US ends era of emotional support animals on planes • Hacker News Board

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#171

Post by hackeraccount » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 9:24 PM UTC

cj wrote: post #93

mwfunk wrote: post #70

I'm all in favor of people who need them having emotional support animals, but for as long as this has been a thing I have been totally shocked at how many people I personally know (who I thought were better people than this) completely abusing it to bring their pets with them everywhere (planes or anywhere else where you don't normally take pets). And joking about abusing the system, and joking about how awesome it…

Edit: Removed comment, sparked unconstructive discussion.

This is exactly how I feel about handicapped parking spaces. If I could pay for a spot right next to the door I would but they don't offer that and schlepping myself all the way across the parking lot makes me feel uncomfortable. Or at least sweaty.

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#172

Post by volkl48 » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 9:24 PM UTC

macdamaniac wrote: post #86

meowfly wrote: post #8

I wish there were better options for people to travel with their pets over long distances. There are plenty of horror stories of pets who have died in cargo. I would be willing to pay for a seat, or even a row, to take my dog on a cross country flight. Setting aside the absurd cases, like emotional support peacocks, I think a lot of the emotional support animal shenanigans are simply people not wanting to cargo their…

I have a pretty unpopular take on this, being married to someone with severe pet allergies. That take is, dogs (and cats) have no place on an airplane, and responsible adults shouldn't get pets that they can't find sitters for or board while they are away. Planes are enclosed-air spaces, and the allergens from your dog make anyone with allergies miserable for the entire duration of the flight. Every single time we en…

I'll entirely support this take, as one of those people (allergy side of things).

I'll also mention that it's the contact side of it too. If I touch anyone's dog, I have to wash my hands, because one absentminded rub of my face is all it takes to go full allergy misery. Sitting on any furniture that a dog has been on for a length of time (say, your couch)? Also going to cause me problems.

Pets shed, airplanes have carpeted floors and airplanes aren't exactly deep cleaned between flights, at least in non-COVID times.

If your dog was in that seat or on the floor of that row on the last flight, and I'm in it on this flight, I'm likely going to be both personally miserable and making everyone else around me miserable for my entire flight.

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#173

Post by 13rac1 » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 9:25 PM UTC

DoreenMichele wrote: post #143

13rac1 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand there is a huge grey area on this subject. I specifically refer to the abusers (the only label I am applying intentionally.) I didn't mention people who are homeless. A much better explanation than I can give at this time: http://brightside-susan.blogspot.com/2011/05/people-behaving... A quote from the article: > "Each time an employee has an encounter with a fake service dog (and yes, they know when you…

The first thing you linked to is the personal opinion of someone with what looks like a personal blog. I have had a college class on Homelessness and Public Policy. I homeschooled my two gifted-learning disabled sons for years, which means I effectively ran a two student school under the laws of California for years. I also spent some years homeless in part due to my own disability. Before I was diagnosed with a seri…

> The first thing you linked to is the personal opinion of someone with what looks like a personal blog.

Anything you or I write here is effectively the same thing. ;) Equal valuation. This blog does cite the ADA and IAADP though.

You seem focused on the bureaucratic hoops and seem to think I want them enforced more strictly? I haven't mentioned that. Please evaluate only the words I use. You seem to be making a point about specifics I haven't raised.

The people acting unethically/immorally and abusing the system know who they are when they do it. It's why they are so defensive. Selfish people ruining good things, once again.

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#174

Post by llbeansandrice » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 9:25 PM UTC

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #107

llbeansandrice wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bit of conflation in some of the comments but the "issue" is a bit of a loophole in the ADA. The ADA basically tries to minimize the burden of having a disability. So there are no licensing fees or registration or anything related to having a service animal by the government and as such businesses, landlords, etc. can't ask for something like a license or registration of a service animal as verification. The key di…

The no/registration piece makes 0 sense to me. Where I live, ALL dogs need to have a license and must have the tags to prove it - why not just add a certification to the tags that say it is a service animal?

> why not just add

This is an extra burden for having a disability which is specifically what the ADA tries to prevent. It allows anyone to train effectively any animal to perform any task that helps them with any disability they (or someone else) may have. It's ultimately these tasks and abilities that make an animal a service animal, not a registration or tag that needs to be kept up to date and costs money.

To be clear I'm talking about any registration that certifies an animal is a service animal, to my knowledge all service animals still have to have all other forms of legal registrations and tags.

It's really about the spirit of the ADA which tries to make sure that there are as few barriers as possible for people with disabilities in society. Someone else made a comment that describes how low the rates are for people with disabilities to have normal forms of ID for themselves, let alone their animals. For someone with a disability even the smallest of barriers can sometimes be insurmountable.

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#175

Post by UhDev » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 9:26 PM UTC

spfzero wrote: post #169

forscyth wrote: post #90

When can we end the era of shrieking babies on planes?

I wonder why airlines don't simply offer a higher cost flight without small children? Say, none under 5? I would happily pay more.

Or maybe a higher cost flight where you can bring your stupid pets.

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#176

Post by strstr » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 9:26 PM UTC

firebaze wrote: post #163

macdamaniac wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a pretty unpopular take on this, being married to someone with severe pet allergies. That take is, dogs (and cats) have no place on an airplane, and responsible adults shouldn't get pets that they can't find sitters for or board while they are away. Planes are enclosed-air spaces, and the allergens from your dog make anyone with allergies miserable for the entire duration of the flight. Every single time we en…

How would you react if someone reacts allergic to another human? Genuinely interested as a non-pet owner.

(While this might be an interesting hypo, it probably won’t be viewed charitably in the context of discussing pet allergies and planes.)

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#177

Post by graeme » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 9:28 PM UTC

meowfly wrote: post #8

I wish there were better options for people to travel with their pets over long distances. There are plenty of horror stories of pets who have died in cargo. I would be willing to pay for a seat, or even a row, to take my dog on a cross country flight. Setting aside the absurd cases, like emotional support peacocks, I think a lot of the emotional support animal shenanigans are simply people not wanting to cargo their…

The dogs that die in cargo are almost exclusively snub nosed dogs, as they can’t breathe properly in those conditions.

I looked into this a while back and articles were making the mortality seem more likely than it was.

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#178

Post by llbeansandrice » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 9:29 PM UTC

TulliusCicero wrote: post #154

llbeansandrice wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who decides what's reasonable, though? The court system. I say something is reasonable, you do not and don't allow me on a flight so I take you to court over it and the court decides.

That's not good. The courts should only have to get involved in exceptional scenarios. The law itself should be more clear.

I suppose that's your opinion but that's just not how the law works and in many cases the subjectivity is a feature not a bug.

It might be a common sense thing to say that no one would ever want or have need to use a horse as a service animal, but there are miniature horses that are service animals.

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#179

Post by DeRock » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 9:29 PM UTC

pdonis wrote: post #128

DeRock wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There really needs to be safe, affordable options for pet/dog owners to travel. Why? Are you suggesting some form of subsidy? Transporting live animals is expensive, and pet ownership (let alone flying with them) is not a human right. If the market does not land on a safe and affordable option, then so be it, solely the pet owner should bare that cost.

> If the market does not land on a safe and affordable option, then so be it, solely the pet owner should bare that cost. Right now the problem for pet owners (of which I am one) is that there are no acceptable options, even at a significantly increased cost. Putting a pet in the luggage compartment is not acceptable, and airlines basically don't give you any other option unless your pet is small enough to fit in its…

> Putting a pet in the luggage compartment is not acceptable, and airlines basically don't give you any other option

Well, whats your suggestion then? If there was a better option, it feels like the airlines would have taken advantage of that opportunity. My guess is that the alternatives are too logistically/operationally expensive, and the pet owners aren't willing to bear that cost.

> Airlines have options to support people traveling with infants and small children

I see a lot of this sentiment in the comments, comparing infants and pets. One is essential to the continuation of our species. The other is a comfort, choice and privilege. It makes sense that our willingness to accept and subsidize is completely different between the two. You don't get a dependent tax deduction either, just because you have a dog.

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#180

Post by jacurtis » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 9:29 PM UTC

macdamaniac wrote: post #86

meowfly wrote: post #8

I wish there were better options for people to travel with their pets over long distances. There are plenty of horror stories of pets who have died in cargo. I would be willing to pay for a seat, or even a row, to take my dog on a cross country flight. Setting aside the absurd cases, like emotional support peacocks, I think a lot of the emotional support animal shenanigans are simply people not wanting to cargo their…

I have a pretty unpopular take on this, being married to someone with severe pet allergies. That take is, dogs (and cats) have no place on an airplane, and responsible adults shouldn't get pets that they can't find sitters for or board while they are away. Planes are enclosed-air spaces, and the allergens from your dog make anyone with allergies miserable for the entire duration of the flight. Every single time we en…

My aunt flies frequently for business (at least once a week). She has routinely had to move because of people with pets (or "emotional support animals"). This isn't to be rude, but because she is highly allergic and it is not only uncomfortable for her, but dangerous.

Have you ever been on a flight where someone with peanut allergies is on the plane? The flight attendants announce that someone on the plane is allergic, so peanuts will not be served on the plane as a matter of safety.

The same courtesy should exist for people with allergies to pets. Many of them have to spend the whole flight concerned that they might have a reaction because they are forced to share the same re-circulated air as a pet that is potentially dangerous to them.