Comments on: Should We Rethink the Concept of Service Animals? http://stoloff-law.com/blog/should-we-rethink-the-concept-of-service-animals/ Thu, 10 May 2012 02:30:14 +0000 hourly 1 By: Cousin Vinny /blog/should-we-rethink-the-concept-of-service-animals/#comment-22 Cousin Vinny Mon, 14 Sep 2009 23:40:22 +0000 http://stoloff-law.com/blog/?p=88#comment-22 Spot-on and incisive analysis. Thanks to its liberal and inclusive wording, the ADA is indeed painted with a broad brush stroke. The provisions concerning service animals are of no exception. Also, there's the law of unintended consequences, where people interpret the law to suit their needs, going beyond what the original framers of the law envisioned. However, this trend, expanding beyond the traditional boundaries that used to define service animals, is troubling. Abuse and/or perceptions of abuse, could lead Congress to revisit the issue and curb service animal usage by PWD's. I remember such issues when the ADA first came out. There was an initial burst of litigation over what it meant to be 'disabled' under the ADA, what kind of relief can be sought, etc. Years and years of litigation and/or regulations seems to have settled these definitions somewhat, guiding future interpretations of the ADA. Still, conservative rulings in the future may erode the gains earned by PWD's (of all stripes) in seeking access under the ADA. Personally, I'm still ambivalent about using service animals. I can see the benefits for 'traditional' PWD's, i.e., blindness, physical impairments. Thank you for illustrating the PWD's with unseen disabilities and their impact on the service animal equation. Certainly makes me think! Spot-on and incisive analysis. Thanks to its liberal and inclusive wording, the ADA is indeed painted with a broad brush stroke. The provisions concerning service animals are of no exception. Also, there’s the law of unintended consequences, where people interpret the law to suit their needs, going beyond what the original framers of the law envisioned.

However, this trend, expanding beyond the traditional boundaries that used to define service animals, is troubling. Abuse and/or perceptions of abuse, could lead Congress to revisit the issue and curb service animal usage by PWD’s.

I remember such issues when the ADA first came out. There was an initial burst of litigation over what it meant to be ‘disabled’ under the ADA, what kind of relief can be sought, etc. Years and years of litigation and/or regulations seems to have settled these definitions somewhat, guiding future interpretations of the ADA. Still, conservative rulings in the future may erode the gains earned by PWD’s (of all stripes) in seeking access under the ADA.

Personally, I’m still ambivalent about using service animals. I can see the benefits for ‘traditional’ PWD’s, i.e., blindness, physical impairments. Thank you for illustrating the PWD’s with unseen disabilities and their impact on the service animal equation. Certainly makes me think!

]]>