[NAGDU] Is it really a problem?

Buddy Brannan buddy at brannan.name
Mon Feb 13 13:38:15 UTC 2017


While I agree with you on ADI's role in this, the problem, while one I haven't run into a lot here, seems to be very real in other parts of the country. I wouldn't call it an epidemic or anything like that. On the other hand, does it not help us to address the problem before it *does* get out of hand in a prouctive way? Would it have been helpful to have told this lawmaker that the concerns that were expressed to him aren't real? Or, rather, does it not seem prudent to meet him where he is and take him to a place we want him to be? 

--
Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV - Erie, PA
Phone: 814-860-3194 
Mobile: 814-431-0962
Email: buddy at brannan.name




> On Feb 13, 2017, at 7:56 AM, NAGDU President via NAGDU <nagdu at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Buddy,
> 
> 	My only issue with this message is that it states the problem is a
> very real problem. I am of the opinion that it is not as big a problem as
> the media makes it out to be. This is not to say that there have not been
> issues with people passing their pets off as service dogs to take advantage
> of the laws that protect our right to be accompanied by a service dog; only
> that it is not the huge problem the media makes it. In fact, I believe the
> media is taking the lead from Asistance Dogs International which is
> manipulating the media into a false belief that something needs to be done
> and they are the ones to do it. I think it is worthwhile for everyone to
> take another read of an article that appeared in the May 2016 Braille
> Monitor entitled, "Fake Service Dogs: Problem or propaganda". 
> 
> https://nfb.org/images/nfb/publications/bm/bm16/bm1605/bm160508.htm
> 
> Assistance Dogs International has been leading the charge to certify and
> register service dogs ever since the Americans with Disabilities Act was
> passed. There motives are not altruistic or selfless. If such a
> certification were to be implemented, they are positioning themselves to be
> that body and gain the benefit from it! They put themselves out to be the
> experts, creating what they self-righteously refer to as "ethical standards"
> which many companies, wanting to do the right thing, have adopted as
> policies, thinking they are, indeed, the experts. These ethical standards
> require the wearing of vests, the presentation of identification cards, and
> biennial recertifications! 
> 
> Fraternally yours,.
> 
> Marion Gwizdala, President
> National Association of Guide Dog Users Inc. (NAGDU)
> National Federation of the Blind
> (813) 626-2789
> President at NAGDU.ORG
> 
> 
> The National Federation of the Blind knows that blindness is not the
> characteristic that defines you or your future. Every day we raise
> expectations because low expectations create barriers between blind  people
> and our dreams. You can live the life you want! Blindness is not what holds
> you back.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NAGDU [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Buddy Brannan via
> NAGDU
> Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2017 7:45 AM
> To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
> Cc: Buddy Brannan
> Subject: Re: [NAGDU] Service dog license
> 
> Howdy,
> 
> There's some legislation being drafted to addres this problem in my state.
> It is not yet drafted, and fortunately, the lawmaker who is proposing is
> taking our input seriously. Jameyanne, here's what I wrote to his office,
> which might clarify why I have issues with asking for service dog ID and
> maybe why requiring such is not a practical solution.
> 
> BTW Wayne, there isn't anything *illegal* about a guide dog ID, or the
> issuing of one. 
> 
> Hello:
> 
> I've gotten word that legislation is proposed that would punish those who
> fraudulently represent a dog as a service dog when it is not one. Thank you,
> first of all, for addressing this very real problem. It is a problem, and
> the problem does need to be addressed. However, it needs to be addressed in
> a way that will not infringe upon the rights of people with disabilities who
> legitimately use service dogs. As, first, a guide dog user myself, and
> second, as someone who has recently trained his own guide dog, I have some
> thoughts and concerns I'd like to share with you.
> 
> While well intentioned, I think you may be coming at this issue from the
> wrong angle. I'd like to establish where the rights and responsibilities lie
> in this discussion. The right to be accompanied by a trained service animal
> rightly belongs to the person with a disability. That means that it is the
> person, not the dog, who is perpetrating fraud in some fashion, either by
> falsely representing that s/he has a disability, by falsely representing
> that the dog has been trained to mitigate that disability, or both. The most
> likely case is "both". 
> 
> Having said that, however, since the ADA stipulates that one cannot be
> questioned as to the nature of his or her disability, there has to be a
> different test. A certification of the service dog? For one thing, there
> isn't one, and creating one would present its own set of problems. (If you
> want to know what those are, I'd be happy to discuss them, but that's beyond
> the scope of this discussion, and the problems are many.) Anyway,
> certification or ID. ID's are a dime a dozen. Anyone can, and does, get
> them. The people perpetrating the fraud are most likely to have ID's and are
> eager to show them. How, therefore, do you tell the real ones from the fake
> ones? Certainly the two allowable screening questions in the ADA
> implementing regulations help: most fakers will be able to answer the first
> and will either struggle with the second or, at best, won't be able to give
> a reasonable answer to it.
> 
> The standard, therefore, is and must be behavior. Under that standard, any
> dog, whether service dog or not, can be removed from a place of business if
> it is not housebroken, and especially if it isn't under the handler's
> control or is aggressive or disruptive. This has always been the case.
> However, whether through fear or ignorance, business owners are reluctant to
> exercise their rights to have such disruptive animals removed for their
> disruptive behavior. Whether a dog is a legitimate service dog or not, there
> is no place in a public setting for it if it is disruptive or, especially,
> if it's aggressive. 
> 
> I'd suggest that the laws, first, address behavior of aggressive or
> disruptive animals. Second, address the fraudulent misrepresentation of
> disability. If, indeed, someone does not have a disability as defined in the
> ADA, and if their dog is not adequately trained (something that could easily
> be proved if it were aggressive or disruptive), that's where your
> legislation could step in. Absolutely, give the false representation of
> disability or of trained status real teeth. As outlined, it seems to me,
> however, that your proposal would be unenforceable. The litmus test must be,
> not the presence of an ID or certification, but rather the behavior of the
> dog in question. 
> 
> As I mentioned, I have trained my own guide dog. She's my fourth guide,
> though only my first that I've trained myself. I started her out as a puppy,
> and I would say that she's as well trained as any guide dog that came from a
> training program. How would your proposed legislation affect me? I have no
> ID for my dog, nor do I believe that I should have to prove that I, a
> law-abiding citizen, am not breaking the law with my dog, who is very
> well-behaved and always under my control. Laws should certainly be available
> to penalize the guilty, but the innocent should not be made to bear the
> burden of the behavior of the guilty. Conversely, I have met program-trained
> dogs who have ID's issued by their schools, who are aggressive, disruptive,
> and whose training has not been maintained by their handlers. Those dogs
> would get a pass, and they absolutely should not. I can't stress this
> enough: behavior, not ID, should be the litmus test here. 
> 
> I'd be happy to discuss this with you further if you want or need. 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> --
> Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV - Erie, PA
> Phone: 814-860-3194 
> Mobile: 814-431-0962
> Email: buddy at brannan.name
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Feb 12, 2017, at 1:46 AM, Wayne And Harley via NAGDU <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Ms. Jameyanne,Rathe than showing an illegal ID for Mopsy, respectfully,
> would it not make a bit more sense to carry and distribute business sized
> cards with the ADA Service Animal provisions printed on them? Because, yes
> ma'am, you are indeed negatively impacting Service Animal teams that follow
> you by creating an expectation in the gatekeeper to see an ID from every
> Service Animal team that comes along after you.
>> 
>> 
>> Yours, Very Sincerely And Respectfully,
>> 
>> Wayne M. Scace 
>> 
>> -------- Original message --------
>> From: Jameyanne Fuller via NAGDU <nagdu at nfbnet.org> 
>> Date: 2/12/2017  00:22  (GMT-06:00) 
>> To: "'NAGDU Mailing List,	the National Association of Guide Dog
> Users'" <nagdu at nfbnet.org> 
>> Cc: Jameyanne Fuller <jameyanne at gmail.com> 
>> Subject: Re: [NAGDU] Service dog license 
>> 
>> Hello all from snowy Cambridge,
>> I haven't posted on here much because law school has eaten my life (Mopsy
> is
>> loving Harvard, though), but I have been lurking. I've always been curious
>> about a service dog license law, so I'm chiming in with some thoughts.
>> The ADA limits the sorts of questions you can ask about a person's
>> disability, including why you have a service dog, and that's what a
> service
>> dog license would violate. I may have missed something else more specific
>> though. It's been a while since I read the ADA.
>> I've always been personally conflicted about a service dog license law. I
>> feel like it would discourage fakers, and the number of times I'm told by
>> business people that people have tried to fake bringing service dogs into
>> places and then the dogs have reeked havoc is really upsetting, because it
>> means the business person automatically doesn't trust me or Mopsy. 
>> Setting aside the issues with the ADA for the moment, I don't think it's
> the
>> sort of law that could be implemented in one state because it would limit
>> people's freedom of movement (we don't have to get a license to go on
>> vacation). 
>> And there's also the issue Daryl raised about being asked to show the
>> license multiple times a day, which is really upsetting. 
>> There may be a way to implement something that would limit fakers and
>> preserve our rights at the same time. Unfortunately I've been doing legal
>> research all day on another issue and my brain is kind of fried so I can't
>> come up with a creative solution at the moment, but I'll continue to think
>> about it.
>> I do have to say that I carry Mopsy's seeing eye ID with me everywhere,
> and
>> I have no problem showing it to someone who asks for proof that Mopsy is a
>> service dog. I know I don't have to do this, and I've even had people tell
>> me that by showing Mopsy's ID I'm hurting people with service dogs who
> don't
>> have IDs. But it's a whole lot simpler to just show the ID than fighting
>> back when I have the ID. I can't fight on every issue. I also inform them
>> that while I have an ID, not all schools give IDs, and under the ADA they
>> can't legally ask for an ID in the first place. I recognize that it may
> not
>> always be effective to give them the proof they ask for while at the same
>> time telling them they can't legally ask for it, but I've found people
> tend
>> to be much more sensitive to this after I have shown them the ID and
>> legitimized myself. They're much more willing to talk and learn.
>> So I guess my point is, it's complicated. I understand and agree with both
>> the reasons for such a law and the reasons against it. I agree that
> without
>> safeguards, a service dog license law would be a violation of our rights.
>> But at the same time, something has to be done about the fakers.
>> Stay warm!
>> Jameyanne and Mopsy
>> jameyanne at gmail.com
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: NAGDU [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Gary Steeves
> via
>> NAGDU
>> Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2017 12:54 AM
>> To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>> Cc: Gary Steeves <rainshadowmusic at shaw.ca>
>> Subject: Re: [NAGDU] Service dog license
>> 
>> Hi Daryl what province is it in
>> 
>> On February 11, 2017 9:09:40 PM PST, Daryl via NAGDU <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>> wrote:
>>> I live in Canada, and one of our provinces has enacted such a law. It's
>>> honestly been incredibly frustrating. People who live there have told
>>> me that just by going about their business with their service dogs,
>>> they are asked for identifying documents several times a day. One has
>>> even told me that she is reluctant to leave her house with her service
>>> dog because she gets asked for paperwork so frequently. They have not
>>> addressed the issue of owner trainers, or visitors to the province. For
>>> example, if I travel there on a family emergency, I can pre apply for a
>>> temporary ID card. This greatly restrict the movement of Canadian
>>> citizens, which is against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. If you
>>> are getting asked for ID when you buy alcohol or verify your ID when
>>> writing checks, it's because everybody gets ask for that information.
>>> You personally are not targeted.
>>> 
>>> On February 11, 2017 10:02:11 PM MST, Nancy VanderBrink via NAGDU
>>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>>> Dar,
>>>> Apologies, I forgot about those groups, didn't intend to.
>>>> 
>>>> I have to show ID when I go to get alcohol though...  and for things
>>>> like writing checks and verifying my identity at the airport...
>>>> 
>>>> Wouldn't something like this help with 'fakers'? 
>>>> 
>>>> I wonder if there could even be some sort of accreditation process
>>> that
>>>> you could go through if you owner  trained or had somebody help you
>>>> train your dog to a group like IAADP?
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> 
>>>>> On Feb 11, 2017, at 11:54 PM, Daryl via NAGDU <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 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
>>>>> 
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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%40outl
>> ook.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/crazymusician%40shaw.ca
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/rainshadowmusic%40shaw.c
>> a
>> 
>> -- 
>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/jameyanne%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/k9dad%40k9di.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/buddy%40brannan.name
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/blind411%40verizon.net
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/buddy%40brannan.name





More information about the NAGDU mailing list