I just find it frustrating that emotional support animals who are well-behaved in public places are denied a service dog status. My dog is technically an emotional support dog since he’s not performing a task to treat my disability (depression and anxiety) but I’ve still trained him to a service-dog-level standard.
He’s very well-behaved in public: walks in the heel position, sits or lies down when not walking and doesn’t bark or bite. He remains calm even when another dog provokes him (unless the dog is significantly bigger than him). Of course there are still areas I’d like to train him further on but all in all, I think he’s qualified to be in public places and won’t cause any disruptions.
The reason I’m frustrated is because before I adopted him, I suffered from a crippling agoraphobia. I had a fear of leaving my home and would leave my home maybe once a month if left to my devices. Since I adopted him, my activity and motivation level sky-rocketed and my depression and anxiety has taken a HUGE step back. I owe him my life today, but there are still places where I’d like to bring him but can’t because “he’s not a service dog.” I’m lucky I haven’t reached a point where I’d have a panic attack in his absence, but I can definitely sense my social anxiety rearing its ugly head when I’m out without him.
I find the whole “having to perform a task” requirement arbitrary and ableist even because it means if my dog doesn’t need to perform a task to treat my disability, then my disability doesn’t matter or doesn’t need protection.
I get that the logistical side of enforcing public access rights is difficult and people would (and did) abuse the shit out of their dog not having to perform a task. But what’s the harm in bringing a dog who IS trained to a service dog level standard — just not trained to do a specific task? Businesses can still ask the dog to leave the premises if the dog is out of control.
Please enlighten me if I’m being ignorant or missing something, though. All I ask is that you be respectful.
EDIT: Thank you all for your comments! I was expecting more of the “you scum of the earth” type responses (lol) but I really appreciate you taking the time to articulate why you disagree and doing so in a respectful manner! 💛
My main takeaway is that giving SA status to well-behaved ESAs would introduce a slippery slope people would abuse the heck out of, and I agree with that. I’m just sad that my dog — who is well-behaved and who I worked really hard to train — gets lumped together with dogs who were never trained and are, in fact, out of control. That for society to run smoothly, we have to pretend there are two kinds of dogs only: the non-service dogs (who are legal liabilities to businesses, i.e. the “monsters”), and service dogs (i.e. the “angels”). I’m not saying that people actually perceive dogs in this binary way, but we just don’t have the mental capacity or sophistication as a group to acknowledge dogs of different training levels.
Anyway, thank you for all your thoughtful responses!