex guide. I was just curious
>> because I wondered what program would give license to a 7-year-old
>> child to handle and be responsible for a dog requiring an additional
>> person. Just seems sooooo unnecessary! As for me, my pup is retired
>> and living the good life of a pet dog and children and exes don't
>> count at this time. Good day, Sir.
>> Best with your owner training undertakings, Danielle Ledet and retired
>> Seeing Eye Golden girl, Eden
>>> On 7/14/14, Tami Jarvis via nagdu <nagdu at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>> Rebecca,
>>> You're right about the dog's ability to sense the seizure (or
>>> whatever medical disorder) -- it can or it can't. However, the
>>> difference between a plain old dog that happens to be able to detect
>>> seizures and a medical alert service dog is whether the dog is
>>> trained to perform a specific alerting behavior. Often the medical
>>> alert SD will perform additional actions, like getting the handler to
>>> a safe place to prepare for the seizure, laying on the handler to
>>> help prevent injury during the seizure and a few other things. The
>>> article mentioned that the dog has eliminated the need for
>>> medication, so I guess locating the medicine bottle for the handler
> wouldn't be needed.
>>> As for the rest, I just don't know. Part of it is that I am not all
>>> that well-informed about the issues when it comes to kids, service
>>> dogs and schools. I can see both sides, depending on which way I
>>> squint. I wonder if having a staffer handle the dog in this case
>>> could be considered to be the equivalent of having a staffer push a
>>> wheelchair? Or do the dog's needs for handling make it that much more
> demanding?
> _______________________________________________
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nagdu:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/djrogers0628%40gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nagdu:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/tami%40poodlemutt.com

More information about the NAGDU mailing list