There have been a lot of news stories about service/therapeutic animals in the news of late. There was one about a woman who was living in a building that had a no dog rule but who felt that her dog was therapy for her panic attacks (and was suing because her condo board wanted her to keep the dog in a carrier when in common areas). This weekend I came across this: a story about a woman and a kangaroo.
Supposedly, according to her vet, the animal won’t get bigger than 50 pounds but that’s not exactly small. And this is a wild, not a domesticated, animal. Also if it has as many issues as it does–partial paralysis, wears diapers–it almost doesn’t seem worth keeping the animal alive. (Plus, I don’t think I’d be cool with an incontinent wild animal being taken to public places if I were the general public…which I am!) I’m not sure how I feel about therapy animals in general but this kangaroo situation seems like a terrible idea.
So my questions for debate are: should we draw the line somewhere when it comes to therapeutic animals? Should people be required to show some proof that they really need this animal? And specifically, is letting the woman keep this kangaroo a good idea?