I’m not objecting to the concept of a therapy animal - I’ve seen at work with our dog and neighbors. What I object to is insisting on bringing any animal out in public or in places like restaurants without the proper training. We found that people are very good about accepting the presence of guide dog puppies, but that is because it is both for a good cause and because the dogs are trained before going out. I’d hate for people with a real need for a service animal to get limited because of abuse. If a guide dog in training makes the slightest hostile move to anyone, it is career changed immediately. The dogs are trained to go through all sorts of stressful situations without freaking out. If therapy dogs went through the same level of training, I’d be fine with them. But would a person wanting to make her dog a therapy dog be willing to give it up if it can’t make the grade?
The obvious endpoint is where a tiger gets called a therapy animal.
If the animal wasnt introduced to the person and trained as such, I dont see why it should get a special exemption, and I seriously question any therapist who starts with a paralysed kangaroo as a suitable animal for the job. At some point limits are needed.
To be honest Im pretty dubious about the entire concept and it isnt very common in Oz as far as I know, closest I hear about generally is animal involved therapy, ie dolphins or horses etc.
Otara