I have 2 friends who have gotten their doctors to give them the paperwork for their pets to be called "comfort animals " and to fly with them in the cabin. Both are small dogs and can fit in a carry-on bag designed for that, but neither friend actually has a need - just a preference not to put the dog in cargo. The system is ripe for abuse, for sure. Comfort animals are not service animals so require none of the extraordinary training.
https://adata.org/publication/service-animals-booklet
Why are people with ESAs allowed to run roughshod over other peopleâs rights? My understanding is that no entity is legally compelled to allow them (vs. true service animals).
ETA:
From my link above:
BUT:
I was just at a business conference and while I was at the hotel waiting for a coffee a man came up with his âserviceâ dog. The dog was whimpering, couldnât sit still, and peed on the floor. I told them man I thought he was the one who should be wearing the vest so he could comfort the dog.
Really people, do our pets have to come everywhere with us? Itâs getting out of control.
I canât find anything that says that restaurants or any other public or private entities must accept ESAs. Other than transportation, it doesnât seem that anyone is mandated to accept them. But perhaps people get away with insisting they are allowed because people donât know the laws?
ETA: Okay, I found something. Apparently it varies by state:
As a poor graduate student DD was tempted to abuse the system with her little dog but didnât. The airlines bring it on themselves. They charged her anywhere from $75-125 each way so that she could put the dog in the carrier, count it as one of her carryon bags and put him under the seat in front of her. They did nothing for the dog. Sometimes the dogâs fee was higher than her fare. BTW he is a great little traveler, low alergan, and most people donât know he is there.
My children raise puppies (one at a time) who will become guide dogs for a the visually disabled. They are bred by an organization that has been doing this for close to eighty years and employs a geneticist to avoid problems with health and temperament. Thereâs is a lot of oversight and training for us as we raise them.
The dogs are carefully and continually evaluated from the time they are born and an issue like aggression will disqualify them from the program. They cannot bark or they wonât make the cut. They will not pee in the floor because they are taught from their earliest days to go on command. A working dog will never sit in a lap.
They go through thorough medical testing and months of trainingâafter they reach maturity and we give them upâwith professionals at their facility before being matched with a visually impaired person, who will then be trained for a month or so together with their dog.
So much is invested in these dogs because people rely on them to get to work to support themselves and go shopping to feed themselves and take care of other life necessities.
It is very disheartening to hear stories like this because it detracts from true service dogs who are responsible for the life and safety of a person who might be blind, diabetic, have a seizure disorder, etc.
It took years of advocacy for guide dogs to be able to travel by plane. Now Iâm afraid even the use of those dogs will be questioned.
While we are raising and socializing a puppy, we abide by rules about where we are allowed to bring them and are instructed to be sensitive to the feelings of the people around us. If it is appropriate to the situation, I or my kids will introduce the puppy and let people know why we are there, letting them know whatâs going on and giving them a chance to tell us to leave if they are uncomfortable or have allergy issues. These outings and the familiarity they bring to the puppy are very important but the needs of people come first.
âThe airlines bring it on themselves. They charged her anywhere from $75-125 each way so that she could put the dog in the carrier, count it as one of her carryon bags and put him under the seat in front of her.â
Honestly, how are the airlines âbringing it on themselvesâ? Bringing a pet onboard does have costs associated with it. These are for profit companies and they have a right to charge a fee. Besides, they probably want to charge a feee to not make it too prevalent. Having pets on board is another hassle and liability for the airlines.
An animal, which fits in a small crate and goes under the front seat, does not incur any additional costs for the airline. Small children who do not pay for a seat, overweight passengers who donât fit into one seat, special snowflakes with the need to be wheel chaired onto the aircraft but magically get cured at 26,000 feet and then walk off without issue, those who do not understand the concept of âonly TWO carryon itemsâ - those passengers increase the airlines costs.
The ADA stuff has been taken to the out limits of absurdity. We know, we have rental units.
My SIL has a tiny little dog that has an ESA vest for traveling. Supposedly, the dog helps their son with something. Son doesnât need any help beyond the âtherapyâ that any loving pet provides! They got the vest so that no one would question them. âJust get one onlineâ, says the H.
Oyyyyyyyy. Do I answer, âsorry, Iâm just not the cheating typeâ. Really it gets back to having no problems with cheating. Their little dog is no problem and he even wears a diaper. Heâs also a no-shed breed. But STILL. He sits on their lap the whole time and they save $100 each way. Cheating.
Iâm amazed at the people I know who cheat this way- people who would never do most other unethical things! They simply see it as a way around paying the fee! Iâve paid the $100 or so to fly cats- in a carrier under the seat. Itâs expensive and annoying, but thatâs the way it goes!
I have a 50 lb dog, and there is no way I would cram her under my feet for an airplane trip! (If I bought an extra seat next to me, it would be feasible. And in fact, knowing her, if I put up the armrest she would love to curl up on the seat with her head on my lap. 
There is no way that any dog I have ever owned would randomly attack a person sitting next to us. They claim that this dog is a lab/pointer mix. Neither of those breeds are inclined to be aggressive, unless they are poorly raised. Iâm wondering if this dog is a random rescue with a lousy upbringing and no training. Certainly, he would wash out of any decent program that trains dogs for veterans on ground of temperament. On the other handâŠ
I donât think that dog was at all prepared to be in extremely close confinement with a lot of unknown people in such an alien environment. The smells alone would be overwhelming. Under normal circumstances he may be fine. He may have been extremely nervous and frightened, and perceived this stranger in their space as a threat.
Unless he was trained to endure such conditions, it was extremely unfair and unwise to bring the dog onto that plane.
And obviously unfair to the man who was attacked! A sad story on all fronts.
A friend of mineâs D uses the fake ESA thing to bring her Yorkie on planes. I do not find it amusing.
Iâm kind of surprised that they let the dog go on another flight kenneled or not! I would have thought animal control would have had to keep him until they double checked shot records and checked the dogs hisory for other attacks.
It sounds like that dog caused âserious bodily injuryâ to me, if it happened in TX that dog would have been detained and likely put down.
I donât get how local authorities could âclearâ a dog like that in a few hours.
I hope the injured party sues the pants of the owner of the supposed âemotional support animalâ.
It doesnât sound as if the dog owner has much to sue for.
@Consolation I havenât read anything about the dog ownerâs assests the only thing Iâve read is he is a combat vetern and he obviously had the means to fly across country. Perhaps he could also sue the person that certified this dog to be a ESA if such a certification exists?
I read this first hand account on a blog and the writer claimed the dog was more like a pit bull then lab.
<<<
As a poor graduate student DD was tempted to abuse the system with her little dog but didnât. The airlines bring it on themselves. They charged her anywhere from $75-125 each way so that s
[QUOTE=""]
[/QUOTE]
Althought your DD didnât do this, youâre right that this is why so many are abusing the system. People who travel a lot or who donât have a lot of money, will abuse the system so that they donât have to pay the airline, they donât have to pay extra to the hotel, and they donât have to pay to board their pet.
Technically speaking, if the law forces airlines to allow pets, one should sue the law itself. Or are the pets to be kept in a kennel at all times? I think whoever issued the ESA letter/vest is more responsible than the airline.
âOK, someone remind me of what the rules are if you are a passenger nearby with a dog allergy? Whose ârightsâ supersede? And do you have to prove your allergy somehow or just state it? Because I surely donât want to be near a dog, especially a 50 lb. one with questionable behavior.â
I read a couple weeks ago a lady complained about allergies and a âtherapyâ dog seated near her. she was marched off the planeâŠso the therapy dog/passenger trumped the lady who needed to be free and clear of dogs/allergies.(it may have been a therapy cat actuallyâŠeither way)
and when this passenger suesâŠthey need to not only sue the airline but the dog owner. if you just sue the people with deep pockets you are not helping to correct the problem for future passengers who may think twice before getting the note that they need a âtherapyâ dog. blind people need dogs yes 100% but this entire situation not just on planes is getting ridiculous.
If the airline is required by law to accept ESA animals, how can they be sued?
I hope the victim sues everyone, the pet owner, the airline, the government, the ESA certificate issuer, even ESA vest sales people if selling without verifying. That will provide an opportunity to have a public debate on the issue.
^^^ And we wonder why things are so out of control with litigation in this country.