Livvysmom, we did not rent to the woman with the therapy dog since that's what she called it and the housing agency said they are not service dogs. However, they did tell me that in government subsidized housing where pets are not usually allowed, thereapy dogs must be accepted, too.

sammy, I agree with you that people should have to show official documentation that the dog is really a service dog, without revealing their disability.

Some people abuse the term therapy dog or service dog.

My friend owns a retail store/mini restaurant that sells food. And she was having a problem with a customer who continued to shop in her store with her "service" dog. The dog was a tiny thing and was no service dog. My friend was worried about health code violations.

She made several phone calls to people in authority and found out that if she denied this women access to her store because of the dog, she could be in violation of the disablity act. And the health department does realize that people are taking advantage of the act and claiming responsibilities for dogs that are not really service dogs.

There is no certification process for the dogs....

If they realize that people are taking advantage, then they should do something about it. There should be some sort of certification.

And while a dog is no more or less offensive than 'a disgusting baby', a baby wears a diaper so it doesn't drop its business on the restaurant floor.

I'm really arguing this as a matter of principle more than anything. I love dogs, more than most people. But (with the exception of true service dogs), if one person can bring their pup in, then anyone should be able to do the same. Any exception to that rule would be discriminating against one dog owner over another. So who do you choose to offend? Those with the puny dogs tucked in their purse, or those with the big scary dogs with spiked collars named KILLER? ;-)

(just joking)

I don't understand the allergy complaint. I'm allergic to perfume but I don't expect laws to be enacted forbidding people from wearing perfume in public areas. My allergies are my responsibility.

Allergy problems go way beyond animals. I cannot stand strong perfume/cologne----my eyes water, I have trouble breathing, etc.

As many have mentioned---'therapy/service' is a much misused category. Per5sonally, I have no problem with a well behaved dog almost anywhere.I have had almost no problems with animals in places where people cause daily problems.

Ok then require dogs must wear diapers. I'm open to negotiation.

Curious as to who issued this "card".

Service dogs are not required to wear vests and if this dog was a psychiatric service dog, I can understand why you wouldn't want to advertize that fact. The piece of paper may be documentation that this dog is indeed, a service dog and not a pet. Usually known as a law information card.

I had a friend that was in a wheelchair and had a service dog. She didn't have to carry a card, though, 'cause in her situation, the dog's purpose was sort of obvious.

I'll never understand why people care. In Europe one sees dogs in restaurants and pubs. People aren't dying in their thousands.

I am from Europe and dogs are allowed in most restaurants. Most of them are well behaved and don't cause problems. Like Quirky, I am much more bothered by ill-behaved children who run around and bother other restaurant patrons, or throw tantrums.

I believe often it is the small dogs used for "seizure warning". They sense the oncoming of a seizure and warn the owner so person can call help & lie in safe area. Just throwing this out as it seems like many people are figuring just because they are small, no vest they aren't service dogs.

I don't know if it would bother me.

It does bother me that people can bring their little dogs into stores where I couldn't bring mine. I could put my dogs in a cart, but it still wouldn't be allowed. I think if one dog is allowed in, all dogs should be allowed in. Or none at all. I really don't think its neccesary that you take fluffy with you to pick out a birthday card. Fluffy won't gain anything signifigant from the experience. And despite what you think, I bet fluffy would prefer NOT to be zipped up in a purse with nowhere to go.

Restaurants...I don't know. I wouldn't mind so much if the dogs were well behaved and tables were spaced. We put our own dogs out, or right across the room when we eat. Even if they're just laying there, I don't like dogs staring at me while I eat.

But again, you can't discriminate. Just like kids. I adore children, but I firmly believe that if your child does not behave in a restaurant and you can't be bothered to control them, they shouldn't be there. But they're always there.

And it's so open to debate. What one person determines well behaved and well trained, could be what someone else determines as wild and out of control.

I would never take my dogs if it were allowed, and I don't think it should be. If it were, i guess I wouldn't care, though. But if its that important that you share the experience of eating with your furry friends, have dinner at home. It's healthier anyways. The dog gets absolutely nothing out of having to lie still and quiet for an hour and a half, resisting all the smells, movment and temptation, while you enjoy your scrumptious steak and lobster.

I just don't see the point or the benefit for the animal.

It is interesting to me that you say in Europe people take their animals into restaurants.

When Foreign Exchange students come to our country, they are surprised that we have dogs inside. They are good to their animals, but do not keep them in the house like we do.

I guess Europe is a big place, and traditions will change depending upon where you are.

I cannot help but mention that there are bull fights in Europe.

Sammy

You can have service dogs for all sorts of things. I have worked in mental health for a long time, and lots of clients I have known have had service animals for all sorts of things such as depression and anxiety. It doesn't have to be a certain type of dog, it can even be a cat or a hamster.

The above poster was correct also that you cannot legally ask someone what their disability is.

Dogs in restaurants don't bother me one bit. There are several restaurants and bars here in Seattle that allow dogs. I love going out and getting to pet doggies.

Meh. I figure as long as the dog isn't peeing on anything or jumping up and eating food off my plate, nor does it stink to high heaven then I couldn't care less.

Anybody who works in food service knows that there are far grosser things that go on (and come in) to the dining area than a doggie. And hey, somebody has to get those stray fries under there ;)

Dances.

munkos writes: "I really don't think its neccesary that you take fluffy with you to pick out a birthday card. Fluffy won't gain anything signifigant from the experience. And despite what you think, I bet fluffy would prefer NOT to be zipped up in a purse with nowhere to go." I wholly agree with your statements. I wish more people realized the obvious.

The trend of petowners bringing the non-service dog along for trips to here and there (regular errands), however, turns me off. I won't shop at Petsmart any longer because I am tired of stepping in dog messes that neither the careless/inattentive owner, and/or lazy store staff don't bother to clean. It is unsanitary at best. I don't understand the bring your dog everywhere with you movement, but to each his own. My dogs are happy at home and safer there as well.

Yes, I have noticed while traveling through Europe that it is commonplace to see petowners and their pets in the cafes. I will also tell you first hand that Europeans do not hold their pets in the same esteem as petowners in the US. Dogs and cats are not on the same level as a human in the family dynamic. Many dogs live their entire lives outside in all kinds of weather. They eat, sleep and live outside their owners's homes. Their feet never touch the floor inside the home. And yes, there are the bullfights. While visiting Madrid, our hosts took us to enjoy(?) one. Sickening to watch. Different countries, different customs.

Lastly, what is a psychiatric dog? I've never heard of that type of service dog. What exactly do psychiatric dogs do? I am all for any type of service dog being welcome in all stablishments, just not so thrilled with the possiblity of a non-sevice dog behind me in line at the supermarket.

Just my own thoughts on pets in public. No offense meant to those forum petowners who wish their pets accompany them everywhere.

Most Germans and British I know consider their animals family members and take good care of them. Spain, Greece, Italy, Turkey, etc. on the other hand are not known for their love of animals. However, I've lived in several different US regions, and I've never seen so many chained dogs and neglected animals as in Texas. Many people here definitely do not care about their animals, lots of these chained up dogs are lucky if they even get enough food or water.

My good friends spent a few years in Germany. They loved it there, because their two Goldens went EVERYWHERE with them. This was four years ago.

(They did mention, though - German laws about breeds are more strict than any BSL here. They don't think I'd be able to have my dog - and if I did, he would have to wear a 'basket' (muzzle) outdoors at all times. Were I to be caught without it, the fine would be severe, and repeat offenses would mean my dog would be put down.)

Eandhl -- thanks for the info on dogs providing "seizure warnings" -- I had no idea there were dogs that provide that service.

I don't like dogs in restaurants. I have allergies, but that's not the problem; I simply don't pet them, and my allergies are not so severe that simply being near an animal for a short period of time would affect me.

I don't object to service animals, because the majority of service animals I've encountered are very focused and business-like -- they do their job, then sit down and wait until they need to do their job again -- better behaved than a lot of people! (I think the idea of service dogs wearing a "work" outfit is smart -- it would cut down on the number of people approaching the dog wanting to play when the dog's on the job.)

But the vast majority of dogs I've encountered in restaurants and coffee shops are not well behaved, and not well disciplined. They wander, they beg, they bark, especially when they run into other dogs in the place. They're bored to distraction (destruction?) sitting there while their owners chat with all their friends, completely ignoring the dogs.

I'm not saying everyone who takes their dog to public places does the same thing, because I know their are many here who will rush to post how well-behaved and well-trained their animals are -- and I believe it. I believe that the standards for pet behavior may be much higher in Europe, where animals are permitted in more places. But that's not what I see in this urban, well-educated enclave.

And there are people who have a real fear of animals, especially dogs, and especially the large, or really loud ones. Strong perfume or powerful body odor may be objectionable, but I don't think there's many people who have a fear of those things.

Is banning anything but service animals from restaurants completely fair? Probably not. But how many things are?

I think the comment about Texas is mean. It is a huge state, and to make a broad comment about the entire state is placing many good people in a category that they do not deserve.

I do not see animals in restaurants here except for the service dogs. I doubt if it is allowed.

I don't see why owners of small dogs feel compelled to allow their dogs to get close to mine. My dogs are both 80 pounds, and when we walk them - the two of us - we will go to the grass and hold them when smaller dogs are approaching, or even children for that matter. Owners will start to allow their dogs to come to mine to sniff. Their dogs are often smaller than cats, and my dogs don't like cats. I really don't get it. I wouldn't go to an extreme to get out of the way if I thought it were safe for them to bring their little dogs up to mine.

They do the same thing with their children. They tell their kids that it is ok to run up to my dogs! I have to yell that my dogs like to jump on kids and they play rough.

There are many irresponsible owners and parents out there that we have to watch out for.

Sammy

Sammy

My comment about TX was not any different than what was written about Europe in an earlier posting. Since my comments bother you, I do hope you will report them.

Just this evening I witnessed a woman bring a kitten into an eating establishment.DH had gone in to order chicken and the woman got out of her car with kitten in arms and waltzed into the place! There were people inside at tables eating their meal and several others waiting at the counter for their food.She walked over to a younger girl,I assumed it was her daughter cause she petted and kissed the kitten,then the manager walked over and told her that she needed to get the cat out of there!She stood there a few more minutes until the girl got the order then left in a huff.When I saw her go in and stand at the counter I thought to myself,"What if the cat got loose and jumped into all that chicken they had cooked up!" LOL Or even worse into the fryer! The kitten was nervous and starting to climb all over the woman. I told DH that I think the only reason she went in with the kitten in the first place was to show off or see if she would be asked to leave.There were other people in the car and she could have just as well left it in the car.
I think there's a time and a place for pets and that doesn't include restraunts.

Happiest dog I ever saw was in Texas. He was a cattle dog. I don't remember the dog coming inside, but the rancher was outside most of the day and the dog was with him and/or working all day tirelessly. The way those two communicated and the way the dog controlled the steers was amazing. That is, we people were free to move about inside with these huge male animals and they would keep to themselves.

I asked one of the rancher's sons if those weren't bulls and why were we safe since I thought bulls had such a scary reputation? He replied it was because of the cow dog. I pointed out that the cow dog didn't come with us. He told me the bulls associated people with the dog, so they stayed away from us, assuming the dog was around.

"Like Quirky, I am much more bothered by ill-behaved children who run around and bother other restaurant patrons, or throw tantrums."

Me too! I'd rather have a dog sitting next to me than some wailing kid anyday.
Also,I have had depression and anxiety most of my life. I live in an apartment that does not allow dogs of any kind.Yet,dogs are walked all day right in front of my building,so it's a real tease.
If I had a shrink recommend a dog,are you telling me the complex HAS to accept it? Although,I doubt one would,I have honestly never heard of this before but I think dogs are great therapy.

Sammy wrote: "I don't see why owners of small dogs feel compelled to allow their dogs to get close to mine. My dogs are both 80 pounds, and when we walk them - the two of us - we will go to the grass and hold them when smaller dogs are approaching, or even children for that matter. Owners will start to allow their dogs to come to mine to sniff. Their dogs are often smaller than cats, and my dogs don't like cats. I really don't get it. I wouldn't go to an extreme to get out of the way if I thought it were safe for them to bring their little dogs up to mine. "

That subject deserves it's own educational thread. The next time I hear "But Tiny LIKES big dogs" as the owner lets out the full 25ft of flexi-lead, I may have to aim the citronella spray at the idiot owner. News Flash: Big dogs like your small dog too, but mostly because they look a lot like bunnies or stuffies. Approach at your own risk.

I have no opinion on dogs in restaurants. That's a situational thing. It depends.

I think that as much as screaming babies should be allowed in restaurants, so should dogs be. Many dogs I've met are far less annoying or bothersome than children, yet we allow children everywhere! But, if dog people can bring their dogs I should hope to be able to bring my cat. I wouldn't dare, but I'd want the right.

This topic was on the radio just this morning! They were going over the news and said that a county in our area is considering passing a law that would allow dogs into restaurants. The DJ said he wouldn't eat an any of those places, though he loved dogs.

On the topic of little fufu going everywhere with you -

I saw a girl the other day at the petstore, with THREE chihuhuas in ONE of those carrying bags. Now, I imagine one alone would be miserable being cooped up with no where to go, and only enough room to pop your head out. Not to mention in a pet store where the other dogs are roaming around, walking, sniffing. All that fun, normal, dog stuff.

But three?? If you have three dogs, surely they will be quite happy keeping eachother company at home. Atleast much happier than being squished in one bag together, not able to move at all, all day.

Labmomma, we rarely take the dogs to the petstore anymore. Occasionally we take coda, just to keep her up on the car ride thing, and associate it with something positive. We've never had either of them mess, but we're always prepared, just incase.

Guaranteed the people you see in petsmart who don't clean up after their dogs, or even blink at it are the same ones running around going "oh why oh why does my dog pee inside ALL the time!"

Some peoples behaviour and lack of responsibility completely baffle me!

We saw two dogs at the Home Depot this morning. One of them a little fluffy lapdog who was being carried around, and the other a mid-sized pointer. The people were just shopping around in the store, lots of employees saw them and no one said anything. I wonder if people are starting to bring their dogs to stores to see if they can get away with it. :o)

"This topic was on the radio just this morning! They were going over the news and said that a county in our area is considering passing a law that would allow dogs into restaurants. The DJ said he wouldn't eat an any of those places, though he loved dogs."

I really don't understand what all the hoopla is about? If you have an indoor dog, and I think *most* dogs nowadays are, what is the difference eating in your house with a dog there versus eating in a restaurant with a dog there? It's just a dog sharing your space in either instance. (So long of course as it's not jumping on the table or trying to eat from your plate....but there's not one dog owner I know that would allow that, at home or anywhere!)

It's not like the dog is running around in the kitchen in the restaurants!
Florida already did pass a law enabliing people to take their pets to outdoor cafes. Of course florida has this tourism thing going on and so that is important. And being that it is florida outdoor seating is not hard to find year round.

As for Home Depot, ours no longer let you take your dogs in but Lowes does. I know this is opposite depending on where you are located but have brought my boys into many different lowes stores and not been kicked out like with home depot. I like Lowes better anyway since they have a much better selection and lower prices and it's easier to get someone to help you.

I always get a kick out of it when people start comparing dogs to children. Don't have a dog, don't want a dog, have a cat, love my cat, but love my kids more. Small children may cry in restaurants but I guarentee they won't poop or pee on the floor or try to bite you.

Anyhow, I think it is just plain impractical to say dogs should be allowed in restaurants. For instance, the other night we went to PF Changs -- the waiting area was packed shoulder to shoulder. I can just see someone bringing in their St. Bernard at that point. Of course it would be bad judgment on the pet owners part but they would insist it is their right to bring their giant dog into the overly crowded restaurant. Also, most restaurants seating is not set up to accomodate a large dog next to the table. Someone, likely a server, could easier trip over it.

Also, way too much liability if a dog were to bite someone.

Off -topic: a person recently brought in an alligator on a leash to my local Petsmart. I freaked out customer called the police.

One of the things I most loved about France was their casual attitude toward dogs. No one really cared if they were in a store, restaurant, anywhere else. I felt "right at home"! it was great.

Well behaved animals should be allowed to go anywhere. As for hygiene... did any of you note the fact that 1 out of every 2 men and many women leave a rest room WITHOUT WASHING THEIR HANDS? it was on the news the other night...

Frankly, I worry a lot less about dogs than people's hands. JMO

:)

My dogs are quite well behaved, and happy dogs. If they were to walk into a restaurant, they would stay close to me on the leash, would leave everyone alone, and would happily wag their tails as they walked in a very respectful manner. Their tails are quite long, and higher than the table. But wagging tails is natural to a dog.

Many could pet them, even though I don't care to have children pet them. They are very clean dogs. They live together, and as good clean dogs, they clean themselves and each other during the day. I know where they clean themselves, and never touch food without washing my hands first. They are dogs, and it is natural for dogs to clean themselves. (Someone told me once that their saliva is sterile. I don't buy it personally.)

They would have their right, even if their beautiful long fur would tend to fly. After all they are dogs. I know a lot of women whose hair smells bad, is unclean, and their hair flies also. So what would be the big deal if their hair flies?

I believe they would have the right to sit in a booth or in a chair. After all it would not be safe for them to be on the floor. I am sure they would not bother anyone else.

Dogs are dogs. I enjoy them, and walk them. There is usually someone here, and they have no need to go to a restaurant or to my friends' houses.

If it became stylish to allow animals into restaurants, I would look for an area where they are not allowed. This is not part of my comfort zone, and I cannot imagine the health department allowing it.

I don't trust people with their dogs. Too many people are careless, and there can be problems. If I visit a friend, I really don't enjoy the friend telling me that Fido won't leave me alone because he smells my dogs. I want to play with Fido if that is my choice. I want Fido to leave me alone if I don't want Fido or if I want to talk to people rather than to play with a dog.

I guess we are all different. I have 3 adult children, and 2 dogs. My dogs are not my children, and my expectations and training of my dogs is different than of my children.

Sammy

People who need service dogs - whether they are guide dogs, hearing dogs, mobility assistance or siezure alert dogs - need the service dogs to function day to day, like they need a wheelchair. To deny the service dog access to a restaurant, besides being illegal, is mean and ignorant.

It is not the same as bringing your pet, who may be well behaved, but someone else's may not, so all other dogs are not allowed.

"Small children may cry in restaurants but I guarentee they won't poop or pee on the floor or try to bite you. "

Haha,you dont know some of the children around here! I had a nephew pull down his pants and start to go number two in a parking lot at the fireworks in front of everybody!

I think dogs are alot like children.they certainly depend on their owners like they are their parents.

I agree with whoever said they thought people were just seeing if they could get away with taking their pets into stores. I took my cat to Petsmart before and still felt like I was going to get kicked out any minute,LOL.

I take Capone out to eat with me often, but it is *always* on an outdoor patio, when it's not crowded, and I keep good distance between myself and the other guests. I'd be just as entitled to sit right by the restaurant door, but it's just asking for trouble. Some people are just plain terrified of dogs, especially one of substantial size, let alone the allergy issue. And I would NEVER take him out in that type of environment if he was a beggar or otherwise ill-behaved. He usually lays under the table, taking a nap or watching the world go by - unless someone wants to pet him, then he gladly obliges.

I guess I would like for more restaurants to have dog-friendly seating, but it's not likely... and even if it were, you just can't count on the common sense of the masses. You just *know* someone would show up with the dog that doesn't like other dogs, the dog the shows fear-aggression towards men, the non-stop barker, or a diarrhea-stricken dog.

On the kids/dogs issue: It has always freasked me out a little bit when people can't differentiate the two. I call Capone my 'baby' often, but it is in jest. Should Capone and a human being be trapped under a burning bus, the person would have my assistance first. (Unless I knew he was a child molester, serial killer, or something of that sort. I'd still help, as my morality demands me to - but Capone would come out first.) Still - I do prefer the company of a four-legged furry friend over most people, babies included.

One the big dogs' rights issue, I simply must say that I can see how bigger dogs can be inconvenient in some cases, just due to their size. But I absolutely loathe the idea that bad manners is more readily accepted from smaller breeds.

I had a good chuckle about the alligator on lead in PetsMart. (Thinking of how Capone *loves* lizards.) Makes you wonder what people are thinking. I'm all about equal rights and such, but I really scratch my head when I see people bring in cats and ferrets to the pet supply store. Aren't they concerned about someone's dog getting out of hand?

Chelone, have you ever seen your server at a restaurant wash their hands? .... Ever?

liivy'smom PF changs is one of those restaurants where I cannot imagine it being easy to bring in a dog. Actually it's hard enough for humans to stand it since it is so loud and crowded but the one by me has outdoor seating but they do not let your dine there with you dogs. That, on the other hand, I could imagine doing pretty easily if they allowed it.

I like to go places and do things and my dogs get me out of the house. They aren't too fond of car rides so I find myself walking and doing a lot of enjoyable things liek that. Only problem is we're so limited in what we can do for day trips or extended travel because if you have to either bring your own food, eat fast food or takeout or delivery etc.

foosacub, that's an interesting thought. I pondered it and I have to admit I think I would be selfish and save my dog first. The reason being, I have no personal relationship with the stranger under the bus, but I do with my dog and would be devastated if I couldn't save him. Of course I would hurry so I could save both, but I cannot imagine leaving an animal who depends on me for everything to first help someone I don't even know. Thing is, you never know unless you are in that situation, and I sure hope none of us will ever have to make such a decision.

Nope, Quirky., which is precisely why I'm not remotely freaked out by the presence of dogs in restaurants.

:)

Gasp! I'm a very occasional visitor, but I'm going to have to start a separate thread on this issue. It is important, so please discuss.

Gillianma, and her "Therapy" not Service dogs!

I haven't read all the posts, but I'd like to respond to the person that a Maltese "are unlikely to cause allergies". That is only true for people with a mild allergy. My allergist, whose specialty is animal allergies, told me you can be allergic to the dander, oil or saliva. People who have more severe or moderate allergies tend to be allergic to all three, as I am. I am allergic to Maltese (DH's aunt had one). In that case, I think the dog was a real licker. The dried saliva fall off the fur/hair and has the same effect as dander.

I feel for someone who has a legitimate need for a service dog. But I think there should be some agency that hands out the cards so there isn't any monkey business. After all, to get a handicapped placard for your car someone had to issue it to you, and it doesn't say why you have it.

I have numerous allergies, not just dogs. But only the fur (dog and horse especially) allergies are life threatening, in my experience (and yes, animal allergies can be life threatening).

You know, I think handicapped people have it hard enough. Get over it.

If you have ever stopped breathing because of an allergy, you will realize that there are many types of handicaps. A restaurant should readily make an adjustment if a person has a problem with an animal.

Almost anyone can get a sticker for their car so that they can park in a good spot. I have never seen abuse with the service dogs, but if it were a problem, I think most people would gladly prove that they need one. After all it is no secret if the dog is with you.

Sammy

What kind of adjustment is a restaurant suppose to do if a customer has a problem with a service dog? Violate federal law? I don't believe having allergies is considered to be a handicap. And people who have severe allergies tend to be allergic to many different things. There could be many other things in a public place that the person is allergic to. Instead of throwing out everything that a person may be allergic to in a public place, the person should leave.

I don't think anyone has suggested that restaurants keep out legitimate service dogs. Just that there be some sort of certification issued that they could show so others don't use the lack of such requirement to bring in their ordinary pets.

My husband and I encountered a dog in a restaurant recently. Usually service dogs are intensively trained and well-behaved, but this dog yapped periodically through our meal. Now maybe it was a service dog in training, but I would like to think the restaurant had been given the benefit of being shown proof that the dog should be there. Unfortunately though, no proof is needed.

Actually, asthma and allergies can be considered a disability under the ADA. Breathing is, after all, a "major life activity".

A person with a disability is described as someone who has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, or is regarded as having such impairments. Asthma and allergies are still considered disabilities under the ADA, even if symptoms are controlled by medication.

I don't know about asthma, but I was told when I called about my vacation rental (I posted early in the thread about it), that allergies were not considered disabilities under the ADA.

On the Chihuahua's in the purse, I don't know about all of them but the Minitures prefer to be in small closed in spaces and they do like to be with a warm body while they are at it:) I have one of those purses and although she doesn't go anywhere in it very often for the simple fact that car rides bother her, she will hop in it and sleep every once in a while. At night most of the time I will find her curled up in the armpit of my 12 year old (hmm, maybe I need to get a photo of that) Now if we are talking about the larger 4 to 6 lb dogs my issue would be that purse would get HEAVY after awhile carrying around 3 of them, lol!

Deb18,
I think it depends on what the person is thinking of when they think "allergy". Itchy eyes are probably not a disability. Breathing problems would be. You are required to reasonably accomodate all the people with disabilities. Reasonable accommodations are those that are not unduly burdensome either administratively or financially. In your case, if someone with an allergy rent the house for the week after the person with the service dog, you would be required to have the place cleaned thoroughly.

It's not easy. The ADA is not a perfect law. Conflicts occur.

Sue,

Are your statements based on some facts you can link to or your assumptions of what you think the law means? I hope this doesn't sound sarcastic. It isn't intended to, but your assessment is not at all what I was told by the federal housing agency. They didn't discuss degrees of allergies with me at all, but just flatly stated that allergies are not disabilities and not a consideration with regards to the ADA.

They were also not concerned with any financial hardship this law might impose on me. Whether I lost rental income or whether due to allergies of my own became unable to use my own home was of no concern to them and there was no recourse for me at all. As far as cleaning, our home was cleaned after every rental. I don't know what would be required to make the house habitable for someone with a severe allergy or even if it would be possible.

My vacation home is not a public place. It is a private home that we used to rent out for the prime vacation times, maybe eight weeks and several weekends per year. It seems really unfair to me that this law could override my rights to my personal property to the degree that it does. The ADA is not only an imperfect law, it is pathetically inadequate.

Also, the real clincher is that due to the lack of accountability the law allows, these hardships could be imposed on people by others who aren't even disabled and just want to bring their pet on vacation. Should I be forced to incur extra expense for them, too? Should the hypothetical allergic renter have to cancel their own vacation for a liar? Where is the fairness in that?

"Many commenters asked that environmental illness (also known as multiple chemical sensitivity) as well as allergy to cigarette smoke be recognized as disabilities. The Department, however, declines to state categorically that these types of allergies or sensitivities are disabilities, because the determination as to whether an impairment is a disability depends on whether, given the particular circumstances at issue, the impairment substantially limits one or more major life activities (or has a history of, or is regarded as having such an effect).

Sometimes respiratory or neurological functioning is so severely affected that an individual will satisfy the requirements to be considered disabled under the regulation. Such an individual would be entitled to all of the protections afforded by the Act and this part. In other cases, individuals may be sensitive to environmental elements or to smoke but their sensitivity will not rise to the level needed to constitute a disability. For example, their major life activity of breathing may be somewhat, but not substantially, impaired. In such circumstances, the individuals are not disabled and are not entitled to the protections of the statute despite their sensitivity to environmental agents."

Above from the ADA website. Allergies are only considered a disability if they result in substantial impairment of respiratory or neurological functioning. And you would need a doctor to verify this in writing and that would be subject to review. Personally I don't think anyone with an alleged dog allergy would qualify.

I don't follow why we are discussing a person with allergies being deemed disabled. If a disabled person came into a restaurant and there was a person in the restaurant who was severely allergic to dogs...the restaurant can not kick out the disabled person with the dog. The person with the allergies should leave.