Don't Be Distracted by the Peacock Trying to Board an Airplane: Why Emotional Support Animals Are Service Animals and Should Be Regulated in the Same Manner.

Amanda M. Foster
{"title":"Don't Be Distracted by the Peacock Trying to Board an Airplane: Why Emotional Support Animals Are Service Animals and Should Be Regulated in the Same Manner.","authors":"Amanda M. Foster","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3225891","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although fifty percent of all Americans are diagnosed with a mental illness or disorder at some point in their lifetime, including one in ten women, and mental illnesses are the third most common cause of hospitalization for adults under forty-four, the ADA’s narrow approach to defining service animals only protects a certain group of people with disabilities using a certain type of animal — dogs who perform tasks associated with the person’s disability. This narrow approach does not consider the thousands of people who use emotional support animals to alleviate or mitigate the symptoms associated with their mental health issues. To provide parity, it is necessary to include emotional support animals within that definition. Despite the prevalence of mental illness, there is a societal backlash against emotional support animals who provide companionship, relieve loneliness, and sometimes help with depression, anxiety, and certain phobias, but do not meet the ADA definition of service animal due to their lack of specialized training. The FHA and ACAA have provided protection and accommodations for people using emotional support animals, but that protection is in jeopardy. In response to uncertainty over the definition of emotional support animals, on April 24, 2018, Senator Burr (R-NC) introduced a bill to amend title 49 of the United States Code, which would make changes to the ACAA such as only allowing service animals as defined by the ADA to be uncaged onboard aircraft's, requiring service animal behavior training for air carrier passengers, and creating a criminal penalty for fraudulently claiming that an animal is a service animal used for disability needs. If Senator Burr’s bill is passed and the ACAA is restrained from allowing emotional support animals to be service animals under the ACAA, then people with mental health issues will once again be stigmatized and treated as second class citizens. Emotional support animals are also on trial in the regulatory realm. The DOT is currently seeking comments on ways to improve the ACAA regulation to ensure nondiscriminatory access for individuals with disabilities to use their service animals onboard airlines while attempting to deter “fraudulent use of other animals not qualified as service animals” and prevent use of “animals that are not trained to behave properly in the public.” Clear regulation is needed to ensure that all people with disabilities can use a service animal, including emotional support animals, if that animal will assist him or her with alleviating or mitigating the symptoms associated with his or her disability. Do not let the peacock trying to board the airplane distract from the real issue at hand. Mental health matters and people who experience mental health issues and need emotional support animals in public places, including on mass transit, to participate in society, should not be denied this accommodation based on fear that some people may fraudulently claim that their pets are emotional support animals. If we legitimize the process of bringing an emotional support animal in public, including on mass transit, then we make steps in continuing to take away the stigma of mental health issues. Parity is essential to accomplishing that goal.","PeriodicalId":79773,"journal":{"name":"Albany law review","volume":"82 1 1","pages":"237-66"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Albany law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3225891","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Although fifty percent of all Americans are diagnosed with a mental illness or disorder at some point in their lifetime, including one in ten women, and mental illnesses are the third most common cause of hospitalization for adults under forty-four, the ADA’s narrow approach to defining service animals only protects a certain group of people with disabilities using a certain type of animal — dogs who perform tasks associated with the person’s disability. This narrow approach does not consider the thousands of people who use emotional support animals to alleviate or mitigate the symptoms associated with their mental health issues. To provide parity, it is necessary to include emotional support animals within that definition. Despite the prevalence of mental illness, there is a societal backlash against emotional support animals who provide companionship, relieve loneliness, and sometimes help with depression, anxiety, and certain phobias, but do not meet the ADA definition of service animal due to their lack of specialized training. The FHA and ACAA have provided protection and accommodations for people using emotional support animals, but that protection is in jeopardy. In response to uncertainty over the definition of emotional support animals, on April 24, 2018, Senator Burr (R-NC) introduced a bill to amend title 49 of the United States Code, which would make changes to the ACAA such as only allowing service animals as defined by the ADA to be uncaged onboard aircraft's, requiring service animal behavior training for air carrier passengers, and creating a criminal penalty for fraudulently claiming that an animal is a service animal used for disability needs. If Senator Burr’s bill is passed and the ACAA is restrained from allowing emotional support animals to be service animals under the ACAA, then people with mental health issues will once again be stigmatized and treated as second class citizens. Emotional support animals are also on trial in the regulatory realm. The DOT is currently seeking comments on ways to improve the ACAA regulation to ensure nondiscriminatory access for individuals with disabilities to use their service animals onboard airlines while attempting to deter “fraudulent use of other animals not qualified as service animals” and prevent use of “animals that are not trained to behave properly in the public.” Clear regulation is needed to ensure that all people with disabilities can use a service animal, including emotional support animals, if that animal will assist him or her with alleviating or mitigating the symptoms associated with his or her disability. Do not let the peacock trying to board the airplane distract from the real issue at hand. Mental health matters and people who experience mental health issues and need emotional support animals in public places, including on mass transit, to participate in society, should not be denied this accommodation based on fear that some people may fraudulently claim that their pets are emotional support animals. If we legitimize the process of bringing an emotional support animal in public, including on mass transit, then we make steps in continuing to take away the stigma of mental health issues. Parity is essential to accomplishing that goal.
不要被试图登机的孔雀分散注意力:为什么情感支持动物是服务动物,应该以同样的方式进行监管。
尽管50%的美国人在一生中的某个时候被诊断出患有精神疾病或障碍,其中包括十分之一的女性,而且精神疾病是44岁以下成年人住院治疗的第三常见原因,ADA对服务动物的狭义定义只保护使用某种类型动物的特定残疾人群体——执行与残疾人残疾相关任务的狗。这种狭隘的方法没有考虑到成千上万的人使用情感支持动物来缓解或减轻与心理健康问题相关的症状。为了提供平等,有必要将情感支持动物纳入该定义。尽管精神疾病很普遍,但社会上对提供陪伴、缓解孤独、有时帮助治疗抑郁、焦虑和某些恐惧症的情感支持动物存在强烈反对,但由于缺乏专业训练,这些动物不符合ADA对服务动物的定义。FHA和ACAA为使用情感支持动物的人提供了保护和住宿,但这种保护正处于危险之中。为了应对情绪支持动物定义的不确定性,2018年4月24日,参议员伯尔(R-NC)提出了一项法案,修改《美国法典》第49篇,该法案将对ACAA进行修改,例如只允许《美国残疾人法案》定义的服务动物在飞机上不戴口罩,要求对航空承运人乘客进行服务动物行为培训,以及对欺诈性地声称动物是用于残疾需求的服务动物的行为处以刑事处罚。如果伯尔参议员的法案获得通过,ACAA被限制允许情感支持动物成为ACAA下的服务动物,那么有心理健康问题的人将再次被污名化,并被视为二等公民。情感支持动物也在监管领域进行试验。交通部目前正在就如何改进ACAA法规征求意见,以确保残疾人在航空公司使用其服务动物的非歧视性途径,同时试图阻止“欺诈性使用其他不符合服务动物资格的动物”,并防止使用“未经训练在公众面前表现良好的动物”。“需要明确的监管,以确保所有残疾人都可以使用服务动物,包括情感支持动物,如果该动物能帮助他或她减轻与残疾相关的症状。不要让试图登机的孔雀分散对眼前真正问题的注意力。心理健康问题以及在公共场所(包括公共交通工具上)遇到心理健康问题并需要情感支持动物参与社会的人,不应因为担心一些人可能会欺诈性地声称他们的宠物是情感支持动物而被拒绝这种住宿。如果我们将情感支持动物带到公共场所的过程合法化,包括在公共交通工具上,那么我们就可以采取措施,继续消除心理健康问题的污名。平等对于实现这一目标至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信