No one on this forum is suggesting that we use our animals as service dogs if we are not disabled. The fact is that the law is quite broad on purpose and allows anyone with a condition which prevents them from living their daily lives in a completely normal way to be considered disabled for the purposes of having a trained service animal who is allowed access to all public places.
I beg to differ Kim, i think that is exactly what you have done. I do not believe the law is intentionally that broad.I just do not think they thought people would abuse it in such a way that everything from a migraine to ADD would be considered a disability that altered the every day life of some people. If that were the case then almost everyone could claim a disability. I would find it almost laughable if it were not so sad.
I do not want to take my dog where he is not welcome, I think it would be more upsetting to him if he heard me arguing with every store owner that tried to disagree with me, he is pretty sensitive to my moods and I dont think it would make for an emotionally stable animal. I would just as soon leave him home than upset him, myself and everyone else.
I knew that when I decided to get a dog that I was ready and willing to spend more time at home. Now I have 2, if I cant fly (btw, i get panic attacks on planes, still not enough of a disability for me) with both of them in the cabin with me, I will find another mode of transportation or I will get a petsitter.
Quote//To suggest otherwise is not just expressing an opinion but impugning the integrity of the members here and this is distressing.
I would be truly interested to know how many members here can actually claim a disability. You can try to turn this around to make it sound like I am attacking the members here, I certainly am not, but it does baffle me how many of them suddenly need a service dog or have had the idea of needing one suggested to them.THAT distresses me. |