Under U.S. law, persons with therapy dogs are NOT granted the right to enter businesses with their dogs which do not permit pets. They do not get to fly in the cabins of aircraft because they are therapy dogs, nor do they get to live in "no pets" housing because they are therapy dogs.

Dogs used for emotional support, that are not task-trained, are called emotional support animals. They are not service dogs.

Can anyone point to any actual state/federal laws that impose fines or jail time on service dog impersonators? Besides just vaguely saying that you can be subject to HUGE fines and prison, can anyone actually cite to code?

I totally agree with you !!!! I myself have a debilitating mental illness and because my service/therapy dog is a Pomeranian I get so much flack because she is small and "cannot possibly be a service dog". Ridiculous!

I myself have been diagnosed with a bipolar disorder (I always thought my symptoms were from menopause!) and have been having really severe panic attacks. A friend of mine had trained her Pomeranian to be a service dog and upon hearing of my diagnosis, offered Koda to me. I was not thrilled with the idea as I have a chihuahua puppy already (my greyhound passed from lymphoma last October - talk about going to extremes - from a 100 lb dog to a 7 lb dog lol). After having Koda for a three month trial period, I have found that when she is with me in public, I am somewhat more at ease around people/crowds. I still get panic attacks, finding a corner to cower in, but she snuggles in my lap, watching me intently all the while, making soft noises while I try to get past the attack and calm down. It really works! I brought her to my doctor and he was quite impressed with the results. I am appalled by those who think that a mental "illness" does not require a service dog. (I used to be one of them and it now disgusts me how narrow minded I was about this issue). I am even more appalled by those in authority who see a small dog such as a Pomeranian and do not allow me access to their properties even though she is properly tagged with identification, wears a service vest and is very well trained. I now carry a doctor's note for proof and it's somewhat embarrassing to hear the whispering and snickering about my illness and get angry when I hear "crazy" ... that is so disgusting and disrespectful but it happens all the time. Bipolar Disorder is genetic, with psychological symptoms that are treated quite well with medication and therapy. Really - do you think it is their business as to what my illness is? Do they walk up to someone in a wheelchair and ask why they are in it? They argue that she most certainly cannot be a service dog due to her size - Goodgrief! That is discrimination of the smaller breeds, in my opinion. However - I can now feel safe to walk through a very crowded Harvard Square or the North End or Chinatown (in Boston for those who are not familiar) with BOTH dogs and not have a problem! I am now in the process of training my chihuahua to also be a service dog (this breed is much harder to train as they have such a Napoleon Complex but wish me luck!!) We with mentally associated problems really need this help - at least, I do. People should really change their opinions. Just my two cents.

Recently I attended the AKC National Agility Championship in Tulsa, Okalohoma. I was disgusted with the number of participants in this event that passed their agility dogs off as 'Service Dogs' so they could fly their pet for free. I can't believe that the AKC would allow this behavior, as it is a bad reflection on them. How can the airlines turn their head and allow this disgrace to happen? In the long run, it is going to hurt the legitimate Service Dogs and their owners. I don't understand why the airlines can't require to see documentation that the dog is a 'Service Dog'. There are so many dog show participants that fly their dogs the proper way, and this behavior is only going to hurt the legitimate Service Dogs. It literally made me ill to witness this outright disgrace, flying in and out of Tulsa. I'm sure this goes on every weekend, where ever there are dog shows around the country. I can only hope that this behavior can be stopped before it truly hurts the true 'Service Dogs' and their owners.

Wow! I am sorry you feel that way. I guess your dog is just a tool.

There are limits on the number of in-cabin animals allowed regardless of size!!! Also, do you really think that those greedy airlines who don't give us enough space & charge to check our luggage will give up space for crated dogs??? My Guide Dog weighs 58 pounds, and she barely fits when we fly. Just because a dog shows or runs agility or is a therapy dog doesn't mean it should have access, many of them have behavioral issues just as any pet dog might. Keep your pets out of the cabins!!!

The language of the previous posts supports the passionate views and emotions of all of us who fly and have dogs be they service dogs, therapy dogs, show dogs, or pets. The point here should be to recognize how much this issue means to everyone that has chimed in, and of course there are more out there that haven’t. There exists a wide base of people that care about this issue. The question should now move beyond the myriad of reasons that people have for falsely flying dogs as service animals to lobbying the airlines and government for a change in flight policies for dogs period.

I am someone who always believed I would never fly my medium size dog, once he grew too big to fly in the little pet carrier as a small puppy. But circumstances change, situations change, and after an extended illness and other complications I was faced with needing to fly him if we were going to make it a particular destination in time: the Westminster Kennel Club dog show. He flew in a custom built kennel, under the plane and only after I spent days and days researching each airline and all the airline animal handling and transport accident and fatality reports for the past five years.

Already this seems to point to the problem in the current system for dog travel on airline: how many of us would ever fly ourselves if we first needed to research every single airline and their handling of human passengers before deciding to book a ticket? The fact is none of us should ever be put in this position. We should all be able to fly with our loved ones at our sides on any airline that offers the best options for our travel.

As it was, I am pleased to report that our experience was positive and I have since had to fly him twice more (as cargo) in his custom kennel while I flew in the cabin, and again we had a fine experience each time. Yes, I felt a great twinge of jealousy leaving the show in New York as I watched a Springer Spaniel in glorious show coat don a service animal vest and slip into line for security just after I’d checked my boy as cargo, but at least I could try to comfort myself knowing that my dog should be able to get some rest sprawled out in his kennel while the Spaniel (that was clearly a show dog and not a service animal) would likely have to endure a trip of suffering, laying on a filthy cabin floor and being stepped on by a myriad of passengers and attendants tripping through the narrow airplane.

Do I understand why those owners would impersonate having a service animal? Absolutely. Do I admire them for having the guts to do it and pull it off? A little. Would I do it myself? I don’t think so. And here’s where I get really angry though, why should I even have to? Why isn’t there a safe way for me and others like me that need to travel and want the safest passage for their pets (travel in the cabin with the owner) to be able to fly on an airplane together without having to resort to ‘cheating the system’? Why are our rights as dog owners and travelers being overlooked, ignored, and generally disregarded by the airline industry? Where is the ethical blame, really?

It is unethical that the airlines do not offer a safe, white glove, temperature controlled, in view of the owner, year-round travel option for travelers with pets of all sizes.

Last week, due to my work schedule, my dog (who is ranked number three in the country for his breed) and I were unable to make the two day (each way) drive to the national breed club show. I decided to fly. But, it turned out we were unable to fly because the temperatures in a city where we had a scheduled 90 minute plane change and lay over were expected to be above the 85 degree embargo that this airline imposes (on all breeds, not just snub noses, which actually are embargoed at a lower temperature). In fact, when I talked to the airline on the phone they said that even if we went to the airport, we would not have be allowed to board.

Ironically, this was not the airline that I’d flown before, and I had a few misgivings anyway, so I ended up being fine with this… except that the fact remains, there is really no ‘ethically’ or ‘justifiable’ reason that I can see as to why I should not be able to bring my well groomed and well behaved dog on the plane with me. These laws are asinine and they interfere with my civil liberties and travel options.

If you’re wondering why I hadn’t booked on the airline that we’d used before, which also happens to be the only airline that flies pets year round and does not require a temperature acclimatization certificate from a veterinarian because they guarantee temperature control at all stages of the pets travel… Well, it was because they did not offer any flights to the final destination on a plane that was equipped to carry live animals as cargo (a temperature controlled and pressurized cargo area are required) and the small jet they were using for that leg of the journey did not have it.

If a solution to safe, healthy, and comfortable air travel for pets in the presence of the owner means making an inlet space available at the rear or front of the cabin where a crate can be secured by strapping it in, that’s fine.

If it means letting more dogs travel in the cabin by sitting with their people that’s fine too.

The point is that ethically speaking safe travel does need to be offered. It currently is not – and that is the real ethics violation.

In discussion of bringing more dogs into the cabin, it is meaningless to bring up issues of allergies because a precedent has already been established that service animals are allowed on board and small animals – including dog, cats, and birds are also allowed on board. The current restrictions have absolutely nothing to do with concerns for allergies.

The idea of where the pets will relieve themselves also should not be an argument for in cabin pet travel. Most pets are trained in the proper place and time to take care of this business. But, where do babies, toddlers, and incontinent people relieve themselves on a plane? If I had to dress my dog in a diaper or train him to use a pee pad in order to bring him on board with me, I gladly would. I’m sure others would too.

As to those nay sayers out there that will cite bite or insurance risks, I am confident that I am not alone when I say, that although I know that there is very slim chance that my Therapy Dog licensed, Canine Good Citizen, AKC Champion, and working now in obedience and agility, dog would ever pose a risk to another I am perfectly fine to support a temperament test requirement for dogs traveling in cabin.

However, I would gladly put my assurances and temperament tests to the side and elevate all possible insurance concerns and legal risks by having the dogs wear a muzzle. As sad as the looks on their faces might be, since it would only be temporary during the duration of a flight, as long as they were allowed to ride in the plane next to their people rather than in a kennel underneath, I’m sure dogs and owners would cope.

I am sure there are others out there that would also gladly trade a muzzle and room in the cabin for the dogs for the current kennel ride underneath if that is what it takes to make insurance companies happy. And on the bright side, I actually think that requiring all the dogs to be muzzled when on board would might really be in their best interest because it would protect them from other dogs that might not be as well trained or socialized and it would certainly protect them and their owners from any chance of a malicious passenger or false lawsuits.

The issue of whether to allow people to purchase an additional seat already has precedent too. Musicians and athletes are able to purchase extra seats for their fragile instruments and equipment, and some airlines require very large persons to purchase additional seats for themselves! It would actually be less expensive to purchase a seat for my medium size dog than it is to fly him in his kennel as cargo.

There have been a few posts here that have pointed to the ‘pet friendly’ airline options. The first problem here is of course that these airlines rarely stay in business. They have inconvenient flight schedules and do not service many of the major airports. Besides all that, they still require that the owner drop the pet off to be cared for by strangers and then what’s more, they exercise the pets taking them in and out of their kennels. I don’t know about the rest of you, but in a stressful and heightened risk environment such as airport travel, the last thing I would want to worry about is my dog slipping away from a well-meaning, but potentially scary handler that he doesn’t know.

Ultimately the current system is flawed. It is not the owners that ‘violate ethics’ by impersonating traveling with a service animal that are to blame. They are simply a product of the real flaw: the airline industry and involved government agencies.

These organizations are unethical because they do not offer a safe and viable means for medium to large size dogs to be transported by air year-round. Many airlines impose embargoes (for the safety of the animals in extreme temperature this is a good thing) and others simply refuse to fly animals in cargo or as luggage at all because they don’t want to deal with it.

But why should outside temperatures be an issue at all? Why shouldn’t our dogs be able to travel in safe temperature controlled environments like we do ever step of the way? This is an ethical issue, is it not?

There are actually relatively few airlines that will accept dogs under the plane, and (again) this is only an option during certain times of the year and of course, it is only available on planes that meet the required specs for live animals to travel underneath.

Did you know that even highly trained and valuable search and rescue and fire and police dogs are not allowed to fly in the cabin? It’s true. They may ‘legally’ travel in the cabin with their handler only when they are flying to an assignment. Otherwise, when the mission is complete and they are flying home, they must fly cargo. The same is true for service animals. If the animal is with the person that they serve, they may fly in cabin, but if a trainer or family member is transporting the animal for some reason, then the dog ‘legally’ must fly cargo.

So, in essence with the current system, the airlines have such limited travel options, they disregard the high level of training on some of the most specialized dogs out there, and it seems then that it is little wonder that they have no regard for the show dogs and pets that also need to travel. Even for those that might be willing to fly a dog in cargo, the ethical rights of an air traveler with a medium to large size dog are violated because there is no guarantee for the safety and well being of that animal.

Here are the current ‘ethics’ of pet travel for those animals that are larger than 15 pounds and must therefore fly under the plane:
1. the owner surrenders his/her dog to the custody of the airline for a booking fee of around $400 for an average 60 pound, medium sized dog in an average 500 size crate.
2. The airline makes no guarantee of the condition that the animal will be in when the owner picks him/her up.
3. The airline makes no guarantee to control the temperatures that the animal will be exposed to (which is why the owner must have veterinarian complete a ‘certificate of acclimation’ assuring that the animal is capable of with standing extreme temperatures).
4. The airline will not allow the animal to continue the journey if temperature rise above 85 degrees, therefore if a layover was scheduled or if a surprise heat wave hits the departure points the travelers may find themselves stuck.
5. The airline will not allow the owner to exercise, inspect, or even peek at the animal during scheduled layovers or unscheduled delays, unless the owner agrees to sign the dog out from the airline’s custody and then go through the entire booking process, including paying a second booking fee, in order to resume travel.

Ethics? It is not the people with the guts and the means to impersonate having a service animal that violate ethics. It is the airlines that rape their travelers that fly with dogs by allowing them to fly only on the condition that the airline violate the owners rights to supervise the care and environment for their animals, while at the same time charging the travelers exorbitant prices and offering no guarantees.

It is my hope that the travelers and dog lovers that have taken the time to post on this site will turn their passion from the vitriolic attacks and jibes at one another to writing letters and lobbying the airline industry and their government representatives.

Demand fair changes that will ethically met the needs of air travelers with dogs by requiring the airlines to open cabin travel up to travelers with dogs.

You seem like a very bitter person "willing to provide more documentation than legally required to catch a few of them and make public examples of them." Some people really love their dogs like family and want to be sure they travel safely. No matter what airlines tell you, cargo has many risks. I even had a dog shipped from South Africa and the stupid, incompetent airline lost my dog for 24 hours sending me into an unimaginable panic. No one wants a disabled person with a service dog to receive any less respect or privileges. What they do want is to have peace of mind for the safe travel of their own pets. From what I have read everyone here has agreed that the disabled deserve the rights given to them. You however have not even tried to understand why others go to extremes to protect their beloved pets. You are responding in anger wanting only punishment for the offenders suggesting you care very little about the welfare of the dogs of either party and more about some perceived injustice.

For those on this post who are disabled, CALM DOWN! We get why you have a dog. No one marginalizes your disablity. We want your rights to remain intact. But reading some posts here, most of you act as if you can't book a flight because of posers with pets.

I fly a lot for my job, roughtly six months out of the year. During this time, I might have seen one, maybe two people with service dogs real or not. Anyone here ever have the airlines tell you, "Sorry, two Dalmation-mixes are already booked on Flight 323..." I think not.

That said, I put the responsiblity of the airlines to improve their pet policies, namely no dogs in cargo. Service animals and well-behaved pets should be able to fly together. Period. People with allergies (we neglected this group), bone up and get Zyrtec.

Yes, calling a companion, show or working farm dog a "service dog" to get the privileges extended to such dogs (access to public places normally off limits to dogs) IS UNETHICAL and a diservice to those animals serving those with disablities as well as those who rely on srvice dogs to move thru their days.

But at several thousand dollars ($6000 with our area training programme) to have a service dog placed with an individual with a disablity is out of reach for many in need.

Can people with disabilities train their own dogs? Yes.

Should we have some sort of verification procedures in place to identify such individuals and dogs? Perhaps this is the answer...

A local homeless man was fined after becaming disorderly for bringing his dog into a fast food restaraunt, claiming it was a service dog who alerted him to pending seizures. He did not win his case in court.

Just as I must pay for driving lessons, take an exam and renew my license every few years for a small fee - I wonder if the same could happen with "home-trained" service dogs. A regional licensing authority where the individual takes her/his dog to show what the dog can do - coupled with a confirmed diagnosis that the individual is claiming from a health care provider. An annual/biennial license granted to the individual employing the services of a service dog to present when asked.

Tough question and one worth exploring.

I've known CCI trained dogs and self-trained service dogs.

As much as I would LOVE to take my dog EVERYWHERE with me (wouldn't we all?!) I think it a system not to abuse or use carelessly.

Well said!

Do you have any idea how disgustingly ignorant so many posts on this board are? I was most affronted by Jenni's, but many people are subscribing to her unacceptable mindset.

Service Dogs are NOT pets.

I did not "kiss ass" to get my DISABILITY, thank you very much!
I live 24/7 with a debilitating condition. I can not function on my own. Therefore, to allow me to have some sense of independance, to allow me to attend college so that I'm NOT mooching off of YOUR taxpayer dollars for the rest of my life, I have EMPLOYED a Service Dog.
I payed for my Service Dog by working to have exceptional grades in highschool so that I could apply to scholarships and grants, eventually accumulating over 10,000$ from my own hard work, despite constant doctor's appointments, hospitalizations and medications.

What is imporant here is that dogs do not have rights. Not your pet dog, not your show dog, not my service dog. But I as a Disabled Person under the AODA, DO have rights that allow me to be accompanied by a Service Dog wherever I choose to go. (Certain places are excempt from the AODO including: Laboratories, Sterile Operation Rooms, Zoos, and Churchs .)

I spent a year and a half waiting for my dog while she was trained. I spent 5000$ on a Certified Trainer who is registered with the I.A.A.D.P. and the Canadian Service Dog Registry. I have proof of disability, I have doctor's notes from not only my Family Doctor, but my Psychiatrist, Psychologist, Counsellor and my dog's Certified Trainer who is also a registered Psychologist.

You still think I "kissed ass" to get that paperwork?

Also, it is not a Service Dog Organization's responsibility to help you get access or better quality accomodations for your "pets". Considering the amount of prejudice faced every day by disabled persons working with Service Dogs, do you not think that these organizations are busy enough? Besides which there is a much larger organization dedicated to pets: The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Commonly known as: The S.P.C.A.. If you have an issue with how your PET is being treated by an airline, you take it to them, not to a Service Dog organization that is not affiliated by nature or by mandate to your PET.

My mom helps me figure out my moods a lot, and helps me chart how my meds affect me - does that mean she can call herself a doctor? NO. So your life may be ENRICHED by your PET, but my life is ENABLED by my SERVICE DOG.
My dog is a dog, just like yours, yes. But unlike your pet, my Service Dog provides an essential service.

I hope that I have managed to educate you on the difference between a Service Dog and your pet. If you have any questions please feel free to e-mail me at kittykatty8@hotmail.com or visit my trainer's website at www.bakerdogbehavioralcentre.com .

I sincerely hope that cargo conditions will be vastly improved so that pets may travel safely as I truly believe every pet owner posting on this board, however misguided about Service Dogs, is only working to provide safety for their pet.
I also commend airline companies forming specifically for pet travel. A fabulous idea indeed!

PLEASE RESEARCH ALL OF YOUR OPTIONS FOR TRAVELLING WITH YOUR PET BEFORE COMMITTING FRAUD OR IMPERSONATION - BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT YOU'RE DOING WHEN YOU CLAIM YOUR PET IS A SERVICE DOG. You can and will be charged upwards of $50,000 WHEN (not if) you get caught.

My service dog has traveled with me all over the United States. Without her I am absolutely unable to leave my home even for short shopping trips. The first time my service dog or me are inconvenienced or bumped from a flight so one of those inbred show dogs can have our seat, you can rest assured I will own that mutt, the owner of that mutt, and the airline that allowed it to happen!! Enough is enough! A service dog is not a pet or a luxury. A service dog is an extenion of a disabled person. Go ahead, step on my rights! I am ready for you!!!!!

I don't even want to read the whole thing. It is so sick! It creates more problems for someone like me where people say, "How do we know it is a service dog? It is a wiener dog!"

Given that dogs can and have died flying cargo,I can understand why a person would want to pass their dog off as a Service Dog. Pet dog and/or show dog owners are acting in the best interest of their dog. However this does not remedy the situation.
The Air Carriers are the ones who need to be regulated correctly to ensure the safety of any animal.
As a person in medical need of a service dog, I see how passing off a pet as a Service Dog has the potential to undermine the rights of those who are in need.
The standards for my Service Dog to be legally recognized have been met. I do carry a Dr.'s letter and vet requirement letters with me for travel purposes. The reason for my need for a Service Dog is no one else's business other than mine and my Dr. No one else needs to know why. It is a matter of privacy and discrimination.
Due to the size of my Service Dog he must travel in the cargo section, which at present limits my options for travel. My Service Dog ought to be able to travel with me regardless of his size. I have a medical need for him and it doesn't magically disappear on a plane. In fact my medical need becomes greater.
High standards are a must and ought to be law to ensure the safety of any animal being transported. Access to one's animal being one of the conditions enforced. I too would then feel comfortable traveling by air with my Service Dog. Thus rendering passing of a dog as a Service Dog a mute point.
I think this would satisfy both Service Dog handlers and pet owners with no reason to make things more difficult for Service Dog handlers. I ask that those who are not in legitimate need of a Service Dog not to pass their dog off as one because in doing so my human rights are being compromised.

A service dog is a legally defined animal that provides one or more trained tasks that mitigate the effects of a specific disability. If you the human owner and handler do not meet the legal definition of a person with a disability, then no matter how warm and fuzzy your dog makes you feel, your dog isn't a service dog and you by claiming your dog as a service dog are committing fraud and there are monetary as well as legal reprecussions for misrepresenting yourself and your dog. No, a service dog in training and a service dog for someone else do are not entitled to in cabin travel. They are only entitled to in cabin travel as a service dog or a medically necessary emotional support dog when accompaning the person with a disability. The Federal Air Carrier Act does allow the Airline to request written documentation showing that your dog is a service dog and that you are a person with a disability or the dog is a medically prescribed emotional support dog. I personally will be happy to supply the airline with a certificate of training, shot records, and a prescription from my doctor stating that my service dog has been prescribed to perform tasks, x,y, and z for me and a statement that I am a person with a disability per the definition of the American with Disabilities Act. Are you posers willing to go that far?
People who commit fraud by misrepresenting themselves as a person with disabilities and their dog as a service dog when it isn't make life harder on those with legitimate service dogs and personally I am willing to provide more documentation than legally required to catch a few of them and make public examples of them.

Come on! Just because someone is not deaf, blind, or epileptic does not mean that their dog does not provide them with some service. My dog means the world to me and I'd do anything to keep him safe. He services me mentally. He makes me smile, he makes me get out of bed on very rough mornings. If it were not for him, I'd be home under the covers right now probably sobbing about the screwed up society we live in.

I have always had a problem with people who believe the rules don't apply to them. However, I believe that if they can break/bend the rules without suffering a crisis of conscience, then the guilt or lack thereof is their issue. Having said that, there are some people who suffer from "invisible illnesses" that may not be an obvious disability when you see them, but actually requires more assistance. So if the "offenders" are not truly in need of a service dog, then that issue is between them and their higher power.

So easy to judge others!

But when you have a an older dog, or whatever your dog is (recently in surgery, spoiled, etc) I bet there will be many excuses.

IMO, there should be new regulation that allow pets to travel in the cabin if:

A. There is a powerful reason (age, health issues, something like this)
B. The owner can submit the dog to a behavioral evaluation or prove the dog will probably not disturb the other passengers.
C. The owner pays an amount of money, so his pet can get this luxury.

This way, nobody would be "abusing" the system.

The system says that animals are objects.

And I am afraid I disagree with the system on this. A pet is not the couch that you wrap up and send in cargo..

At least not my pets, sorry.

I say go for it. Of course if it were me I wouldn't give a plug nickel to any business- airline or other than wouldn't let me have my dog on board with me at least in a carrier. I'd drive. But for those who don't have that option go for it. The policy is ridiculous dogs aren't cargo and as for the mention of condos what kind of fool can't see how much good dogs do people? Break the rules. Why not? Whether it's the administration lying to people or cops planting evidence the entire justice system is a joke, all we want are our family members not treated like crap. Nothing compared to these other people's law breaking. It seems a reasonable request, that if you can't honor it like a reasonable person I see no reason to remain reasonable with you. As for giving service dogs a bad name not only is their reputation not my job but what are the service industry people doing to help us get access for our dogs? Quid pro quo my friends. Your dogs no matter how "specially trained for x years" are still dogs- just like mine. I just didn't pay the right payoff and kiss the right a** to get the paperwork you did. That paperwork says nothing other than you made the right payoffs and you need to realize that. Your dog is no better than mine- they are all special and they all deserve to be with their people.

Here's how I see it in terms of ethics:

The facts are:
Sometimes flying cannot be avoided, driving is not always an option.
Sometimes dogs die or are lost when they are put in cargo. They are almost certainly distressed. Thus they are being harmed to some degree, and at risk of severe harm.
Having a poorly trained, badly behaving dog being passed off as a service dog harms the owners of true service dogs.
A poorly trained dog puts other people and service dogs at risk of bites.

Thus I believe that if you have a healthy (as certified by a vet) very well trained (therapy dog QUALIFIED / obedience trained to a Utility Dog Title, or AT LEAST a canine good citizen award )if you brought them on the plane as a service dog you would be behaving ethically, assuming you have reason to believe that there is a substantial risk to your dog in cargo.

Why? It does not harm real service dog owners if your dog is as well behaved as theirs.

If you are doing something to avoid harming a living thing and not causing harm to anyone else you are are behaving ethically.

Yes people's morals have slid that terribly. I live in a condo and it has a no pet policy. Recently, a few owners have obtained fraudulent service dog certification from a service dog scam site in Hawaii. It is infuriating because it is fraud. Government agencies designed to protect the disabled dismiss the fact it is such a site. What can one expect when a Gov't agency fails to act? It will result in ugly retribution to everyone with SDs based on the assumption that theirs must be bogus too since so many are. These sites must be shut down. it is the epitome of arrogance and selfishness to claim your "pet" is a SD.

Thank you for the most coherent and reasonable comment on here.

if you want your dog to be safe then you will do anything to do that.

I can't say it has not crossed my mind... and would it be hurting those who really have and need their service dogs?
Probably only if abuse would result in stricter regulations.
But, as I said, i can't imagine my puppy in cargo and do understand people who do it.

you guys r all right. I have seen this happen and it kills me. They should also ask to see if they have an ID that states that the person is dissable.. I have one and I show it when they asked me about my SD.

"Every see the guy get of his motorcycle after parking in one ? "

You're a physician and you don't think disabled people can ride motorcycles? My father-in-law has a handicap badge on his bike - he's got crippling arthritis - but that doesn't prevent him from riding his bike. He can walk, just not very far.

I find it interesting that you judge others they way you do - especially since you "have a disease that is not readily noticable to others..."

Good for you Dawn. Many within the disabled community use the ADA to run legalized extortion rackets, so I'm not getting all teary eyed when I hear others might game the system for no other reason but to protect their animals.

My dog has a service dog jacket and he is a service dog for me but not because I have a disability. I am a professional trainer, and my dog is my primary working companion. He provides a huge service to me and does go everywhere with me. I need him as much as a handicapped person needs their dog. I need him as well trained in variable situations as anyone with a handicap.

I wish this country was more like England where dogs are welcome everywhere. I'm all for anyone, with a well balanced and trained dog getting a service dog jacket if that's what it takes to be able to have their dog with them more.

Their lives are too precious and too short to not take advantage of all the time together that we can.

Who's to say that only handicapped individuals have the right to have their dogs with them. I think that's predjudice so I have to do what's right for me, and my dog.

There seems to be a trend here and on other blogs. Those with the most disability are not out there writing letters and blaming others. I have not seen any responses from the blind, those with SD for Medical Alert (DM, Siezures, etc) I am an MD so I am well aware of dogs servicing mental health issues. I love both my dogs, they go everywhere with me I would be devistatewd if something should happen to the older Golden, but he is not a SD. What I see and hear are people complaining that they are against certification..why...they then go on to talk about the need to take psyhiatric dogs with them.
Why would anyone be afriad to carry a cocument with them indication thier need for a SD...a diagnosis? It is not plastered on you shirt, just for the authorities to see. Handicap parking permits are just as abused. Every see the guy get of his motorcycle after parking in one ? Or the guy wearing the dirty baseball uniform after a game get out of his car? And we need certification for that. Nothing is perfect. I have a disease that is not readily noticable to others , until I fall to the floor. I carry a medical tag so that I can obtain quick help when needed. I have a SD (a 45# PWD) trained to alert. She is not all "Tricked out" in vests,specisl handles and backpacks to look obvious and official. She has an IdD card and a small pouch that has a Medical Alert badge on it That's it. She only flies when I am alone....todate....not yet...has a flight in Jan. Never goes into Restaurants, etc, and she is none allergic.
That cartoon with the 3 doors is crazy....if you are disabled, you are, if not so be it. If you have a dog that you take on a plane because you are afraid to fly, pay thr fee and take it in a handbag or carrier, but don't trick it out...a mini dog in a vest, come'on! And I realize that many dogs serve no purpose while actually on the plane, they have to be with the owner. Look, I am a physician, and I am well aware of the human psychi .... but when it come to disability there are many who take advantage and who blow thing out of proportion...if you do not want to have your diagnosis out there than why woulkd you make your dog look like it was at a perpetual Holoween party ? Think about others, allow laws to be made, and don't get angry at people who question the use of a minidog, that can go in a carrier, yet, it's owner takes it on as a SD and takes the place of a dog that does have to be on the plane. It is the more obvious SD owners that seem to make the most noise and it is those who don't want the world to know the diagnosis that put blinking lights on thier animals.

It is interesting that those of us who need psychiatric service dogs are discriminated against, both by the Americans with Disabilities Act and by the Air Carrier Access Act. It is absolutely unfair that I have to produce documentation to fly stating that I am mentally ill. I already have papers from a doctor stating that I have a chronic medical disability, but it is not enough for some airlines. I, too, deplore transporting show dogs or pets by passing them off as service dogs, but I believe I should be treated equally with someone with a physical disability. I am absolutely unable to leave the house without my dog. He is trained to come and provide tactile stimulation to ward off panic attacks and - here is where I truly qualify under the ADA - I need him to provide balance and mobility because of the medications I am on.

It is time for the mentally ill to be treated equally. My dog, besides being trained, is very well behaved. We have traveled before on Southwest - they are great - but other airlines are not so good.

So I ask that all of you respect me need for a service dog; my illness is horrible and my dog is a wonderful ally for me.

Well put! I travel with a Service Dog and have commented more than once to my partner that I am so glad Buddy gets to fly with me because I would hate to have to put a dog in cargo. Buddy is getting older and I know it is not safe down there. I am sure there are lots of people who love their dogs and who are scared and worried about putting them in cargo and searching for an answer . . . another way . . . to make the trip safe for their beloved pet. If the AIRLINES changed how animals were transported this, too ,would change.

as someone who has been sorely tempted to label his dog a service animal in order that he might fly with me, i feel compelled to weigh in on this matter.

placing this question in a framework of ethics is a fundamentally flawed premise. it is never ethical ("responsible") to promote false assertions in pursuit of personal (yours or your dog's) transportation convenience or comfort, insofar as other remedies exist to achieve the transport goal. NO respectable ethicist worth her salt would tell you otherwise.

despite the clear ethical line, several times i have been to the verge of ethics-be-damned on this one; but the fact remains: options to the perceived dangers of cargo transport exist, however inconvenient or unpalatable we may find them. not a conundrum here, just a choice whether to ignore ethical boundaries.

some of the options i consider: a trusted and familiar secondary care-provider for our pet when we are out of town, driving (not always viable for cross-country hops) - and now, in direct response to the need for safe pet travel by air: the humble beginnings of airlines dedicated to pets (limited routes, unfortunately).

nevertheless, decrying "false service dog" people as "barbaric and sick" is just melodramatic overkill, preposterous, and above all, downright silly. people grow attached to their pets, and would no sooner put them in cargo than they would their baby. this sentiment does nothing to decrease the legitimacy of true service pets, nor does it "increase discrimination" against service dogs.

the solution is simple: require credentials for any animal to fly in the airplane cabin. in a manner similar to the placards that guarantee those who need special parking, those who need service dogs can be amply served by a level of documentation sufficient to discourage those who would otherwise unethically take advantage of the situation.

on the other hand, those of us who feel the airlines provide grossly inadequate transport options for our pets would be best served by a) lobbying the airlines and other relevant resources to improve the situation b) supporting (most effectively, as paying customers) pet-friendly transport companies/airlines or better yet c) investing our resources in the development of a broad, competitive swath of pet-friendly transport options.

from a pet safety perspective: my dog will never fly in cargo: the little one flies in-cabin in a carrier with me; we make other arrangements for the big dog. from an ethical perspective: despite my sadness at not having the big dog with me, i won't ever falsify his credentials for the sake of my convenience.

I just recently took my first and last flight with my SD. Thank heaven she is a small 13 lb Schipperke. I was forced to move away from my family and hold the dog in my lap for the entire flight because there was no room at my feet for her to lay down. It happened on the flight going and coming home. I will never travel Delta Airlines again. She was wearing her vest. I had all her documentation and all of her vet records. It was a nightmare! And it is probably because people do try to pass their pets as service animals. Please people, think about the consequences we have to pay for your selfishness!!!!

While we understand the temptation of pet owners to do this, it is illegal to do so. We've been selling service dog IDs since 2006 and we suspect that it happens quite often. The airlines have become very strict about service dogs and they will ask for some form of documentation. Unfortunately there are companies charging over $350 to "Certify" your dog. If they have never seen and tested your dog then their ink-jet printer "Certification" isn't worth anything and these companies are just trying to take advantage of people for hundreds of dollars.

It is my opinion that the airlines have placed THEIR problem on the public, convinced DOT and FAA that it is the public's fault.

If transporting live animals in cargo were SAFE, then no one would feel a need to "fake a SD." So many animals have been mistreated, allowed to escape, and died traveling in cargo that the public KNOWS their animal has a good chance of dying traveling in cargo.

If an airline employee had to travel in cargo with each live animal shipped, things would change. After a few employees died, the airlines were sued "wrongful death", the airlines would get the temperature control and air pressure control in cargo as dependable as it is inside the cabin of the plane.

We would then see the "fake SD" on plane diminish. Airlines by making this a public problem have US fighting each other instead of dealing with the real issues. POOR QUALITY CONTROL BY THE AIRLINES IN CARGO.

I use an Assistance Dog, and I see what people are saying, I just see a different "root" of the problem.

Dawn, you are the reason the courts should make it illegal to fake having a service dog. I am disabled and have a service dog, and like you I'd have no qualms about turning you in to authorities just because you want your dog to fly on a plane with you. If you aren't comfortable putting it crated in the cargo hold, then don't fly and drive somewhere instead. It DOES harm us when people like you lie about having a service dog, if you honestly think it doesn't then you need your head checked.

And then we wonder why the DOT does things like this:
http://www.psychdog.org/comm_talkback.html
At the rate we're going, it could come down to ALL SD users having to have a doctors note and advance notice.
Hello people wake up! Fakers DO hurt people with legitimate disabilities. If your dog is a pet, don't call it a service dog. it's illegal and unethical. Seriously, have people's morals slid so terribly?

Well this is exactly why the ACAA has recently changed their guidelines requiring letters from doctors attesting to disability and need for service dog. This is a recent change and I do wonder how it will rock the show dog world.

Even if you are willing to commit fraud and pass your pet off as a service dog, are you going to go so low as to ask your doctor to diagnose you with some fake disability (a disability being something that severely limits an activitiy for daily living: breathing, walking, eating, tolieting, hearing, seeing, thinking) and ask your doc to commit fraud for your own travel ease?

Those fake certifications wont work either, by the way. It is very common knowledge to the airlines that they are fake.

I also want to correct the assumption that service dogs don't have to be trained and nobody can question that, even by the ADA. Any buisness can ask if you are disabled and what tasks your dog does to mitigate your disability (and this has to be more than comfort, companionship, or emotional support). If you are asked these questions and lie, you are impersonating a person with a disability and can be heald accountable for your crime.

In my opinion it is unethical and it does create issues for true service dog handlers wishing to access services.

Do everyone a favor, rather than tarnish the reputation of service dogs with your untrained dogs, fly them safely via Pet Airways http://petairways.com/

There is NO excuse for lying and passing your PET off as a service animal. There have been stricter regulations imposed as a result of people faking which discriminates against one type of service dog. Today it might be a psychiatric service dogs but next will be the medical, and others as people "adjust" their "disability" so fluffy can fly without charge or restriction.

If the pet airline isn't going to the same destination as you are planning and you don't want you pet in cargo, LEAVE YOUR PET HOME! If you are going to a show with your dog, drive instead. It doesn't matter how far it is. I've driven cross country so don't start whining it is too far. If you want to go to a show then do it morally. I wouldn't want to have to be on a flight near you with your fake service dog growling at my trained service dog the whole entire flight. Though I may be inclined to offer a muzzle and report you to the airlines to be sure you will not be welcome on the return flight.

I'm a guide dog handler and trainer and I know that those of us who use service dogs often get the blame for the untrained poor behavior of fake service dogs. It is unethical to try and pass a pet off as a service dog because it jeopardizes our rights and makes us look bad.

If you fake having a service dog, you are scum. I have a service dog in training, which means I don't have the legal right to airline flights with him and that's okay. When he's fully trained I will.

I do not have a service dog as some type of special perk, but instead because I need him to be able to live my life. When you fake having a service dog, you hurt real teams, who are already harassed by the public.

If I could get rid of my disabilities, I'd leave Figaro home in a red hot minute.

Depending on where you decide to fake, fines and jail time are possible. Is it really worth hurting people with disabilities just so Fluffy can ride in the cabin?

Responsible pet care would be getting airlines to allow you to buy a seat for your non medically necessary dog.

Anyone who fakes that there dog is a service dog should be ashamed. It makes discrimination toward people with disabilities that use service dogs far more likely. It's barbaric and sick.

It's definitely unethical to 'play service dog'. Remember, every time someone does this, it makes it more difficult for true SD users to fly with their dogs. It's very unfortunate that the Air Carrier Access Act now allows airlines to ask questions, because it becomes more of an interrogation than a simple inquiry (as reported by SD users). Some even 'require proof', such as a doctors note. Is it fair that a person with a disability must 'prove' that he or she is disabled? That they must subject themselves to the humiliation of having to share private, medical details with someone they do not know at all? I think not.

The people trying to pass their pets off as Service Dogs need to be more considerate of the bigger picture.

I do agree, however, that the conditions our wonderful pet dogs are subjected to when flying in cargo are unacceptable as well. I personally opt not to fly... I drive with my dog. But there should be a better alternative offered by the airlines.

So.....you believe that having to place your dog in cargo is unethical...............but lying about your dog being a legitimate service dog is "ethical", and allowing others to lie in order to do what they wanted, regardless of who it harms or of any protective laws that are being broken is also "ethical". Where are the "ethics" in lying? Wow....you do have some screwed-up values. You are totally lacking of any semblance in the tenents of Honor, Courage and Integrity. You disgust me.
Every time some selfish, thoughtless scumbag like yourself drags their ill-behaved, untrained and unvaccinated mongrel into public in the manner which you propose, it causes untold problems for legitimate service dog users. How? Simple. When the mutts who dont belong in the public venue, but are there because some idiot lied about them being a "service dog" start acting up (and it is not a matter of "if" they act up, but a matter of "when") THAT is the image that the public is left with in regards to ALL service dogs, legitimate or not. Access issues, denial of services and violations of the disabled persons civil rights always follow incidents where someone lied about their precious little "Fluffums" being a "service dog", just because they wanted to take the dog places it did not legally (or morally) belong. The actions taken by the self-serving lawbreakers have far-reaching consequences for those who they have no idea their actions are affecting. Therein lies the harm you cant seem to fathom.

The article does not acknowledge that legitimate service dogs for people with mental illness are actually discriminated against as they DO have to provide a doctor's letter and 48 hours notice prior to flight.

Also, as someone with a service dog, I am furious that anyone would "wink" at the prospect of faking their dog as a service dog. This is why my rights as a person with a disability that uses a service dog to mitigate the symptoms of the disability stands in danger of losing some rights on airlines. Fakers hurt people with disabilities. Fakers perpetuate discriminatory behavior. Fakers hurt me.

Dawn,

That is greatly offensive to those of us with legitimate service dogs. It may not be a federal offense to pass your dog off as a SD, but it is a state offense in most states with punishment ranging from a fine to jail time and confiscation of your dog. Your pet dog is not trained to the level that a service dog is and you have no idea how they will react to many situations, especially stressful ones such as flying. It is because of fakers that like may get very difficult for those of us with legit service dogs and why we now have so many public access problems. I have one service dog, one service dog in training and one pet dog. I would NEVER try to pass off a non-SD as a SD. We do travel with all 3 and stay in pet friendly places and drive. It is unethical, and in most states, illegal to pass off a non SD as a SD. It should be federal with stiff penalties!

First to clear up an error in the article. It is the Air Carrier Access Act(ACAA) not the ADA that allow service dogs to accompany their disabled handlers on flights. The service dog must occupy the foot space below the handler. People with disabilities do not buy an extra seat or actually foot space as the service dog is not allowed by the ACAA for a service dog to ride on a seat.

The law only allows for fully trained service animals.

It is fraudulent for a person to portray themselves as disabled to avail themselves of the rights granted to a person with a disability.

Jeanne Hampl

As a person who requires a service dog, I get to see first hand the effect that taking advantage of these laws has had on those who require the aid of these admirable animals. To be honest, airlines are not fond of allowing service dogs on their flights either, and the abuses of this allowance are only causing it to be more and more difficult for people who have to have their service dogs to fly at all. That said, I find the current system of packing dogs and other animals into the cargo hold like so much luggage to be deplorable, and I do completely understand the concern on the part of pet owners. I wish there was an easy answer.