tombiro

But if you call right now, our operators are standing by to take all your information and do all the work, while billing your insurance company. You could get a scooter for free.

missydarlin

Using a scooter because you are unable to walk long distances, doesn't necessarily equate to not being able to stand up and turn it around, and I imagine pushing it like a big wheel is easier on someone with bad knees/legs/back than trying to walk the strip.

And perhaps you feel that the extremely obese should hide in their homes til they are at a weight you find less obscene, but that doesn't necessarily mean they'll be able to walk long distances comfortably enough to leave the scooter behind.

Eastbay1K

And now, we return to the canine topic of this thread.

seaflyguy

I don't think that severely overweight people should hide in their homes. Quite the opposite, actually. I think they should, um, walk.

In any case, it's inevitable that some people are going to try to abuse any privilege offered to those suffering from a handicap of some sort, whether it's service animals, scooters, handicapped parking plates, or anything else.

From what I can tell, the nature of the guide dog system, the effort involved in acquiring one, and the nature of visual impairment dictated that any abuse of guide dogs for the blind was rare at worst. But once we opened up service animals to people with emotional issues, and allowed species other than dogs, well, I suppose it was inevitable you'd have pigs and miniature horses defecating in airliner cabins, or people claiming iguanas and goats as service animals. So last year the Feds tightened up on this sort of thing. I find it interesting and instructive that the folks behind guide dogs for the blind wanted the government to crack down on this sort of thing -- and rightfully so.

jenpdx

I couldn't agree more with your sentiment. The abuse is sickening! I am a paraplegic, and my daily life is made much harder because of the abuse of handicap parking. The city of Portland offers unlimited free street parking to placard holders. Of course, this leads to substantial savings of perhaps a couple grand a year and thus creates a powerful incentive for able-bodied people to become "disabled." According to a City of Portland study, 20% of downtown parking spots are now taken up each workday by cars with handicap placards. An astounding 6% of Oregon drivers have obtained placards. Only a small minority conform to the ORS definition of "disabled person" for parking purposes, specifically that you must use a mobility aid or be unable to walk 200 feet. (If you've never thought about handicap parking, look around the handicap parking spots the next time you go to Target or Fred Meyer's on the weekend ... it's likely that they're all taken, and you're likely to spot 3 marathon runners for every person who can't walk 200 feet).

I really don't care about people scamming free downtown parking, but I do care about handicap spots being taken every time I go somewhere. Unlike most "fake" disabled people who take up the spots, I cannot use a regular spot as a backup, because I can't get out of my car without an access aisle (needed to get my wheelchair out of the car). Often, I have to circle the lot numerous times until something opens up, and in some cases I have returned home because I couldn't find parking at all. I, along with several of my severely disabled friends (paras, quads, amputees) have lobbied the city to abandon the free parking benefit, in an effort to remove the most powerful incentive for obtaining frivolous handicap placards, but without success. I know of several national disability organizations who lobby for handicap parking changes, and specifically ask for the abolition of "free" parking for the disabled.

Regarding the service dog issue, I know several people who have them, and the dogs are always well trained and the users are careful not to offend anyone. Most people with real disabilities know that we depend on these benefits, and we don't want to upset anyone or see them diluted or taken away. To go back to my parking example, I have a friend who's a double amputee, and he wouldn't think of parking in a handicap spot when he's wearing his prosthetics. He knows that someone like me might need the spot. If only "fake" disabled people would abide by the same standards.

CZBB

Not true, in Canada (and that includes AS and QX flights to Canada) the airline must make a peanut free zone (+/- 1 row IIRC) if requested by the passenger

98103

^^^

-- I only get irritated with people on scooters when they use the scooters as a bulldozer to clear a path (not unlike some young parents with strollers in crowded places).
-- I have never understood giving FREE parking to those with disabilities. Sure a placard for places in lots, but the ABILITY to pay is not determined by one's mobility, ability, or lack thereof.
-- A service goat would be SO EFFING COOL!

pinniped

I want a service pinniped. (Preferably an adult male walrus, and naturally we'll need to be upgraded to F.)

Genuine question: what service are the dogs in question trained to perform in the event of a seizure? The retrieval of medication? I have not seen that one. I will admit: I see small service dogs and I have that fleeting thought that it may not be legit. Right or wrong...I suspect that the owner may be playing an "emotional support" card. When I see a shepherd, I immediately think seeing eye dog and don't question it at all. It's not a bias towards any one physical ailment: it's a bias I have, and I think a lot of people have, about which breeds are smarter animals. (It's a perception that could be completely false - I really don't know much about dogs.)

So maybe there's an educational aspect here more than anything. Most people are totally understanding and accommodating to people with legitimate service animals. If some small breeds are just as medically vital and well-trained as the larger breeds we've seen for years as seeing eyes, then I think there are a lot of people out there not fully aware of it.

CharlotteYork

I saw someone bring what I assumed to be a fake service dog into a hospital yesterday. They had what appeared to be a fake vest on the large dog and proudly paraded him around the lobby.

The dog was very nervous and even jumped up on someone who went up to pet him. I've seen many vests that indicate the dog is not to be petted since he is "working." The dog's owner did not discourage the stranger from petting the animal. In fact, he seemed quite pleased with the attention. And the dog jumping up on a person? Please.

I guess it's possible the dog was a real service dog, but all the facts suggested otherwise. Real service dogs are trained to do a job and not to be distracted or nervous in strange surroundings.

I've also known people who have ordered fake service dog vests on the internet and have told me they can now take their dog anywhere without question.

My understanding is that the dog's owner can only be asked if the dog is indeed a service dog and further ask what service the dog provides. If the owner lies, then he is in violation of federal law.

gahyland

Last year, on a flight from Seattle to Chicago, a couple with a very large dog sat in 6B and 6C. I was in 6D. The dog wore only a poorly fitted and incorrectly positioned prong collar. A prong collar is a training device, meant to be used during training sessions, then removed. The dog was nervous throughout the flight, getting up and down, stepping into the aisle, and at one point, sitting in 6c, while his owner stood.

If this dog was a service or companion animal, he was poorly trained one. I don't know what the standards are for these animals, but my family pets were better behaved. (yes, I took them to obedience training.)

In light of the 'we are here for your safety' pronouncements I have heard recently, I'd like to point out that this situation is inherently unsafe. An untrained, improperly secured animal is a hazard under normal flight operations. In the event of an emergency? I'd rather not find out.

alphaeagle

I was told a story once from an airline employee who witnessed this. Someone claimed at check-in that he was blind and that his dog was a seeing eye dog. The dog appeared to be doing a terrible job, but not much the airline employees could do.

In the terminal waiting for his flight the dog got loose and was running around the terminal with the owner chasing after it. It was highly unlikely he needed a dog, and if he did his choice was rather poor.

pinniped

There's a federal law regarding lying about service animals?

Isn't the Supreme Court currently considering the Constitutionality of a law about lying about military service? The general question being whether the First Amendment gives you the right to lie...

CharlotteYork

Woops! You're right, Pinniped. I should have said the person misrepresenting their dog as a service dog may be in violation of a state law, not federal. I do know there are many states that do provide penalties for misrepresentation but I am not aware of a federal penalty. Thanks for the good catch.

rtpflyer

You were probably dodging my wife who can walk short distances, but absolutely requires a mobility assistance device to travel the distance from the casino floor to her hotel room in almost any LV casino/hotel. While we travel with her own manual wheelchair, we are willing to pay the $100s per visit so that we can be independent of each other and enjoy our vacations. LV is a favorite vacation destination for us precisely because practically every bell stand can rent her a scooter with no hassle or advance planning. Oh, and the severe arthritis in one knee and a full knee replacement in the other is absolutely not a visible disabiliy to the casual observer.

wrp96

I believe that if the dog is needed for seizures, then typically the dog is trained to detect a seizure before it starts and notify the owner so that the owner can get in a safe position for the seizure.