[NAGDU] Service dog license

Sun Feb 12 18:32:37 UTC 2017

Hey folks,

Thanks for the lively but respectful discussion - I was nervous about asking that question.

Sounds like there's no good way to prove our cases in situations where we're challenged.  

If the text from Ada is put on a card, isn't it very small?  

I haven't been asked in quite a while - minus Uber's but that's a different conversation I'd wager.

Thank you all for humoring me and my questions.

Nancy & Doc, SEGD '09
Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 12, 2017, at 12:57 PM, Wayne & Harley via NAGDU <nagdu at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> *Hi Julie and Nancy,
> Julie, according to the wording in this bill, Assistance Dogs International ( ADI ) would be given the monopoly on accrediting, not just Service Animal training programmes in Illinois (there are a very few of them in Illinois, but  NONE of them are Guide Dog training programmes ), but the Service Animals themselves. This bill also enshrines ADI's standards as THE standards to be followed. This also must to be pointed out, Owner Trainers are anathema to ADI. Due, in large part, it is suspected, because of money. Every successfully trained Owner Trained Service Animal means thousands, or tens of thousands of dollars that would not be going into the coffers of ADI accredited programmes.
> Nancy, may I point out that Guide Dog Owners are a very small, let's say minuscule, minority within the Service Animal Owning community. Heck, programme trained dogs for Service modalities other than Guiding are also a small fraction of the Service Animal Owner Community. The VAST majority of Service Animal Owners choose to Owner Train, privately train in tandem with Owner Training, or privately train. There are quite a few reasons for that. The biggest reason, from what I've learned from speaking with Service Animal Owners whose dogs perform non-guide Service work,  is that the non-guide dog programmes don't, and can't cover all the permutations of disability that exist, they have long, long waiting lists, or they charge thousands, or tens of thousands of dollars for a dog.
> 
> CAVEAT: Your Mileage May Vary,
> 
> 
> Wayne And Harley
> 
> *On 2/12/2017 5:23 AM, Julie Johnson via NAGDU wrote:
>> Nancy,
>> 
>> I appreciate your sincerity in wanting to address the situation. I am also glad you are open to learning why this might or might not work.
>> 
>> First, who decides what programs are accredited?  The programs themselves? The government?  Some other organization?  Who pays for this?   There is no single accreditation entity for all guide, service, hearing, diabetic, psychiatric dog programs.  Would some of the programs be accredited and other types of disabilities would be out of luck?
>> 
>> Currently the laws in the U.S. state that a dog has to be individually trained to mitigate the handler's disability.  There is no mention of a program needing to do this training or the person needing to prove their disability.  In order to have an ID of some variety, you would not only need to list the dog, but the person would need to prove their disability.  As blind people we don't really find this to be a problem, but what about other disabilities.  I'm thinking those with a strong social bias like dogs who do psychiatric tasks or seizure alert.   Who decides what is a disability? Currently people self identify and in the case of a legal situation a judge decides if a disability is in fact present.  If we had to have ID's there is going to be a seriously long line for disability confirmations.  I have had it proposed that doctor's be the contact to determine disability and I think this is a very bad idea.  Doctor's understand the medical aspects of disease and disability, but they do not understand the legal side of the issue, which is what is needed in this situation.
>> 
>> Then we get to the people who do not go through a program for their dogs. When it comes to programs for guide dogs, blind people have it made.  We have a wide selection of very low cost options with not too bad waiting lists.  That is not the case with every other type of disability.  The number of programs compared to the number of applicants is low, making for long waiting lists. Frequently these programs charge large sums of money, in the thousands or tens of thousands, for their dogs.  This means there are a large number of people with disabilities that choose to owner train or have a dog privately trained faster and for less money.  This also allows for a greater flexibility in what training is provided, making the owner trained dog much more customized to the owners particular disability needs. So who accredits these folks?
>> 
>> Then we get to the part that irritates me the most about the ID issue, well one of the parts anyway.  Why would the entire program be accredited instead of each individual team?  That feels like we are giving the program a free pass to slide through some dogs who are a little rough around the edges. We've all encountered program dogs who were not pleasant and the handler couldn't or wouldn't do something to address the situation.  If we are going to do this ID thing, then folks who owner train and those who have program dogs must be treated equally.
>> 
>> I also agree wholeheartedly with Daryl about what she said about when a driver's license is shown vs. when this dog ID would be shown.  A Driver's License is never a condition of access.  You aren't asked for it when entering the grocery store, when you get in the car or when you sit down in the restaurant.  It can be used as proof of age or residency, but never as a condition of public access.  Requiring a different standard of
>> community access for disabled people is highly discriminatory.
>> 
>> And yes, I owner train my dogs or in the case of the last one, had her privately trained.  I'm very happy with that choice and don't see myself changing anytime soon.
>> 
>> 
>> Julie
>> Courage to Dare: A Blind Woman's Quest to Train her Own Guide Dog
>> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00QXZSMOC
>> -----Original Message----- From: Daryl via NAGDU
>> Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2017 10:53 PM
>> To: NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users
>> Cc: Daryl
>> Subject: Re: [NAGDU] Service dog license
>> 
>> I can't speak for anybody else, but as for myself I have big problems with such an idea. It makes people with disabilities who use service dogs targets for anybody who wants to see identifiable information. Yes, to drive a car you need a license. But you are only requested for that license if you are driving erratically. Also, if a person chooses to owner train their dog, or if they're disability makes owner training the only viable option, they are at a distinct disadvantage.
>> 
>>> On February 11, 2017 9:46:58 PM MST, Nancy VanderBrink via NAGDU <nagdu at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>> Hey guys,
>>> So I'm going to make you mad at me but I don't understandsomething...
>>> 
>>> If you have to get a license to drive why not one for a guide dog.
>>> I know that people who were glasses are supposed to have their picture
>>> taken with her glasses on and I guess I wonder why he could not be
>>> something like that but for us with our dog?
>>> 
>>> I know figuring out how to come up with some sort of database of
>>> accredited schools and then how to figure out how to make sure these
>>> places are accredited would be a process but I guess I kind of wonder
>>> if having it on something that already exists and is already official
>>> wouldn't that make it easier?
>>> 
>>> I mean, if I have to go get a new ID when I move wouldn't it make sense
>>> to just go get a new ID with your picture of you and your partner in it
>>> that way?
>>> 
>>> I'm not trying to ignite a fire storm or anything I just don't really
>>> understand why this is such a big deal. I understand the need for
>>> privacy but I'm not even really saying that you have to say on there
>>> why you have the dog I guess I really just kind of would think that if
>>> they could get accredited schools in a database and then the DMV could
>>> choose the school you went to given on some sort  of letter or
>>> something, why is that bad???
>>> 
>>> Just trying to understand.
>>> 
>>> vandyvanderbrink at outlook.com
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/crazymusician%40shaw.ca 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> _______________________________________________
> 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/vandyvanderbrink%40outlook.com