Agree. I googled “life threatening dog allergies” and the only thing I found were references to this incident. I’ve know a few people with pet allergies. They take Benedryl, but they still come over to my house with 2 dogs and 2 cats. I’ve never met someone with a truly life-threatening pet allergy.
Oh. I honestly didn’t know there was a distinction. I was talking about service animals I guess. I didn’t know you could bring an emotional support animal on a plane (hell, I didn’t know there WERE emotional support animals). Sorry…but thanks for the explanation. I’ll have to process this before I call bullshit, but gives me something to think about.
And a person with a life-threatening pet allergy would probably not be safe if they removed the animals that had presumably already spread dander, etc. onto the plane (or the animals that may very well have been on the previous flight, sitting on the very seat this woman occupied - I don’t think the cleaning done between flights is sufficient to remove all allergens). So if the woman was telling the truth about her allergy, assisting her in getting off the plane may have been the only alternative.
Double post.
Not sure why you are telling me this. I am fully aware of the distinctions and I know the law. I was responding to dalej42 who thinks the only two types of support dogs are guide dogs for the blind and therapy dogs. I wanted his opinion on other types of support animals.
I didn’t know flying with pets was a thing. (I rarely fly) But as much as I love my little doggies, I would not consider ever bringing one on an airplane. They smell… bad!
And I’ll tell ya, if Doxie farted, like he is wont to do, it could very well bring the whole craft down! 
There would be some serious apologizing to be done in any case.
I’d like to clarify further that a therapy dog is not a service animal.
Therapy dogs are those that visit with their able-bodied handler/owner at nursing homes, rehab facilities, library “read to a dog” programs, schools, universities, hospitals, airports, disaster scenes, hospices, funeral homes, camps, and so on. They provide momentary comfort and cheer to people who are not their owner, on a volunteer basis. They do not have any right of public access; under the ADA, they are pets. They are welcome in places that do not allow pets only by invitation as part of an arranged pet therapy visit at that particular time.
Source: My dog and I are a registered therapy dog team* with the Alliance of Therapy Dogs. She wears a harness that says “THERAPY DOG” when she is working, and I frequently give my elevator speech about the difference between therapy dogs and service dogs when she is wearing it. (Yes, you can pet her, but you should still ask first. Her job is to be petted, unlike a service dog, who must not be petted while working.)
If you see someone claiming that their “therapy dog” has a right to public access, either they are faking or they are violating their therapy organization’s rules. If I tried to use my dog’s therapy dog status to gain public access where pets are not allowed, we could lose our registration with ATD (and thus our insurance and our ability to visit).
Part of the problem is the term “therapy dog,” I think. Yes, an “emotional support animal” <I pause to roll my eyes slightly> is “therapeutic” and provides comfort to its owner, but it is not a “therapy dog.” A therapy dog provides pet therapy, as described above.
*We completed visit #48 today. Two more and she will have earned the AKC Therapy Dog title (THD). Next level: 100 visits.
Facts, schmacts.
To expand the definition of service, there are anxiety dogs. For some people with anxiety, the first symptom that they have started an anxiety spiral is losing the ability to monitor their own emotional state. So at exactly the time that they should be taking their acute incident meds, they’re unable to tell that they should be taking their meds.
Dogs can be trained to monitor and signal them when they should be taking that pill. It’s a difficult thing to train for, and actual anxiety dogs are expensive. The usual signal is placing a paw on their patient’s thigh and looking at them until they notice. So the dogs have to be large enough to comfortably reach a person’s thigh.
And does this woman make sure to never sit next to someone who owns a pet? “Life-threatening allergy” my ass. That doesn’t exist.
In the thread about the guy being forcefully removed from a United flight, the prevailing consensus was they had no right to remove him. What right did Southwest have in this instance to remove the woman?
Didn’t read the article linked in the OP, didja?
She claimed to be in imminent danger - obviously if she was telling the truth, she needed medical support beyond that available on a plane.
Ninja’d by Snowboarder (in revenge for the times I’ve ninja’d him, no doubt).
Life threatening allergies do certainly exist. I’ve seen them up close, and treated them. One was triggered by shrimp, and the guy became a pulseless non-breather right in front of me (resuscitation was successful) and the other was to peanuts.
I’ve also seen severe asthma attacks triggered by animal dander. 5000 people die in the US every year from acute asthma attacks.
Now, I am dubious about the woman’s claim that her condition was that severe. If it was, she’d carry an epi-pen and the appropriate documentation about the severity of such condition. But allergies do kill people every year.
I did read that. And it says “Denied Boarding” But she was already aboard. A point that was repeatedly made in the thread about the United Flight.
So if she had had all the right paperwork, she could have gotten her injection? Huh? :dubious:
Do airlines routinely carry those kinds of medicines on-board, with crew qualified to administer them?
It was already questioned up-thread why she didn’t have her meds with her (a remark, BTW, that I didn’t see mentioned in the linked article). But personal meds or no meds, and paperwork or no paperwork, why should the airline have been expected to have or administer any meds? As far as I can see, nobody has asked that obvious question yet.
TBH, I’d rather share parks, movie theaters, airplanes and other public places with more dogs and fewer Homo insapiens .
(ETA: QtM’s post wasn’t there when I started this post.)
In this particular case, I think the woman was trying to raise a stink. She was trying to get booted off the plane. In general, I’ve wondered for a while about animals on airplanes. We don’t allow smoking any longer. If I tell an airlines that I have a peanut allergy, at least some of them will ask the passengers in the immediate area if it’s ok to not serve peanuts. But animals?
I have allergies. Not life threatening, but annoying. Why does an animal have more rights to a comfortable flight than I do? Yes, I could take some kind of meds. It would leave me sleepy and disoriented, and probably not take affect until well into the flight. No one warns you they are putting a dog under your seat, so I can’t take anything ahead of time.
I just don’t get why shoving a dog in a bag under my plane seat is ok.
FWIW I probably have as much dog dander on my clothes as exists on whatever sort of dog can fit in a carrier under a seat. Especially if it’s a short-haired dog (my dog has an under-coat). And I’m kind of fastidious about dog hair and a clean person.
I’m guessing there’s not that much more risk of triggering pet allergies by allowing pets on the plane as there is allowing pet owners.
So tell us what your solution to this dilemma is, please.
.