Guide Dogs on Flights - what if another passenger has a dog allergy?
 

There's been some fuss in the Australian media today because Jetstar refused to let a guide dog (seeing-eye dog) onto a flight. Obviously there's regulations in place which allow guide dogs on flights and the airline didn't act accordingly, but this raises a question I'm interested in hearing the answer to...

I've been on flights before where it was announced that nobody could open any nut products on board the flight because someone on board was violently allergic. They informed the airline beforehand as it's common for the airlines to have snacks on board containing nuts.

However what would happen if someone on board was violently allergic to dogs? It's not common to have a guide dog on board, and is not something you would ordinarily see the need to inform an airline about! How would an airline be expected to deal if a guide dog needed boarding and someone on board was violently allergic?

Just curious!

Chances are strong that the allergic person would end up reaccommodated on another flight. That, or the person requiring the dog... but chances are higher it would be the allergic person, because blindness (or pretty much anything else requiring a guide dog) is a protected disability, while allergies are not, so the legal issues are minimized by inconveniencing the allergic person.

I suppose. But that's impractical in situations when flights only run a couple of times a week. And what happens if you end up with the dog on a connecting flight? You'd be unaware of it until you got to the gate - all your checked bags and everything would already be in transit. And if the person requiring the dog got advanced boarding, you may not even realise there's a dog on board. Would the airline then be liable if you had an allergic reaction and they didn't explicitly inform you that there was a dog in the cabin?

*shrug* the practicalities of it all just interest me.

I worked for pre-merger NW in the summer of 2008, and we had to go through a standard training program before we could work; something all employees did annually (even if the position didn't come close to needing that information, like mine). This exact question came up, of what to do if a passenger with dog allergies was on the same flight as a blind pax with a guide dog. The correct multiple choice answer was that the pax with allergies would have to be put on a different flight, as an allergy-free flight couldn't be guaranteed or something like that (not to mention ADA rules that I'm sure would come into play)

i recently saw someone bringing a guide dog onto a flight. the dog was all decked out as a guide dog, but i don't think it was. was a border collie, with the owner, and was standing on two back paws against the check in desk, getting head rubs from the gate attendant.

while i watched for the next 5 min. dog did much more following than leading. i was unable to notice any defects in the dog's master.

This thread may get heated as the allergy topic typically does. From the legal side I agree that blindness and many other conditions are legally protected disabilities and airlines are required by law to accommodate the passenger. Allergies and other medical conditions are not.

Someone with bad allergies can (and should) take precautions to minimize their chance of problems. Medication, epi-pen, mask, respirator, etc. Really, how do you know you are not going to run into a dog/cat in a train, bus, store, or just walking down the street. A blind person cannot do anything to mitigate their blindness.

My belief is that if your condition is so bad that it could cause death or serious injury, and you are unable or unwilling to find a way to minimize the risk, you should not be traveling by commercial transport. I don't see it as any different than someone who is at high risk of DVT expecting the airline to give them a business class seat.

I'm not saying the airline should do nothing, but expecting them to guarantee a flight is allergen free or remove six seats so your hospital gurney can be accommodated is too much.

Going OT a bit, is it possible for a human to be allergic to other humans? We share pretty much the same hair/dander/skin oils as our mammal cousins so it seems like it could be possible. How would an airline handle that one?

Sometimes the dogs are being "moved around" not by owner but by a helper which is not necessarily trained to handle the dog.

In the case you mention above, sure sounds like that border collie was a pet that was dressed up. I saw the same one time, and it was refused on board because it wasn't in a harness!

HTSC

With people using sites like this one, no surprise.

Let me move this to our Disability Travel forum for further discussion, with a slightly more descriptive thread title. Ocn Vw 1K, Moderator, TravelBuzz.

As a social worker, and a member of the human race, I feel that JetStar has made a person living with a disability quite humiliated. I don't know the laws in OZ, but in the USA this airline would not only have been fined but it would be on the national news as well as a total disgrace/neglect for human rights.

Shame on you JetStar!

If we're just talking about allergies, what happens to someone who paid to bring a dog onboard that is not a service dog? Those dogs are required to stay caged. The odds are much higher that someone has a cabin dog than a service dog. Would the person with the allergy still be the one moved to a later flight, the person with the dog, or neither since the pet is caged.

Real service dogs require training. What the person above saw may have been a young dog in training to be a service dog. One of my co-workers who is totally blind had a problem with her first guide dog as he was terrified of airplanes. The trainer came down from the dog's training school and worked with the dog on many flights to get him used to the idea as travel was required in her master's job.

It depends on the airline and the situation, I'm sure, but in my experience, it's still the person with the allergy. Cabin pets require an extra fee, and since no actual service is provided for that fee, my presumption is that the fee is intended to cover increased liability and possible passenger reaccommodation for exactly this reason (notwithstanding the "because they can" factor).

I fly with my dogs in-cabin once a year, and one year a passenger made a big fuss (to the GA, not to me, and not directly in front of me) about the dog. The GA told her she could switch seats or take a different flight; I was not asked to do anything. (For the record, our dogs stay in their bags the entire time, and on most flights, even our row-mates don't know there's a dog on board.)

There are many people who are legally blind who still have some vision left but not enough where they can get along on their own and, consequently, have a guide dog. It may not be at all evident just by looking at the person or the situation. Usually, though, when guide dogs are *working* they wouldn't be jumping up on the desk, as you mention.

Bobette

It may depend on who booked first, and if the airline was notified in advance of the allergy.

My son has a life-threatening allergy to dogs, which, BTW, is covered under the ADA in certain circumstances, but those don't include flying. I have taken to calling the airline to see if there is a dog booked on a flight before booking a specific flight. If there is, I book a different flight, and notify the airline of the severe allergy. Some airlines, for example NW pre-merger, would then promise that no pet dogs could be booked in the cabin for the flight, but that if a service dog was booked, the service dog would fly and we would be bumped.

BTW, a cage/pet bag would have no effect at all in preventing an allergic reaction for my son; just breathing essence of dog in a confined space will get to him. And, yes, I've got half a pharmacy in my bag to deal with his allergies.

To be of service, they require training, but to be a "service dog" they don't. It's one of the loopholes in the ADA. All I have to do is claim it's a service dog and magically it is. Training, vests, and certification are all irrelevant.

It is nearly impossible to provide a plane that does not have residue of pets. Your flight may not have animals on it, but the people who just left the plane could have had pets that left dander and allergens behind them.

My daughters are allergic to cats. I would never trust the airline to guarantee a "cat free" flight. I just make sure that they have epi-pens.

Easy. Send one of them on a later flight and offer IDB compensation to the one delayed.

No, not easy at all. Have to yet to find an airline that thinks life-threatening allergy is grounds for IDB - they say, "Your seat is waiting" and basically if we decline, we're at their mercy for rescheduling. If I have it in the reservation in advance that there is severe dog allergy and then they book a service dog, they usually re-book without a fee, and that's the best I can hope for.

How about a sensible, first-come first-served approach?

Both the person with a severe allergy and the dog-owner are obliged to notify the airline at the time of booking. Consequently, if there's a dog already booked on a particular flight (service dog or otherwise, btw, small non-service dogs in cages can also travel in the cabin), the allergic person is notified and asked to book a different flight; or vice-versa.

Service dogs and pets have different status, but both are still dogs and cause allergic reactions.

Service dogs take priority. I can't tell you for certain if that is the law, but it is the practice of airlines. Generally if I have notified an airline of the dog allergy, they tell me they won't book a pet dog on the same flight, but we could be forced to accommodate, i.e. change our plans, if a service dog is booked on the flight. But that change doesn't amount to IDB in their eyes because it is based on our medical decision, not their availability.

Interesting, thanks. But at least there is a logical procedure; just wonder whether it is properly communicated to all involved.

Still simple. What's more important to a person wit allergies. Compensation or being able to avoid severe allergic reaction?
I empathise with your situation. It may be difficult to choose as to who goes first between a person with allergies to dogs versus a blind person with a guide dog, but it should be easy when the dog is not guide dog. I prefer not have animals in the same cabin as I,

I'm basically allergic to everything with fur, thankfully not anaphylactic, and I just assume that there's going to be pet hair on the flight. If I'm flying, I take my allergy medicine. (I take it almost every day unless I'm staying home all day.)

My former friend once had her cat in a cat carrier on a plane with a young girl who was evidently flying to a hospital because she had horrible respiratory problems, and she agreed to have the airline put her up in a hotel overnight and fly out the next morning.

It is possible for a human to be allergic to another human who wears purfume.

Going OT a bit, is it possible for a human to be allergic to other humans? We share pretty much the same hair/dander/skin oils as our mammal cousins so it seems like it could be possible. How would an airline handle that one?[/QUOTE]

I'm pretty sure it's the law. The ACAA (the airline equivalent of the ADA) prevents discrimination against protected classes, which include people with recognized disabilities. At this time, allergies - no matter how severe - are not recognized as a disability (or at least not one that comprises a protected class) under the ACAA, hence the need to accommodate the service dog would take priority. While the ADA may protect your son in certain cases, the ACAA has somewhat different restrictions. (Disclaimer: IANAL.)

No, it's not. The other human is irrelevant to the equation... the first human is allergic to the perfume, whether or not it happens to be on another human.

Actually, we do not. Some of the specific proteins found in the dander and/or saliva of other mammals (e.g. cats, dogs, etc.) are sufficiently different from ours, which is why the human body can see them as antigens that provoke an immune response. In principle, if one human's dander contained proteins that were sufficiently foreign to another human, it could provoke an immune response, but in practice I don't think such distinction ever occurs. Some humans' immune system fails to properly recognize innate proteins and attacks them, but this is generally considered an auto-immune disease, not an allergy (since allergies almost by definition refer to foreign proteins).

[/QUOTE]

I was sprayed going through a department store and had an immediate asthmatic reaction to whatever fragrance had been sprayed. The store paid the associated medical bills and implemented a policy restricting sales associates to spraying strips of paper oriented towards the floor instead of in the air.


Back to the original topic - how does someone with an allergy to animal dander handle the issue if after boarding they start having an adverse reaction to a service animal on board from the previous flight?

Wrong.
The loophole is designed so that a bus driver, a restaurant server or a grocery store cashier is not privvy to a detailed explanation of a disabled persons medical condition.
I work with a service dog. I am legally disabled. I have a psychiatric condition. No, my service dog is not a "emotional support animal".
To qualify as a service dog, there are many, many conditions a dog must meet.

Please see my post in the question on perceptions of a service animal thread.

In regards to allergies: If it is minor and causes only discomfort, please come prepared with your own medication and do your best to politely be reseated. A person with a service dog is not out to get you, or to make you have a bad trip, and they probably feel bad enough already if your are suffering a reaction.
If it is major anaphylaxia, you should be proactively dealing with such a situation in the same way peanut anaphylaxia is dealt with - call the airline well ahead of time, inform them of the severity of your allergy, ask that if a service dog is boarding in your cabin that you be reseated to another cabin, and come prepared with epi-pen in case of emergency.

Are you sure it wasn't a service dog for another disability, or that the owner wasn't totally blind? I have a guide/service dog that is a Siberian Husky. People don't realize I can't see because I don't act like they think I should. I've also been told that it doesn't look like my dog is guiding me, but it's because we work so well together it's had to tell.

The biggest compliment I can get is when that happens because it means we work really well together!

Not necessarily! A lot of service dogs are taught "paws up" and the owner could very well have told the dog to do that.

Could you explain what "paws up" means to a service dog? In the animal rescue group I work with, "paws up" is a euphemism for dead, as in "That poor dog is going paws up next week if we don't find it a home."

Oh no! "Paws up" (or whatever other command you use) basically means for the dog to put it's front paws on your lap. a counter top to help pay for or take things etc.

I have allergies and would just recommend deferring to the person with the seeing eye dog because it is not worth making a complaint about it and also a blind person was dealt a worse hand in life than any allergic person and they do not need people with allergies making trouble for them. If anything just try to sit far away from the dog and ask for some free drink coupons

:confused::confused:

Who has suggested "making trouble for them" anywhere in this forum?

There are widely different levels of allergy. Perhaps you would be safe, or only minorly inconvenienced, by the presence of a dog, but others with dog allergy would not. My son is severely allergic, and a close relative of his died from an allergic/asthmatic reaction to a dog. For him, spending time in a closed metal tube with a dog isn't an option.

I think you took m90291s words too literally. I didn't infer that she really meant that others were "making trouble". I found her post to be kind and compassionate.

Bobette

Yes, perhaps it was "kind and compassionate" except towards those with a life-threatening allergy. The advice to "just try to sit far away from the dog and ask for some free drink coupons" shows a real lack of understanding of how dangerous some allergies can be. Are the free drinks supposed to stop a major allergic reaction somehow? :confused: Maybe mix a little alcohol with the Epi-Pen and see if that helps?

With the lack of fresh air on most aircraft now, the distance to the dog really doesn't make a difference anymore. I find that those who are blessed enough to have only mild allergies often assume that their level of allergy is as bad it gets and really don't understand what its like for someone to be grasping for breath in reaction to the same allergen.

And you certainly have the right interpret a post the way you see it, but I also have the right to read the words that were written and assume the poster meant what they said: "they do not need people with allergies making trouble for them" suggesting that bringing attention to one's allergy to the service dog is "making trouble."

The task of determining which passenger has the greater need is impossible. Obviously a blind person has a serious need for his service animal. A person who stops breathing when he is near a dog also has a strong argument.

I appreciate the generosity of someone with less serious problems who volunteers to move away from the dog and put his needs second to that of the person with the service animal.

I do understand that some allergies are more serious than others. I just kind of wonder how someone with such a serious allergy to dogs manages the rest of his life. Dogs are such a prevalent part of our society. I know you can avoid those dogs that you see, but how do you manage dealing with the dander, fur and other residue they leave behind them in hotel rooms, offices, public transportation, taxis, rented cars, and all those other places that are not available to pets but open to service animals?

I live with a person who has a serious allergy to a less common place substance, so I appreciate the terror when someone stops breathing. I carry our epis everywhere we go, and touch them several times a day to make sure they are there. Mostly, however, I take every step possible to avoid coming in contact with seafood or any item or medication containing iodine. Much easier than avoiding a dog.

This is an impossible decision to require anyone to make, and my sympathies are with everyone who finds themselves in such a situation.

Been looking for someone to explain why the blind person needs the accommodation of having the dog at hand during the flight. Is this so the dog can find the restroom for them? I mean, why have cabin attendants if you're gonna depend on an unpaid animal?

As for allergies being a "minor disability", tell that to a sufferer of anaphylactic shock. Is blindness going to kill you?

Putting a guide dog that is with it`s owner in the hold will traumatize the dog so much it`s not a good thing. The dog could have separation anxiety, get out of the crate and get injured/killed when on the ground (it has happened to other dogs). The blind person has the added worry PLUS if anything happens to the plane then most likely the dog that the person relies upon completely and has had all that expensive and long training will die. If anything happens to the plane and it needs to be evacuated otherwise when the dog is in the cabin it lays on its back on the blind persons legs and they both slide down the slide together.

If the dog is too stressed out at the other end they could be too stressed to work causing themselves and their owner injury or death. Or they might not want to work ever again depending on the dog and situation.

Also having the blind person and guide dog left together assures that the blind person DON'T have their independence stripped of them. They can get on and off the plane like everyone else independently just like everyone else.

It makes no more sense to put a service dog in the baggage compartment than it does to pack one's medications in checked luggage. Things that are medical necessities should never be placed at risk by being anywhere other than where the passenger is.