Disabled Vet With Service Dog Kicked Off Of Airline.

[Skylane81E]

http://youtu.be/0rUMa8bFbqo

 

[SoloEqs]

I think this is a tough one to judge.

Not at all. Service dogs are supposed to be on the floor, against a bulkhead.

 

[Henning]

Not at all. Service dogs are supposed to be on the floor, against a bulkhead.

As soon as the guy started yelling, the dog was no longer the issue, the mentally unstable, potentially dangerous passenger was.

 

[Mason]

Before y'all start opining, might I suggest a trip to CFR 382.117

Keep in mind that the ADA (AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT) does NOT apply to commercial air travel. The ACAA (AIR CARRIER ACCESS ACT) is controlling.

 

[ron22]

From the info we have I say the guy over reacted. Played/demanded the disabled card right away.
Could he maybe of asked nicely why the dog could not sit in the empty seat?
Could he not ask if the dog could sit on his lap?
Could he not ask if the dog could sit in the empty seat when the plane was in the air.

You get much farther when you ask nicely.

 

[Captain]

Yes. Other than the infant-in-lap exception, you can't have anything in a seat during taxi/takeoff/landing but a person properly strapped in.


If it's not a person, it must be on the floor or in the big. That's the rule. Dogs are not people under FAA rules. Hence, dogs (like baggage), must be on the floor or in the bin.

Do you just make this stuff up? I've seen other threads where I thought you were an aviation encyclopedia, but seriously. Quote a reg that says crap can't be on a seat. I dare ya.

 

[Henning]

Do you just make this stuff up? I've seen other threads where I thought you were an aviation encyclopedia, but seriously. Quote a reg that says crap can't be on a seat. I dare ya.

Why do the FAs walk down the aisle and make you take things off the seat and put them under or in the seat pocket in front of you?

 

[ZeroPapaGolf]

Do you just make this stuff up? I've seen other threads where I thought you were an aviation encyclopedia, but seriously. Quote a reg that says crap can't be on a seat. I dare ya.

Done.

http://www2.airweb.faa.gov/Regulato...4EFABB63E579B5F7852566EF006DB146?OpenDocument

(c) No certificate holder may allow an airplane to take off or land unless each article of baggage is stowed: (1) In a suitable closet or baggage or cargo stowage compartment placarded for its maximum weight and providing proper restraint for all baggage or cargo stowed within, and in a manner that does not hinder the possible use of any emergency equipment; or
(2) As provided in § 121.285 (c) and (d); or
(3) Under a passenger seat.

 

[Captain]

Why do the FAs walk down the aisle and make you take things off the seat and put them under or in the seat pocket in front of you?

They don't. They look for seat belts, Seats upright and crap out of the foot area. I've gone through 'inspection' a gazillion times with iPads, Mags, and other crap in the middle seat with no problem.

 

[poadeleted20]

Do you just make this stuff up? I've seen other threads where I thought you were an aviation encyclopedia, but seriously. Quote a reg that says crap can't be on a seat. I dare ya.

During taxi, takeoff, and landing? See 14 CFR 121.589. And for the purposes of this discussion, the dog is baggage.

 

[Captain]

Done.

http://www2.airweb.faa.gov/Regulato...4EFABB63E579B5F7852566EF006DB146?OpenDocument

Could it be that a service dog is not 'Carry-On-Baggage'?

 

[Henning]

They don't. They look for seat belts, Seats upright and crap out of the foot area. I've gone through 'inspection' a gazillion times with iPads, Mags, and other crap in the middle seat with no problem.

Day before yesterday I had to put my camera bag under the seat in front of me.

 

[No Joy]

Why do you ignore the link I post? That is the REALITY of what a PTSD vet can do. THAT is why he was taken off the plane.

Why should anyone answer your questions, when hypocritically you haven't answered questions that you have been asked?

Yes I watched the video. So you think it's okay to discriminate against someone with PTSD, because you fear they might become violent? Is that why you are so blinded by hatred, that you ignore the fact that carry-ons often become projectiles during mishaps? Should people fear you, because you keep repeating the same questions? Should people fear you, because you ask questions that already have been answered? Should people fear you, because you because you have so much hate?

So if bullies push someone over the edge, you would blame the victim?

So if you post a video about an angry black man that hurt someone, should we discriminate against all angry blacks?

Why are you so eager to judge and hurt people, without bothering to try to understand them?

Why don't you care if the airlines MIGHT have been the cause of the war veteran going off the deep end?

Not at all. Service dogs are supposed to be on the floor, against a bulkhead.

If so, then isn't US Airways at fault for not seating a disabled person with a service dog in front of a bulkhead?

Isn't there usually more foot room in seats by bulkheads? Therefore there would be more appropriate room for a large dog?

Thanks for helping convince me that the US Airways is at fault.

From the info we have I say the guy over reacted. Played/demanded the disabled card right away.
Could he maybe of asked nicely why the dog could not sit in the empty seat?
Could he not ask if the dog could sit on his lap?
Could he not ask if the dog could sit in the empty seat when the plane was in the air.

You get much farther when you ask nicely.

That's why I think it is important to know what happened before the video started. It seems that there was a confrontation long before the video started.

He may have asked nicely why the dog could not sit in the empty seat.
He may have asked nicely if the dog could sit in his lap.
He may have asked nicely if the dog could sit in the empty seat when the airplane was in the air.

Why do you seem to put all the burden on the disabled?

You seem to think the assumption of innocence should not apply to the disabled.

More businesses and authorities might get farther if they nicely complied with the ADA.

 

[ZeroPapaGolf]

Could it be that a service dog is not 'Carry-On-Baggage'?

The question was about stowing items in general.

Service animals are covered under the Air Carrier Access Act. Here is the entire thing: http://airconsumer.ost.dot.gov/rules/20030509.pdf
The relevant parts are on page 4:

What if the Service Animal Is Too Large to
Fit Under the Seat in Front of the Customer?
•
If the service animal does not fit in the
assigned location, you should relocate the
passenger and the service animal to some
other place in the cabin in the same class of
service where the animal will fit under the
seat in front of the passenger and not create
an obstruction, such as the bulkhead. If no
single seat in the cabin will accommodate the
animal and passenger without causing an
obstruction, you may offer the option of
purchasing a second seat, traveling on a later
flight or having the service animal travel in
the cargo hold. As indicated above, airlines
may not charge passengers with disabilities
for services required by part 382, including
transporting their oversized service animals
in the cargo compartment.

Nowhere is sitting IN a seat mentioned.

You are also responsible yourself for booking an appropriate seat per that document.

 

[Henning]

Why should anyone answer your questions, when hypocritically you haven't answered questions that you have been asked?

Yes I watched the video. So you think it's okay to discriminate against someone with PTSD, because you fear they might become violent? Is that why you are so blinded by hatred, that you ignore the fact that carry-ons often become projectiles during mishaps? Should people fear you, because you keep repeating the same questions? Should people fear you, because you ask questions that already have been answered? Should people fear you, because you because you have so much hate?

So if bullies push someone over the edge, you would blame the victim?

So if you post a video about an angry black man that hurt someone, should we discriminate against all angry blacks?

Why are you so eager to judge and hurt people, without bothering to try to understand them?

Why don't you care if the airlines MIGHT have been the cause of the war veteran going off the deep end?

If so, then isn't US Airways at fault for not seating a disabled person with a service dog in front of a bulkhead?

Isn't there usually more foot room in seats by bulkheads? Therefore there would be more appropriate room for a large dog?

Thanks for helping convince me that the US Airways is at fault.

That's why I think it is important to know what happened before the video started. It seems that there was a confrontation long before the video started.

He may have asked nicely why the dog could not sit in the empty seat.
He may have asked nicely if the dog could sit in his lap.
He may have asked nicely if the dog could sit in the empty seat when the airplane was in the air.

Why do you seem to put all the burden on the disabled?

You seem to think the assumption of innocence should not apply to the disabled.

More businesses and authorities might get farther if they nicely complied with the ADA.

How is this discriminatory? If I started yelling at the FA I'd be taken off the flight as well. It really doesn't matter why he went off the deep end, he did. The airline acted exactly as they should have, they defused a potentially dangerous situation and took care of the guy while fulfilling their duty to the rest of the passengers as well.

 

[Captain]

The question was about stowing items in general.

Service animals are covered under the Air Carrier Access Act. Here is the entire thing: http://airconsumer.ost.dot.gov/rules/20030509.pdf
The relevant parts are on page 4:

Nowhere is sitting IN a seat mentioned.

You are also responsible yourself for booking an appropriate seat per that document.

Did you bother to read what you posted?

...you may offer the option of purchasing a second seat, traveling on a later flight...

See right there? Offer to purchase a second seat. ...for the dog. ...dog in a seat.
So the dog CAN sit in a seat. Face palm slap OMG

 

[No Joy]

Nowhere is sitting IN a seat mentioned.

I see nothing in there that requires or forbids service animals from being in seats.

The document indicates that a second seat can be purchased, which seems to imply that service animals are permitted to be seated.

You are also responsible yourself for booking an appropriate seat per that document.

Not so fast.

How Can Airline Personnel Help Ensure That
Passengers With Service Animals Are
Assigned and Obtain Appropriate Seats on
the Aircraft?

 

[No Joy]

How is this discriminatory? If I started yelling at the FA I'd be taken off the flight as well. It really doesn't matter why he went off the deep end, he did. The airline acted exactly as they should have, they defused a potentially dangerous situation and took care of the guy while fulfilling their duty to the rest of the passengers as well.

You still haven't answered the questions you've been asked, yet hypocritically you keep on asking questions. The war veteran with PTSD seems much more rational. You've already been given several reasons why your posts are discriminatory.

Why assume the airline is innocent? Authorities are well known for causing problems, then pretending to come to the rescue. It's a racket.

 

[Camaro]

I came across this thread and wanted to chime in on it with the perspective of a Service Dog Handler. Service dog handlers have the right to be accompanied by a service dog, the airline did not try to deny him that. SD handlers also have the responsibility to know and follow the laws, and rules. Federal laws protect those rights, the ADA is one law but it DOES NOT apply to airline travel. The ADA is the newest (relatively speaking) law, it is 23 years old. The Fair Housing Act, Rehabilitation Act, and Air Carriers Access Act all cover disability discrimination in certain situations including service dogs, and all were in place before the ADA. As has been said by others the ACAA is the law that applies here so any discussion of the ADA in this case means nothing. The veteran standing there yelling about "the ADA gives him the right" was 100% wrong.

The airline can arrange for him to have a bulkhead seat, but he can sit wherever he wants (barring exit rows). They may have offered him a bulkhead seat and he refused, we don't know.

Service dogs are used to squeezing into tight spaces, they have to do it all the time. How much floor space do you think there is in a booth with four people and the center support for the table?


Having a service dog is protected to allow access, not to do what you want. They are to be treated as durable medical equipment, you can not keep a 100 pound piece of equipment sitting unrestrained in a seat during take off and landing, the airline was right to not allow the dog to do so.


The seatbelt restraints for dogs are terrible. Look at the crash test data, not one that has been tested has passed. Yes they are better than nothing but not by much. http://centerforpetsafety.org/research/

"The pilot study was completed using a specially designed crash test dog model weighing 55 lbs. We do not use live animals in our testing.
Results and Analysis: What We Learned
Alarmingly, the pilot study revealed a 100 percent failure rate. None of the harnesses were deemed safe enough to protect both the dog and the humans in the event of an accident.
The slow-motion videos below provide evidence of what happens to a large, harnessed dog in a simulated collision of a car traveling 30 miles per hour. Examples of problems include:

• Extremely low likelihood of survivability for the animal.
• Danger to humans when the dog becomes a missile.
• Choking and/or other bodily harm to the animal when harness materials cinch tightly upon impact.
• Extensive damage to fixtures within the vehicle caused by the projectile animal."

 

[Henning]

You still haven't answered the questions you've been asked, yet hypocritically you keep on asking questions. The war veteran with PTSD seems much more rational. You've already been given several reasons why your posts are discriminatory.

Why assume the airline is innocent? Authorities are well known for causing problems, then pretending to come to the rescue. It's a racket.

Because in this 'racket' of yours, it cost the airline, and that's not typically how 'rackets' are run. You've given plenty of evidence why you are similarly nuts, yet I'm not accusing you of being discriminatory against sane people.

 

[Aeric]

No Joy, you've lost practically every argument, people have responded with reasonable, level-headed explanations and some have even responded with links to regulations that spell out the reason why this aircraft could not depart.
This man was being a prick, he was swearing in front of young children, and he was in the wrong.

 

[denverpilot]

Children need their first swearing lessons from TV of course, instead of someone who's probably earned the right to swear a bit.

 

[Tony_Scarpelli]

At the point he becomes combative, it's time to get him off the plane.

it depends on whether it was "combative" or "argumentative" in defense of an unreasonable request.

Pretty sure the airline would not pay his over night expenses if they felt 100% justified in their position.

 

[Tony_Scarpelli]

Not really. Hard to splat when you've only traveled two inches forward. LOL.

Airliners blow rainbow chunks.

I do not really have an opinion on where the dog sits but I do agree airlines suck and airlines flight attendants are often unprofessional.

 

[jonnyjetprop]

I see nothing in there that requires or forbids service animals from being in seats.

The document indicates that a second seat can be purchased, which seems to imply that service animals are permitted to be seated.


Not so fast.

The purchasing of a second seat is so that there is room on the floor for the dog.

 

[jonnyjetprop]

My responses are in bold. I'm sure that none of this will change your mind. I don't really have anything further to add to the conversation.

I think you're not being honest. You seem to be talking double talk. The alleged FAA regulations, ADA and airline safety policies seem to be in conflict, therefore it seems it is not possible to be compliant with all.Here's a link to the regulation. It's a government link, not the air carrier industry. http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14cfr382_main_02.tpl

I thought the disabilities act was conceived to supersede most other existing laws. I'm sorry that you feel that I'm lying to you. I don't work for USAirways and really don't have a reason to lie to you.

What law says that the airlines don't have to abide by the disabilities act? The Air Carrier Access Act, 14 CFR Part 382If what you claim is true, I think the FAA is wrong for violating the disabilities act, for allegedly approving such a manual. In my opinion your alleged airline manuals are ignorant, discriminatory and violates the law.I'm sorry that you feel that way

Specifically what the manual is that? Our FAA approved In Flight Safety Manual, under the section Air Carrier Access Act

 

[ZeroPapaGolf]

Did you bother to read what you posted?




See right there? Offer to purchase a second seat. ...for the dog. ...dog in a seat.
So the dog CAN sit in a seat. Face palm slap OMG

I read every single word. It makes it clear the second seat is for more room in front of the seat. It does NOT say IN a seat, anywhere.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 4

 

[Norman]

Why should anyone answer your questions, when hypocritically you haven't answered questions that you have been asked?

Yes I watched the video. So you think it's okay to discriminate against someone with PTSD, because you fear they might become violent? Is that why you are so blinded by hatred, that you ignore the fact that carry-ons often become projectiles during mishaps? Should people fear you, because you keep repeating the same questions? Should people fear you, because you ask questions that already have been answered? Should people fear you, because you because you have so much hate?

So if bullies push someone over the edge, you would blame the victim?

So if you post a video about an angry black man that hurt someone, should we discriminate against all angry blacks?

Why are you so eager to judge and hurt people, without bothering to try to understand them?

Why don't you care if the airlines MIGHT have been the cause of the war veteran going off the deep end?

If so, then isn't US Airways at fault for not seating a disabled person with a service dog in front of a bulkhead?

Isn't there usually more foot room in seats by bulkheads? Therefore there would be more appropriate room for a large dog?

Thanks for helping convince me that the US Airways is at fault.

That's why I think it is important to know what happened before the video started. It seems that there was a confrontation long before the video started.

He may have asked nicely why the dog could not sit in the empty seat.
He may have asked nicely if the dog could sit in his lap.
He may have asked nicely if the dog could sit in the empty seat when the airplane was in the air.

Why do you seem to put all the burden on the disabled?

You seem to think the assumption of innocence should not apply to the disabled.

More businesses and authorities might get farther if they nicely complied with the ADA.

DANG! Sounds like Al Sharpton speaking.

 

[poadeleted20]

DANG! Sounds like Al Sharpton speaking.

Now, now -- let's leave the personal insults out of this. And please...

 

[Gary F]

I believe that the ADA is poorly written. It does little to help the truly disabled. Many people have "issues" that I do not consider to be disabling and have been able to use this law to force employers and others to make ridiculous exceptions to common sense restrictions. Pets are claimed to be service animals to give comfort for almost any psychological condition (real or imagined). A note from any health care provider for any reason seems to do the trick. Many disabled persons develop a strong sense of entitlement at the expense of everybody else. It's time to rewrite the law and make it rational and better defined.

 

[JimG.]

I believe that the ADA is poorly written. It does little to help the truly disabled. Many people have "issues" that I do not consider to be disabling and have been able to use this law to force employers and others to make ridiculous exceptions to common sense restrictions. Pets are claimed to be service animals to give comfort for almost any psychological condition (real or imagined). A note from any health care provider for any reason seems to do the trick. Many disabled persons develop a strong sense of entitlement at the expense of everybody else. It's time to rewrite the law and make it rational and better defined.

Unfortunately, because of actions like this “100% disabled” veteran, the rest of us who need the ADA laws just to live as normal as possible get thrown into the same pot.

I have applied for a service dog for medical reasons (not “comfort” for a psychological condition) and have researched how to travel with the dog and Camaro is 100% correct… the dog is required to be on the floor, tucked up under the seat if physically possible.

The ADA laws are broad and written to cover the majority of people who have disabilities, but as is often the case with broad reaching regulations… they often don't satisfy the wants and needs of all disabled people, and in turn can be overreaching to businesses who have to accommodate them occasionally.

Common sense has to be applied in those situations, and from the video it appears the guy was not using his common sense. Dr. Bruce's theory of PTSD appears quite accurate.

My personal opinion is, I would have been embarrassed for him and embarrassed myself had I been on the plane in my condition

 

[Gary F]

Unfortunately, because of actions like this “100% disabled” veteran, the rest of us who need the ADA laws just to live as normal as possible get thrown into the same pot.

I have applied for a service dog for medical reasons (not “comfort” for a psychological condition) and have researched how to travel with the dog and Camaro is 100% correct… the dog is required to be on the floor, tucked up under the seat if physically possible.

The ADA laws are broad and written to cover the majority of people who have disabilities, but as is often the case with broad reaching regulations… they often don't satisfy the wants and needs of all disabled people, and in turn can be overreaching to businesses who have to accommodate them occasionally.

Common sense has to be applied in those situations, and from the video it appears the guy was not using his common sense. Dr. Bruce's theory of PTSD appears quite accurate.

My personal opinion is, I would have been embarrassed for him and embarrassed myself had I been on the plane in my condition

I believe we have diluted the support for the more deserving wounded veterans by defining down disability. In my opinion the VA disability system is a failure. There is heavy political pressure on the VA system to have a very low threshold for awarding disability. A fair number of vets have milked the system and strained resources. I would place more emphasis on treatment and rehabilitation and increase the support for the more seriously disabled. I served as an active duty physician in the Army during the first Gulf war and also worked at a large VA hospital and long term care facility and have seen how the system can be abused.

The ADA has resulted in shakedown operations by unscrupulous lawyers. There is a need to rewrite the law to better define what constitutes a reasonable accommodation as well as a grace period for a business to implement changes. The definition of what constitutes a disability should be revised to cull out the people who are abusing the system.

 

[No Joy]

the ADA is one law but it DOES NOT apply to airline travel. As has been said by others the ACAA is the law that applies here so any discussion of the ADA in this case means nothing.

Several bigots have made such assertions, however no one has supported their claims of such. I've asked several times for people to support such claims, yet they have refused.

They/you seem to believe that if they/you repeat a lie often enough, that people will believe them/you.

As I have challenged others before:
Have any specific legislation that proves the airlines do not have to comply with the American Disabilities Act? If so please post the specific legislation.

The ADA is the newest (relatively speaking) law, it is 23 years old.

False. I don't know what the newest ADA law is, but the one that I have linked is from 2010 and went into effect in 2011.

14 CFR Part 382 that was posted is antiquated. It appears that one was last updated in 2003, the other in 2009. Neither revision supported the forum members claims.

Service dogs are used to squeezing into tight spaces, they have to do it all the time. How much floor space do you think there is in a booth with four people and the center support for the table?

You like many here that has commented has shown ignorance of dogs, service dogs and medical conditions. Confining some service dogs in such a manner as putting between seats could be cruel to the dog, and render the dog ineffective as a service dog.

In most cases restraining a service dog in a manner that prevents a service dog from doing medically necessary services for the disabled is a violation of the American Disabilities Act. US Airways may have violated the law. If so, then it is understandable that the veteran lost his cool.

Under the ADA, service animals must be harnessed, leashed, or tethered, unless these devices interfere with the service animal’s work or the individual’s disability prevents using these devices. In that case, the individual must maintain control of the animal through voice, signal, or other effective controls.

They are to be treated as durable medical equipment, you can not keep a 100 pound piece of equipment sitting unrestrained in a seat during take off and landing, the airline was right to not allow the dog to do so.

I reiterate.

In most cases restraining a service dog in a manner that prevents a service dog from doing medically necessary services for the disabled is a violation of the American Disabilities Act. US Airways may have violated the law. If so, then it is understandable that the veteran lost his cool.

Under the ADA, service animals must be harnessed, leashed, or tethered, unless these devices interfere with the service animal’s work or the individual’s disability prevents using these devices. In that case, the individual must maintain control of the animal through voice, signal, or other effective controls.

http://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm

I believe that the ADA is poorly written. It does little to help the truly disabled. Many people have "issues" that I do not consider to be disabling and have been able to use this law to force employers and others to make ridiculous exceptions to common sense restrictions. Pets are claimed to be service animals to give comfort for almost any psychological condition (real or imagined). A note from any health care provider for any reason seems to do the trick. Many disabled persons develop a strong sense of entitlement at the expense of everybody else. It's time to rewrite the law and make it rational and better defined.

The law also needs to be better defined because people, businesses like US Airways, and even the government itself discriminates against the disabled.

Unfortunately, because of actions like this “100% disabled” veteran, the rest of us who need the ADA laws just to live as normal as possible get thrown into the same pot.

I have applied for a service dog for medical reasons (not “comfort” for a psychological condition) and have researched how to travel with the dog and Camaro is 100% correct… the dog is required to be on the floor, tucked up under the seat if physically possible.

The ADA laws are broad and written to cover the majority of people who have disabilities, but as is often the case with broad reaching regulations… they often don't satisfy the wants and needs of all disabled people, and in turn can be overreaching to businesses who have to accommodate them occasionally.

Common sense has to be applied in those situations, and from the video it appears the guy was not using his common sense. Dr. Bruce's theory of PTSD appears quite accurate.

My personal opinion is, I would have been embarrassed for him and embarrassed myself had I been on the plane in my condition

Camaro and you are wrong. You haven't used common sense or done proper research.

A service dog should not be unnecessarily restricted if it prevents the service dog from doing medically necessary work.

As I said before. If the airline was really concerned about the dog being a safety hazard as a projectile, then the disabled veteran and dog should have been reseated in front of a bulkhead. The airline didn't seem concerned about safety, they only seemed concerned about keeping the dog out of the seat. It seems the airline antagonized the war veteran. I suspect the airline is responsible for driving the war veteran over the edge. I suspect the airline should be sued, to try to formally gather evidence, set precedences and to encourage better laws/regulations that don't unnecessarily discriminate and jeopardize the health of the disabled.

 

[Norman]

Beginning to sound more and more like SZ fodder.

 

[jhausch]

Out of curiosity, at what point in the booking/travelling process is the airline made aware of the service animal?

 

[JimG.]

Out of curiosity, at what point in the booking/travelling process is the airline made aware of the service animal?

At the time you make the reservation to give them heads up and flexibility to make seat assignments, etc.

 

[JimG.]

Several bigots have made such assertions, however no one has supported their claims of such. I've asked several times for people to support such claims, yet they have refused.

They/you seem to believe that if they/you repeat a lie often enough, that people will believe them/you.

As I have challenged others before:
Have any specific legislation that proves the airlines do not have to comply with the American Disabilities Act? If so please post the specific legislation.

False. I don't know what the newest ADA law is, but the one that I have linked is from 2010 and went into effect in 2011.

14 CFR Part 382 that was posted is antiquated. It appears that one was last updated in 2003, the other in 2009. Neither revision supported the forum members claims.

You like many here that has commented has shown ignorance of dogs, service dogs and medical conditions. Confining some service dogs in such a manner as putting between seats could be cruel to the dog, and render the dog ineffective as a service dog.

In most cases restraining a service dog in a manner that prevents a service dog from doing medically necessary services for the disabled is a violation of the American Disabilities Act. US Airways may have violated the law. If so, then it is understandable that the veteran lost his cool.


I reiterate.

In most cases restraining a service dog in a manner that prevents a service dog from doing medically necessary services for the disabled is a violation of the American Disabilities Act. US Airways may have violated the law. If so, then it is understandable that the veteran lost his cool.

http://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm


The law also needs to be better defined because people, businesses like US Airways, and even the government itself discriminates against the disabled.



Camaro and you are wrong. You haven't used common sense or done proper research.

A service dog should not be unnecessarily restricted if it prevents the service dog from doing medically necessary work.

As I said before. If the airline was really concerned about the dog being a safety hazard as a projectile, then the disabled veteran and dog should have been reseated in front of a bulkhead. The airline didn't seem concerned about safety, they only seemed concerned about keeping the dog out of the seat. It seems the airline antagonized the war veteran. I suspect the airline is responsible for driving the war veteran over the edge. I suspect the airline should be sued, to try to formally gather evidence, set precedences and to encourage better laws/regulations that don't unnecessarily discriminate and jeopardize the health of the disabled.

How long have you been an ADA attorney?

 

[N747JB]

How long have you been an ADA attorney?

He's pretty much an expert on everything, I'm sure ADA is just a hobby to him!

 

[JimG.]

I believe we have diluted the support for the more deserving wounded veterans by defining down disability. In my opinion the VA disability system is a failure. There is heavy political pressure on the VA system to have a very low threshold for awarding disability. A fair number of vets have milked the system and strained resources. I would place more emphasis on treatment and rehabilitation and increase the support for the more seriously disabled. I served as an active duty physician in the Army during the first Gulf war and also worked at a large VA hospital and long term care facility and have seen how the system can be abused.

The ADA has resulted in shakedown operations by unscrupulous lawyers. There is a need to rewrite the law to better define what constitutes a reasonable accommodation as well as a grace period for a business to implement changes. The definition of what constitutes a disability should be revised to cull out the people who are abusing the system.

No question.

It's a 2 edge sword, and I have seen it from both sides.

Someone with a disability who feels discriminated against can often find themselves an ADA attorney to go after a business or municipality pro bono, because the defendant if found guilty pays the fees.

Not that some of them are not guilty as hell.

Case in point… the parking lot at one of our favorite Mexican restaurants was redone last year, because the business complex it is in has become so popular that they needed more parking spaces.

The owners contractor submitted a set of plans to the County for permitting and in the process moved the 2 handicap spots from the center of a long building down to the end in front of the dry cleaner that has been there for almost 20 years… taking his “10 min. parking” spots.

Within 30 days of completion, overnight those 10 min. spots were back in the front of his business, and the handicapped spots moved across the parking lot.

So the 2 handicap spots that were right in front of 2 restaurants suddenly became 75 yards away from the front doors.

And there is nothing the County can do. The only recourse is to hire an ADA attorney to sue them for discrimination (which the counties planning and zoning director suggested)

on the flipside… blue placards are so easy to get, doctors give them out to patients that really don't need them, because they don't want to shame their patients and risk losing their business.

So, when able-bodied people see people with supposed disabilities get out of their car and skip in/out of the business… it clouds their belief that handicap spots are just a scam.

(Not to mention many municipalities don't charge parking fees in prime locations, which irks them further)

 

[Henning]

What kinda irks me, especially when I drive around a person in a wheelchair is being beaten to the handicap spot by someone whose handicap is morbid obesity. Dude/lady, you should park at the far end, you need the exercise.