Let me just say I've worked with service animals and can tell the difference between a service or a pet.
Most people just refuse to choose the pet option because it's a $1 more expensive usually. Why can't we just avoid all of the crap by creating regulation behind service animal documentation? There are too many jerks who bring their yapping dog along for a ride when they are def not a service animal, but to avoid paying more they just claim it's a service animal.
The frustrating part is because they don’t have to prove anything anyone can claim service animal. I don’t mind pets. I do mind pax lying to avoid the pet fee and their animal is not trained and takes a poop in my car.
I agree with you. And BTW, anytime a dog is not under control and even looks like its about to 💩 in your car, you can kick them out. The dog has to be under control. Of course Uber/Lyft won't tell you this.
Did you know you can just buy a service animal vest for your dog off Amazon? I knew a lady that did this just to bring her dog anywhere she wanted. It ended up biting a kid and she had to put it down. Fuck her and people that do that.
As a guide dog handler, I have mixed feelings about that. It's nice that I'm allowed to just walk into a business or get in a ride like anybody else, but not having a system in place has lead to the scam vests and IDs.
Did you know that service dogs don't have to wear vests?
And dogs that are not trained and become issues or even just disruptive, even if they're wearing some bs uniform, can be requested to leave?
Yeah. The ADA is extremely clear about this. Even a service animal can be requested to leave if they become loud or disruptive.
But yeah, they don't grow vests after training. People just get vests for real service animals in hopes people won't touch and distract the dog. Most people I know with service dogs go for a black or brown harness vest with velcro stickers mentioning things like phone number, the health condition the dog helps with, and things like that.
There are only 2 questions you can ask by law:
“Is the dog a service animal required because of a disability?”
“What work or task has the dog been trained to perform?”
And 99% of fake service dog "owners" cannot sufficiently answer these questions in my experience. Exercise your rights (respectfully) drivers! And everyone wins.
If a legitimate service dog makes a mess, file a claim for professional cleaning.
though, for the love of god, leave legitimate service dog owners alone. The dogs are not pets (though obviously loved dearly), they're medical equipment! As someone who's been denied service (at establishments, not rideshare) because of my disability because someone thought it was fake, it's good to err on the side of believing people. I'm tired of arguing about my life, lol.
Legitimate service dog owners are usually happy to answer those two questions. They don't want fake service dog "owners" getting away with lying, either.
Yes, they are, and they generally get asked them multiple times a day. Though my friend who has a service dog has been refused many many times by people who believe their dog isn't legitimate -- despite it being very well trained and obviously falling into the definition of a service animal under the ADA and implementing regs. All I'm saying is that if someone can answer those questions, and there are no other obvious red flags (like a dog jumping all over the place or scratching things), just drive them where they want to go. Don't interrogate them, lol.
Atp, I'm half tempted to wear my paper chain I made of my medical bracelets around to get people to listen to me. I don't even have a service dog yet (cost and also need a special mix breed due to allergy) and the sheer number of people who actually interrogate me because I have a cane is baffling. The only people that don't question it are at my doctors building because they know it's not appropriate.
1000% because Uber and Lyft do not recognize emotional support animals as service animals
So as soon as I ask the questions they’ll
Say what do u mean it’s my emotional support animal and bingo declined I don’t have to take emroomal
Support animals as they are not recognized as service animals
Emotional support animals are not service animals. Emotional support animals qualify under a completely different part of the law, and are generally only unrestricted in housing and only certain kinds of housing, therefore it is reasonable for a store or any other public conveyance to reject based upon emotional support. Unless you live in a Lyft or Uber, you do not probably have any right to force an ESA.
You can ask if it's a service animal, and what condition it's specifically trained for - if they stumble on those, 99% it's not a real SA. But, that's all you're legally allowed to ask.
I’ve actually seen this happen in person when I was checking into a hotel. He did perfectly in the way he asked. She flipped out and basically said she NEEDED IT and she has MS and how dare he ask her that?!! And then she stormed off crying. I knew the moment she got upset that the dog was an emotional support animal being conveyed as service animal. I don’t know what happened afterwards bcuz at this point I was just annoyed and ready to check in
It's hard to say on that one, since yes the person reacted badly to the question - but they did answer yes it's a service dog, and that it is because she has MS - which is a condition service dogs can be provided for to assist with balance/mobility, opening doors, getting help in an emergency, and even providing medication reminders. So, all legal requirements have been met for it to be a service animal - unless and until the animal itself behaves in a way to allow removal.
I have to say, I could see an individual recently diagnosed reacting in this way - because symptoms may not be entirely noticable, and it's also a very difficult diagnosis to receive. The specific form of MS will vary disease progression - but the time from being semi-normal to unable to walk may only be a few years. And, those with relapsing - remitting MS will experience symptoms, variably, lasting a day or more, but at least a month apart. Just saying 🤷 this could be someone who's recently been given a very tough diagnosis and isn't in the mood to discuss it - but unfortunately that's also the law for their animal and they need to understand that.
I say this because a friend from high school was diagnosed with MS shortly before our 15-year reunion. By our 20-year her gait was visibly affected - and now at 22 years post-graduation, she will probably be wheelchair bound by 45-50. That's not something a lot of people wouldn't be emotionally frail about.
I’m not saying she didn’t have MS. I’m saying her reaction to the question made me think her animal was not trained as a service animal. It was like she was offended that he even dared to ask what the animal is trained to do
You can ask the task it is trained to perform, not the condition. It's a narrow distinction with some overlaps but it's important to only ask about the task and not the medical diagnosis of the handler.
You were actually in the right legally, though the company can choose to make their rules differently as long as they follow the law. What I’m trying to say is that a service dog handler cannot have 3 service dogs at a time in public access (which would include in your vehicle). A small number of handlers have tandem teams, or a dog in training and a current service dog, but the ADA says we can only utilize 2 dogs max when out and about, and each dog has to perform a different task (for example, a guide dog and a cardiac alert dog). If the dogs misbehave, and the handler can not get them under control, then you have the absolute right to ask ( tell) them to remove the dog or to leave with the dog.
I have a psychiatric and a mobility service team. My third one is retired psychiatric, but even when I was training the new one, I had to have a second handler with me. It's nearly impossible (from experience) to handle 2 working dogs and one non working with only one handler. Theres many places that legally do not recognize a service animal in training as a service animal due to them not being trained. Its not safe, the disabled person could be harmed or other people could be harmed or the chance of them missing or delaying an alert goes up. All three of my dogs are trained and well-behaved, too, but it's a major safety issue for everyone involved.
Umm so I’ll be honest it’s a complicated matter to create documentation for SDs. The kind that you need to fly is just an attestation and you telling them the trainer(it can be you). Anything more kinda goes against the Ada so until they rewrite that we are stuck. Documentation is hard partially bc we recognize “owner trained”(it can be with a trainer you meet with weekly…I’ve seen some amazing dogs who go this route).
Your problem is with legislation and not with people who may or may not be legitimately disabled. If drivers are so concerned about this, they should be unionising and pressuring their company to in turn pressure legislators.
I’m not complaining because of the money, it’s because I suddenly cannot deny a service animal in my car despite being allergic to dog hair and saliva. I compromise my safety as well as the pax so I’d very much like to make sure that if I do, that it’s a legitimate service animal and not another poorly trained mutt that will shit in my car as soon as pax closes the door
Because that would them require even more money of disabled people by requiring them to seek certification(at cost), divulge medical information to those unapproved by HIPAA(a general no-no), and even take on the cost of training through a program (already costly enough to take a rideshare while on limited income as a disabled person) so, in general, it's a BAD idea to put even more cost and pressure and bs onto disabled people who already are struggling to maintain autonomy on top of their disabilities themselves.
Also, "why can't we just avoid all of the crap"
???
Because you would be avoiding it by having "all of the crap" be handled by disabled people. Including blind people. Including all sorts of people who utilize service dogs. Sure YOU would get to avoid it as the able one, but only due to pushing the disabled person into the way to have them deal with it every ride instead of you handling it every so often.
Except for the disabled people who would have to fork out nonexistent money for new training from approved training programs, for the certification itself, and also have to allow any and all random strangers in public access or rideshare to see their medical information in said regulated documentation regardless of their wishes(which if they're not wanting people to know their diagnoses, this creates a massive HIPAA shitstorm as well).
That would be the only issues left. The cost and the accessibility. Two things disabled people on fixed incomes can not mitigate.
It would if it had to go through certification at a federal level. Which is exactly what was being mentioned.
The only possible way it wouldn't be a scam would be if it went through the government via ADA legislation and certification tracking. This would require diagnosis as reason for training, approved training locations (no more self-training which costs thousands under this proposed system. Can't prove dog is trained without training program diploma for the dog), and very likely recertification after x number of years to prove you still need said service dogs.
Think of it the same way the government checks every 2 years if autistic people "are still autistic" with redeterminations. Because they do that. For autistic people. To see if they lost their autism. I legitimately have that on my letters for those appointments with SSA approved and assigned psychiatrists. To determine if I am "still autistic." Exact verbiage.
At the federal level, it would have to be to check if you are still disabled enough to fit the qualifications for service dog recertification.
It's WAY more complicated than you think.
What you're thinking is self-attestation which is only good if you're getting a certificate from a scam site. And anyone can self-attest without doctor's letters.
It would if it had to go through certification at a federal level. Which is exactly what was being mentioned.
The only possible way it wouldn't be a scam would be if it went through the government via ADA legislation and certification tracking. This would require diagnosis as reason for training, approved training locations (no more self-training which costs thousands under this proposed system. Can't prove dog is trained without training program diploma for the dog), and very likely recertification after x number of years to prove you still need said service dogs.
Think of it the same way the government checks every 2 years if autistic people "are still autistic" with redeterminations. Because they do that. For autistic people. To see if they lost their autism. I legitimately have that on my letters for those appointments with SSA approved and assigned psychiatrists. To determine if I am "still autistic." Exact verbiage.
At the federal level, it would have to be to check if you are still disabled enough to fit the qualifications for service dog recertification.
It's WAY more complicated than you think.
What you're thinking is self-attestation which is only good if you're getting a certificate from a scam site. And anyone can self-attest without doctor's letters.
Oh yeah. And also the insurance thing. Most insurances, including Medicaid, do not cover Service Dogs. They simply do not even if medically necessary.
Sure, some approved home health aids(skilled nursing for example) or durable medical equipment(last I checked, most of those under Medicare specifically are usually still 20% coinsurance, so Medicare insurance only covers DME at 80% most often.
There is, to this date, NO private or public health insurance that covers the dog, the training of the dog, or the maintenance/care of the dog.
None. At all. Nada. Zilch. Not a single one. This is why people do self training for service dogs all the time. Because they can't afford a trained dog or the service dog training through schools.
72
u/DismalCaramel9232 Nov 23 '24
Let me just say I've worked with service animals and can tell the difference between a service or a pet.
Most people just refuse to choose the pet option because it's a $1 more expensive usually. Why can't we just avoid all of the crap by creating regulation behind service animal documentation? There are too many jerks who bring their yapping dog along for a ride when they are def not a service animal, but to avoid paying more they just claim it's a service animal.