*IMPORTANT* Florida Fake Service Dog Law HB 71 and SB 414

[videogal1]

Somewhat off topic:

I contacted Disney a week ago regarding pet allergies and Disney hotel rooms and have not received a response outside of the immediate auto response. Last spring, both my niece and I had severe allergic reactions while staying in a room at Disney World. Although I have zero proof, I suspect a dog had recently stayed in our Disney hotel room. Both of us have been diagnosed with allergies to pet dander and our symptoms were in line with what we experience after being in someone's house who has a dog. I just got all stuffed up and miserable, but my niece experienced asthmatic symptoms including use of emergency steroid inhalers. We have another visit planned for this July. How do I request and insure that our hotel room has not had a dog in it? It doesn't matter to me if its a service dog or an emotional support dog. I just don't want to stay in any room that a dog has been in. Do those of you who have stayed at WDW with service dogs know what they do to isolate your dog? NOTE: If a hotel advertises that it is pet friendly, I do not stay in it under any circumstances.

Any advice?

An isolated Service Dog would not be very useful to the person who requires its assistance so that's not going to happen. What you might do, though, as other posters have noted, is treat the aIIergy with the importance it deserves and make a point of insisting that you have a room that meets your requirements.

 

[OurBigTrip]

As for Service Dog certification ...Do we require that drivers of cars be trained by some authorized facility before being issued certification to drive?

In my state, yes we do.

As I have posted before, the "you can't ask me situation", as you call it, is a problem manufactured by businesses that simply will not use the laws that protect them to deal with problems caused by individual Service Dogs, preferring to push the problem onto the Service Dog handler community as a whole.

I disagree - the problem is that business owners know that if they try to prevent an obviously untrained dog from being in their place of business, the handler will scream discrimination, likely sue, and the business owner will be forced to spend money to defend themselves.

 

[Allison]

In my state, yes we do.

I was going to say the same-in my state we do.

 

[aaarcher86]

I don't understand the driving analogy. I think EVERY state requires a driving test and written test before a license is issued. You can't just claim to drive and get a license.

And most states have requirements for training before a test is administered.

 

[OurBigTrip]

I don't understand the driving analogy. I think EVERY state requires a driving test and written test before a license is issued. You can't just claim to drive and get a license.

And most states have requirements for training before a test is administered.

I also question that claim that most service dogs are trained by their owners.

 

[TheRustyScupper]

{FLAME PROOF CAPE FROM DRAWER TO SHOULDERS}
1) I hope it gives cause to WDW to question ESD's.
2) They have no place at WDW.
3) True SD's, yes.
4) The ESD's, no.
5) If one can't negotiate WDW with such emptions, maybe it is a place better left un-visited.
{FLAME PROOF CAPE BACK TO STORAGE}

 

[OurBigTrip]

Does WDW let ESDs in the park but not allow them to stay in resort rooms? I thought I read here a week or so ago that ESDs weren't permitted in the rooms.

 

[aaarcher86]

Does WDW let ESDs in the park but not allow them to stay in resort rooms? I thought I read here a week or so ago that ESDs weren't permitted in the rooms.

They aren't allowed in rooms, and I don't think WDW 'lets' them in. I think most people claim their pets are service dogs or the CMs don't question it.

 

[videogal1]

In my state, yes we do.



I disagree - the problem is that business owners know that if they try to prevent an obviously untrained dog from being in their place of business, the handler will scream discrimination, likely sue, and the business owner will be forced to spend money to defend themselves.

You may disagree, but the Supreme Court in Costco v Grill has already supported business owners by coming down solidly on the side of a business, Costco, against a woman (Ms Grill) who would not cooperate with the store manager when he attempted to verify that her dog was, indeed, a Service Dog. I have already posted the steps that a business may legally take to verify whether a fraud is being committed by someone who is claiming that their dog is a Service Dog when, in fact, it does not appear either by its behavior or the handler's behavior in managing the dog to be a Service Dog, as defined by the ADA. You are welcome to look it up. If a business does not choose to take this legal recourse then it is being part of the problem and furthering the cowardly fiction that somehow a business is powerless to impose its policies in such cases.

As for your disinclination to believe the fact of the predominance of owner-trainers that I took the time to share with the group that's your prerogative. Are you suggesting, perhaps, that the thousands of dogs who meet the ADA definition of Service Dogs were trained by the few training schools that exist? Impossible.

As for the driving analogy, the point was the lack of certification of parents who attempt to train their children to drive being as ubiquitous as the lack of certification of service dog trainers, which one poster called for. Of course, untalented drivers are far more dangerous to the public as a whole so before anyone calls for certification of service dog trainers I would expect certification of parents who train their children to drive.

 

[aaarcher86]

You may disagree, but the Supreme Court in Costco v Grill has already supported business owners by coming down solidly on the side of a business, Costco, against a woman (Ms Grill) who would not cooperate with the store manager when he attempted to verify that her dog was, indeed, a Service Dog. I have already posted the steps that a business may legally take to verify whether a fraud is being committed by someone who is claiming that their dog is a Service Dog when, in fact, it does not appear either by its behavior or the handler's behavior in managing the dog to be a Service Dog, as defined by the ADA. You are welcome to look it up. If a business does not choose to take this legal recourse then it is being part of the problem and furthering the cowardly fiction that somehow a business is powerless to impose its policies in such cases.

As for your disinclination to believe the fact of the predominance of owner-trainers that I took the time to share with the group that's your prerogative. Are you suggesting, perhaps, that the thousands of dogs who meet the ADA definition of Service Dogs were trained by the few training schools that exist? Impossible.

As for the driving analogy, the point was the lack of certification of parents who attempt to train their children to drive being as ubiquitous as the lack of certification of service dog trainers, which one poster called for. Of course, untalented drivers are far more dangerous to the public as a whole so before anyone calls for certification of service dog trainers I would expect certification of parents who train their children to drive.

Right, but if a child hasn't been trained properly they won't pass the driving test. If a service dog isn't trained properly they wouldn't pass the test.

Do you have any kind of verifiable source that most people train their own service dogs? Just thinking about the tasks they do, I'm just not really seeing how a regular joe can adequately train their dog to perform a genuine service.

I think everyone here is aware what business can do to, it's that they don't. And being able to fine someone more than likely isn't going to change that.

 

[videogal1]

I don't understand the driving analogy. I think EVERY state requires a driving test and written test before a license is issued. You can't just claim to drive and get a license.

And most states have requirements for training before a test is administered.

But they do not require that the TRAINER of the driver be certified, which is what the poster I was replying to was suggesting. Testing whether a Service Dog has learned the skills it needs to function in its service role would be impossible. Service Dogs are personal aids to disabled individuals...as different in skills from one another as the needs of their handlers. I prefer to train my own dogs because I know what I need help with. What I don't need is a dog graduated in a cookie cutter manner from a school whose trainers may or may not be effective in training a dog to meet MY needs, not trained to meet the needs that the trainers know how to address. Good behavior on the part of the dog in training develops during the complex training process, which, to be successful, requires that the dog pay attention, which requires that the dog unfailingly obey commands that are required to achieve a CGC (Canine Good Citizen) rating. If a dog will not, or cannot become successful at performing the complex tasks that are required for it to be useful to its disabled handler then it is retired. The "service dogs" you see misbehaving in public have obviously not succeeded in achieving this standard and should not be allowed public access. It is important that business owners demand the proper behavior from Service Dogs. The law is on their side. Responsibility for enforcing the standards they expect of a customer's Service Dog would put an end to those frauds who, if they were, as you say, ("just claim to drive and get a license") just claiming their dog is a Service Dog and getting public access.

 

[aaarcher86]

But they do not require that the TRAINER of the driver be certified, which is what the poster I was replying to was suggesting. Testing whether a Service Dog has learned the skills it needs to function in its service role would be impossible. Service Dogs are personal aids to disabled individuals...as different in skills from one another as the needs of their handlers require. I prefer to train my own dogs because I know what I need help with. What I don't need is a dog graduated in a cookie cutter manner from a school whose trainers may or may not be effective in training a dog to meet MY needs, not trained to meet the needs that the trainers know how to address. Good behavior on the part of the dog in training develops during the complex training process, which, to be successful, requires that the dog pay attention, which requires that the dog unfailingly obey commands that are required to achieve a CGC (Canine Good Citizen) rating. If a dog will not, or cannot become successful at performing the complex tasks that are required for it to be useful to its disabled handler then it is retired. The "service dogs" you see misbehaving in public have obviously not succeeded in achieving this standard and should not be allowed public access. It is important that business owners demand the proper behavior from Service Dogs. The law is on their side. Responsibility for enforcing the standards they expect of a customer's Service Dog would put an end to those frauds who, if they were, as you say, ("just claim to drive and get a license") just claiming their dog is a Service Dog and get public access.

Ok. But do you have a source that shows most people train their own dogs?

I think the car analogy is a poor one, because there is a method,put in place that tests the skills of the driver. It doesn't matter if the trainer is trained.

There isn't one to show that someone has trained their dog adequately or that it even legitimately performs a service.

 

[videogal1]

Ok. But do you have a source that shows most people train their own dogs?

I think the car analogy is a poor one, because there is a method,put in place that tests the skills of the driver. It doesn't matter if the trainer is trained.

There isn't one to show that someone has trained their dog adequately or that it even legitimately performs a service.

Obviously the proof of the unsuccessful training of a Service Dog (if, in fact, the dog IS a Service Dog, and not a fraud, which is not what you're referring to here, is its inability to meet the public AND private needs of its handler. There is no better comment on a handler's dog or curb to the handler's enjoyment of the dog's support and utility than public censure. As for whether or not the dog meets the private needs of its handler is no one's business but the handler's.

 

[aaarcher86]

Obviously the proof of the unsuccessful training of a Service Dog (if, in fact, the dog IS a Service Dog, and not a fraud, which is not what you're referring to here, is its inability to meet the public AND private needs of its handler. There is no better comment on a handler's dog or curb to the handler's enjoyment of the dog's support and utility than public censure. As for whether or not the dog meets the private needs of its handler is no one's business but the handler's.

What? I was just asking if you had a source that showed most service dogs are trained by their owners, versus a third party company.

 

[SirDuff]

What? I was just asking if you had a source that showed most service dogs are trained by their owners, versus a third party company.

I'm going with "no" - given the number of times your question has been ignored. I did a Google search and couldn't find anything.

 

[videogal1]

I'm going with "no" - given the number of times your question has been ignored. I did a Google search and couldn't find anything.

Thank you, sir duff for answering for me. I suspect that any answer that I might give, other a very long recitation of the number of years I've worked with Service Dogs as a trainer, as a handler, as a citizen working on civil rights issues, including those involving Service Dogs, would probably not satisfy this troll-like poster who seems to show a complete lack of interest in doing any individual research before challenging the information posted on this topic. If this poster had read thoroughly all the posts in this thread they would have seen that the question has been answered.

 

[OurBigTrip]

Thank you, sir duff for answering for me. I suspect that any answer that I might give, other a very long recitation of the number of years I've worked with Service Dogs as a trainer, as a handler, as a citizen working on civil rights issues, including those involving Service Dogs, would probably not satisfy this troll-like poster who seems to show a complete lack of interest in doing any individual research before challenging the information posted on this topic. If this poster had read thoroughly all the posts in this thread they would have seen that the question has been answered.

I've read the entire thread thoroughly, and there is nothing I've seen that proves you claim, i.e., that most people train their own service dogs. No one should have to research in order to prove a claim that you've made - if you have a link that backs up your claim, why not provide it? Anecdotal evidence is not proof.

 

[SirDuff]

Thank you, sir duff for answering for me. I suspect that any answer that I might give, other a very long recitation of the number of years I've worked with Service Dogs as a trainer, as a handler, as a citizen working on civil rights issues, including those involving Service Dogs, would probably not satisfy this troll-like poster who seems to show a complete lack of interest in doing any individual research before challenging the information posted on this topic. If this poster had read thoroughly all the posts in this thread they would have seen that the question has been answered.

As I said, I did research and could not find a single reference backing up your claim. Nor have you provided one in this thread (or any of your posts - I searched your history in case you had posted it another thread and were confused about where you posted).

 

[3Gsandme]

Ok. But do you have a source that shows most people train their own dogs?

I think the car analogy is a poor one, because there is a method,put in place that tests the skills of the driver. It doesn't matter if the trainer is trained.

There isn't one to show that someone has trained their dog adequately or that it even legitimately performs a service.

I'm interested in this information as well because it goes directly against anything I ever knew about service dogs. I cannot imagine a lay person beijng able to train a dog in that manner with much success.

 

[aaarcher86]

Thank you, sir duff for answering for me. I suspect that any answer that I might give, other a very long recitation of the number of years I've worked with Service Dogs as a trainer, as a handler, as a citizen working on civil rights issues, including those involving Service Dogs, would probably not satisfy this troll-like poster who seems to show a complete lack of interest in doing any individual research before challenging the information posted on this topic. If this poster had read thoroughly all the posts in this thread they would have seen that the question has been answered.

Well, I'm not a troll. But you made a claim that completely goes against everything I've known about service dogs, and frankly, doesn't make much sense.

I'm just not a fan of throwing around opinion as fact in the manner you have. Yes, your experience is insufficient, as mine would be.

The conversation itself is meaningful, but not when people just claim whatever they want with zero evidence. That's silly.