Originally Posted by
BigBopper
I don't argue that those that have legitimate needs deserve to have their trained service animals on the plane however I also have a right to safe travel. This means not being forced to sit next to animal that I'm allergic to. There has to be some fair middle ground. For example, why can't the airlines send an email to those in the neighboring rows to alert us 24 hours in advance? That way I can take medicine in advance, not be affected and not infringe on the other persons rights as well.
What would be the point?
Airlines are permitted to require 48 hours advance notice and documentation for emotional/psychiatric support animals, and theoretically, the airlines could send out emails.
What about the service dogs serving the blind and deaf and disabled? Those folks don't have to provide any advance notice to the airlines that they're bringing their dog, so there would be no way to provide advance notice to the allergic passengers. Would the allergic reactions be diminished because the dog was a traditional service dog serving a blind or deaf or physically disabled passenger? Do emotional support animals trigger more severe allergies?
See the logical inconsistency? If I were a cynical person, then I might conclude from reading the many posts on Flyertalk over the years that the "I'm allergic to animals" card might get played more often when the animal is serving an emotionally or mentally disabled person more often than when it's serving a more "traditional-looking" physically disabled person.
If you're allergic to animals, then bring medications to treat those allergies and/or be prepared to move to a different seat or, if that's impossible, consider taking a different flight. AA won't charge a change fee to accommodate an allergic passenger in such a circumstance.