Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 263 posts

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#211

Post by jasonlaramburu »

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…

Is there a limit to the number of service animals that can be on board a plane at any given time? It seems like the airlines will happily allow an unlimited # of passengers to pay $200 to fly with their pet under the seat in front of them.

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#212

Post by devteambravo »

MereInterest wrote: post #48
devteambravo wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So let's just make assumptions then. Disabled people should have a case prepared, and always be ready to argue it in front of people. Upon challenge, by people "inconvenienced" by your accommodations, you should be able to spend 2 minutes showcasing your disability, how it came to be, and plead for said accommodations. Maybe you could edit that "not to be a jerk" bit to "I'm a jerk, hence:".

Please read up on the term "Invisible Disabilities". Not every disability is obvious, not every disability is immediately provable to satisfy an adhoc request, and not every disability has immediate effects. Your suggestion would lead to people being further marginalized, if every person feels that they can barge in for 2 minutes each. Add up more and more people each stealing away 2 minutes, and that is quite a lot…

My point exactly. Btw, I'm one of those invisibly disabled people you mention. "Luckily", I also have massive scarring all over, so I don't have to explain myself to people as much.

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#213

Post by mmglr »

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…

Certainly you could go on netjets.com and fly private if "enclosed-air spaces" are such an issue.

Ridiculous right? The way I understand the argument so far is:

Pets should be allowed on planes and everyone else must deal with that.

Pets should not be allowed so pet owners must deal with that.

Neither option sounds reasonable to me.

Really it looks to me like there is a market for safe and reliable pet air transport. Why have carriers not addressed this?

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#214

Post by logotype »

We recently relocated with our dog on a 13 hour flight. Everything went well and our dog is happy. But the process of flying with our pet is absolutely horrible. First of all, our only option was to let the dog fly in cargo. Extremely expensive (5000 USD). It’s also stressful for our dog to be in the crate in a noisy environment during “check-in” at the cargo company, sending the dog through an industrial x-ray machine, didn’t seem safe at all! The dogs are really handled like any cargo package, getting picked up by forklifts and placed to wait for extended periods of time. The only alternative option for us would be to charter a private yet, then our dog can fly in the cabin. But the price is prohibitive.

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#215

Post by lotsofpulp »

joegahona wrote: post #198
liuhenry wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Logically, the "surcharge for potential damage" should be a security deposit, or fines and penalties against specific behavior. You'd have the same issues with tenants that were excessively noisy, or held parties and spilled alcohol in the hallways, or scratched doors/walls/floors from moving bikes, furniture, etc. So it seems inconsistent to apply the nonrefundable fee only to the case of pets.

Yes exactly. Or toddlers, who cause much more damage than pets. Good luck charging people "toddler rent."

I have 2 decades of experience in the hotel business, and pets cause much, much more damage than toddlers. The total of pet fees collected never made up for all the damage caused. And tons of people would lie about their animal being a service animal(s). With no shame, they would declare all 3 dogs they have service animals.

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#216

Post by fuzxi »

joegahona wrote: post #199
0xffff2 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is my landlord charging me rent "a non-refundable fee for a human each month, simply for existing"? Why shouldn't a landlord offer the option if that's what they're comfortable with? Why is strictly less choice better for a pet owner?

Presumably the rent is the same whether it's just you, or you and an autistic child.

Why are you comparing children with autism to animals? You could have simply said "children", as all children are likely to cause some damage to a home that an adult would not.

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#217

Post by logotype »

logotype wrote: post #214

We recently relocated with our dog on a 13 hour flight. Everything went well and our dog is happy. But the process of flying with our pet is absolutely horrible. First of all, our only option was to let the dog fly in cargo. Extremely expensive (5000 USD). It’s also stressful for our dog to be in the crate in a noisy environment during “check-in” at the cargo company, sending the dog through an industrial x-ray machi…

The flight was from Hong Kong, the cargo company is Jardine Airport Services, operating for IAG Cargo which handles pet cargo for British Airways. Like I mentioned, everything went fine, but this isn’t how it should be. We should be able to fly with our pets in the cabin. Our dog is our family member!

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#218

Post by amanaplanacanal »

x86_64Ubuntu wrote: post #136
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…

Keep in mind that an Emotional Support Animal Service Animal. It appears they will still allow service animals, but not the "I just need my Great Dane by me on the flight damnit!!" emotional support animals.

It sounds like dogs only, so you can probably still take your Great Dane.

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#219

Post by lotsofpulp »

joegahona wrote: post #202
jacurtis wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to work in property management and we charged extra fees each month for pet rent. I initially was against it when I started working there, but by the end I completely understood why they did it. The reality is that animals are rougher on homes than humans are. Even things like the backyard will have more wear and tear on it with a pet than with humans and all of this has to be dealt with during turn over. A pe…

What I don't get is why can't this occur via a massive deposit on the front end, that the landlord can then itemize and prove when the tenant moves out? Rent forces all people to pay a monthly charge for their pet, regardless if their pet is a disaster or well behaved.

A security deposit is a legal term treated differently than rent, and can become a subjective thing that can be litigated. It's much more secure to simply demand it as rent.

Hotels discount rooms all the time for guests they know have a very low likelihood of causing damage. The probability of a person with a pet causing damage must be sufficiently high that it makes sense to charge extra. There's plenty of competing landlords and hotel businesses, and if there was economic opportunity in doing it the way you said, it would be done.

It's not just pets though. Hotels will charge more for wedding parties, who are far likelier to cause noise complaints, damage etc, than a crew of workers who will be sleeping, going to work, rinse repeat.

Re: US ends era of emotional support animals on planes

#220

Post by lotsofpulp »

mmglr wrote: post #213
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…

Certainly you could go on netjets.com and fly private if "enclosed-air spaces" are such an issue. Ridiculous right? The way I understand the argument so far is: Pets should be allowed on planes and everyone else must deal with that. Pets should not be allowed so pet owners must deal with that. Neither option sounds reasonable to me. Really it looks to me like there is a market for safe and reliable pet air transport.…

>Really it looks to me like there is a market for safe and reliable pet air transport. Why have carriers not addressed this? reply

As long as all flights are forced to accept service animals without verification for free, it's not a viable business to have flights exclusively for pets.

Post reply on HN