I decided to put in a call to the ADA Network the other day for some questions I have about some of my assumptions about service dog law. This was kicked off due to so many arguments about 2 different subjects. I guess I do need to point out that the ADA Network is not part of the Department of Justice (the ADA), however, it is a group of ADA specialists that are funded by the ADA. So I do consider them credible sources for ADA service dog-based questions.
Doctors Note:
I have always felt that handlers had to have a doctor's note, prescription, or medical records showing that the handler was, in fact, covered by the overall ADA. After my chat with the wonderful lady from the ADA network, I found that my assumption was wrong. I based my argument on a portion of the ADA statute that included 3 prongs, the first being "a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities of such individual;". I had made the assumption that on top of that qualification the hander also needed one of the other ones.
(1) The term "disability" means, with respect to an individual
These are stand-alone items. A person only needs to qualify under one.
So, I will continue to say that as a handler you should have the paperwork but will have to stop saying it is a requirement.
Protection work with Service Dogs
Ada gave me a 2 pronged answer for this subject.
1. Protection training in and by itself as tasks for a dog, the dog is not a service dog. Meaning that protection actions by the dog are not considered service dog tasks.
2. There is nothing stopping a handler or trainer from teaching a service dog protection activities.
In a nutshell, it is fine to train a service dog in protection/bite work.
Honestly, I figured that would be the answer, not that I would like it. Even the lady I was speaking to ask me "why would anyone do that?".
But there it is.
I have always felt that handlers had to have a doctor's note, prescription, or medical records showing that the handler was, in fact, covered by the overall ADA. After my chat with the wonderful lady from the ADA network, I found that my assumption was wrong. I based my argument on a portion of the ADA statute that included 3 prongs, the first being "a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities of such individual;". I had made the assumption that on top of that qualification the hander also needed one of the other ones.
(1) The term "disability" means, with respect to an individual
These are stand-alone items. A person only needs to qualify under one.
1(a) is self explanatory
1(b) is used for people that were at one time disabled but are no longer
1(c) is used as a defense for people that have been discriminated against because someone else assumed they were disabled.
With all that being said the ADA Network also said that there are times when paperwork like this is required. Renting, work, and the like.So, I will continue to say that as a handler you should have the paperwork but will have to stop saying it is a requirement.
Ada gave me a 2 pronged answer for this subject.
1. Protection training in and by itself as tasks for a dog, the dog is not a service dog. Meaning that protection actions by the dog are not considered service dog tasks.
2. There is nothing stopping a handler or trainer from teaching a service dog protection activities.
In a nutshell, it is fine to train a service dog in protection/bite work.
Honestly, I figured that would be the answer, not that I would like it. Even the lady I was speaking to ask me "why would anyone do that?".
But there it is.
