[Disclosure: I LOVE animals! I have a pet!]
WHAT IS IT suddenly with all these "companion" and "comfort" animals?????????
Suddenly, we're seeing them everywhere..... These are not "seeing-eye" dogs (they've been around for decades and are very rare) but animals for "emotional support." Often essentially "purse dogs." My recent 5 hour flight cross country included a lady with some small furry dog in the cabin - I assume a "comfort animal." Last time I was at Disneyland, I saw several people with small animals - something very new. Attractions now have little pet cages near where you board the ride, I assume to "keep" these animals while the person goes on the attaction.
There are people VERY allergic to pet dander or to certain animals (my sister-in-law among them). MUST they put up with such in stores, at restaurants, even on airplanes? And animals DO carry certain diseases which occasionally can impact humans. People did fine for centuries without all these "comfort" animals.....
I can't help thinking that if you can't cope with flying without a dog (that other passengers in a very confined space may find objectionable, given "comfort animals" aren't trained to anything like the standard of guide dogs or other genuine assistance dogs) then you can't cope with flying, period. Honestly, for me being in a confined space for several hours is unpleasant enough without being next to someone with a dog that is barely under control. Frankly the same goes for children - when children run up and down the aisle making a lot of noise when I need to sleep because I've got a four hour drive after my eight hour flight I don't see why it should be considered acceptable. If nothing else the shrieking in a confined space with no means of getting away from it makes an already unpleasant experience even more stressful.
I wonder to what extent the issue is that people have decided they would really like to take their dog to (place dogs aren't allowed for a good reason) and simply found a way to force the issue such that nobody can challenge them. Just one of the problems relates to the training (or specifically, the lack thereof) that these animals have. Years ago I knew a lady who was a wheelchair user prone to epileptic seizures, and she had a dog that helped guide her, could perform a few day-to-day tasks for her, and could also alert her when she was about to have a seizure so she could take appropriate preparations. Even as one that doesn't care for dogs I found absolutely nothing about her dog to be even remotely objectionable. One day I met her for lunch and, having helped get her to a table the dog curled up under the table and didn't move until it was time to pay the bill and leave - if I hadn't already known it was there, there was no way I'd have known about it.
One problem with even this situation is that if someone else in the restaurant had been highly allergic to dogs the immediate question is whose rights take precedence. Does my disabled friend get to eat where she chooses, potentially inflicting suffering (albeit unwittingly) upon another diner? Or does the existing diner get to insist that my disabled friend eat elsewhere because the presence of the dog will cause them major problems?
At present it seems everything is slanted such that the slightest mention of a disability means that no questions can be asked and the person's word has to be accepted as-is, but having allergies or phobias relating to the provisions made for one don't count as a disability so other people just have to deal with it.
