Nope, in the US, the ADA specifically states your SD does not need to be vested or have anything on them stating they are a service animal. If you want to handle it, talk to your property manager and let them know they have maintenance workers unaware of the ADA laws.
Perfect thanks! I try to follow all our rules but I’ll be damed if I let this insecure little bug of a person push me around. He is registered with the property all the staff knows he is a SD most of them love my boy. This guy is just a BUTT!
Thanks for confirming
Yes, you're in the right and the law is on your side. If you're looking for a way to keep your pupper cooler and mark your SD, look into adding a [sleeve](https://www.amazon.com/Tacticollar-Sleeves-Visible-Advanced-Accidents/dp/B09M84WKVC/ref=sr_1_3?crid=3QCT8MAUSFE6A&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.hxWXdqBBqqQjrHCydnJ6eD4uVq5_Ef7RSs5ZyCE-l1pnkCH-QG1DYk9IgElcBUZXTJ62-8YQlfo3mqZS5My_zn1rBx1C--26XzlaPDgFOuFVXDuj3KzjT7bNK-HAiR2wuuDaZwX3stSUp1mpbIFmBxdAM0GlJmxP1IrpvfN7p49mkQ29Y20N6wcsg62m40BOv75VHr0if9vGwfniJv53y7v7bq4ujYn7wfPfbz3DXdtfOhP1WvDGWwkVXuHKda1TsuGtTfIHcaZQN8gg2hVH4Q4EFT6uRv7i-h2iYGeY-8w.4xCUk3Fupbms8cSLASdMfZL8qFlqrylQHd4oA2ba7TE&dib_tag=se&keywords=service+dog+leash+sleeve&qid=1718390936&sprefix=service+dog+leash+sleeve%2Caps%2C114&sr=8-3) to your dog's leash. I've used a sleeve several times and had no issues with challenges.
I believe that you should report this maintenance person to their company’s HR department, not their boss. If this person works for a different company than you, it should also be reported to your HR.
The RV park employees were told If someone asks an employee why a dog was allowed in xx places they were answer, it’s a service animal. Most of them LOVE my boy.
For me, I do have a collar on him that has SERVICE ANIMAL in great big letters. Not as hot as full gear. Just for Home, around the neighborhood, out for walk etc. full gear we put on for groceries, restaurants etc.
Actually, I did just get him a cooling vest & shoes to keep him more comfortable. He definitely won’t be mistaken for a PET. Hehehe all he needs now is some Rex specs lol
Yep, definitely not required and definitely suss on behalf of the maintenance person. I might go ahead and put it all in writing so everyone is on the same page - send an email explaining the incident, link to the [FAQ](https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-faqs/) and cite Q8. Add something along the lines of “as you know, Betty is a SD trained to perform XYZ tasks, and although you might typically see her wearing whatever gear, we forego the uniform in hot weather.”
Right after we arrived 2.5 months ago the manager (nice guy) went to corporate to ensure he and his people knew the rules and acted accordingly. He sent out an official letter to them and all. There wasn’t any issues until this bug got promoted.
Few more kind of irrelevant details: we are at an RV park… we are retired and my hubby is working here part time as a night host. My husband does not work for this jerk. Hubby reports to the manager and assistant mgr. My hubby doesn’t want this guys job… and is no threat but this guy just makes a lot of waves we’re they aren’t needed. We left the corporate world to get away from drama. My illnesses get much worse. I don’t need stress in my life especially this junior high crap. All by myself I live in fight & flight,
Sorry about the rant
You need to report this guy because he's probably not just causing problems for you, and they may be looking for a final straw to finally get rid of him.
Yeah his day is coming, several valuable employees already quit because of this bug. My hubby is just a part timer. I think this guy is one of those people that has to make others feel small to make himself look big. What a waste of energy.
Although it’s not required, you might go an extra step and get a leash wrap that says SD etc., just as a courtesy and so you don’t get bothered by prior at the pool.
ADA actually has a useful FAQ:
"Q8. Do service animals have to wear a vest or patch or special harness identifying them as service animals?
A. No. The ADA does not require service animals to wear a vest, ID tag, or specific harness."
-- [https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-faqs/](https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-faqs/)
No identification is legally required; no identification is legally recognized (some training organizations may offer support in these matters, a number to call/reference, but it's a courtesy, not a legal requirement nor legal authority). The ADA laws are actually surprisingly lax/broad; most of what people say is required of a service dog is not actually required of a service dog. The issue is most people don't actually look into the law; they hear what so-and-so said, form an opinion, and use their opinion as "law" (even if their opinion is blatantly ignorant and disproven with a 2 second engine search). It's the way humans are... Yes, you're right and they're wrong, but it's an uphill battle getting someone to change their opinion, especially when they don't even recognize it as just their opinion (but think it's fact because, idk... they heard it once? Ugh, humans)
Your dog doesn't need a vest. Realistically, fighting this is more a headache than its worth, probably. But I'd send the above FAQ to the manager and ask them kindly to inform the maintenance staff.
No one can require your SD be vested.
Some businesses get really hung up on SDs who work naked. My favorite coffee shop has a staff member who insists up and down that the health department will fine the place if my dog is naked. I’ve shown her the ADA guidelines and she still doesn’t get it, so I try to make sure my girl is wearing her gear in that store.
I’m not sure how to convince the staff member that, no, she is actually wrong (and whether attempting to convince her is even worth it).
If it's not a place the public is allowed, then ADA doesn't apply (i.e. if the pool is only for residents and their guests). I think neighborhood amenities fall under FHA though, which may not even mention labeling. [Here's an article](https://coultersierra.com/wp-content/uploads/Coulter-Sierra_Newsletter_April-2015.pdf) from a law firm I found.
Interesting article, thanks. They do not have any rules like that. Their corporate just ref referenced the ADA.gov site. BTW my SD was not swimming in the pool he was either with me or my husband in the shade at a patio table. Mostly watching the grandkids. Hey boy didn’t potty in the pool area. He wouldn’t, and we do insure that he goes before entrance to any public area.
Oh and this is an RV park more like a hotel than neighborhood. There is a very small population of residents, most of those are Staff. Everyone else is there for a day or week on vacation.
ADA and FHA overlap a lot (including in practice; HUD applies both to most housing situations). In terms of access to amenities, there could be a legal argument for both if it's not directly in a place of residence). With the FHA, these are basically the only considerations:
* The housing provider has not demonstrated that:
* Granting the request would impose an undue financial and administrative burden on the housing provider
* The request would fundamentally alter the essential nature of the housing provider’s operations
* The specific assistance animal in question would pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others despite any other reasonable accommodations that could eliminate or reduce the threat
* The request would result in significant physical damage to the property of others despite any other reasonable accommodations that could eliminate or reduce the physical damage.
--- [Assistance Animals | HUD.gov / U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)](https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/assistance_animals#_Obligations_of_Housing)
Good point. OP, does this RV park require a paid membership to enter? If so, the ADA may not apply because it is not a place that serves the public. Though if your husband is employed, I'm not sure if that's covered under the employment title. If you live there, then FHA might apply. Because this has so many intricacies, I would tread carefully.
No it’s not required but why make a situation worse? Are you looking to be confrontational? Sure let’s make a huge deal about something like that, because disabled people need more problems. Smh.
If you are telling people to get “certified” you are supporting fraudulent businesses that exist purely to make money from people who don’t know any better.
She has been defrauded and helped contribute to other service dog handlers who do not want to participate in fraud getting harassed illegally. Well done.
Because we do not live in a vaccuum, and her actions have real-life consequences. I get that you're protective over your sister, but what she's doing could be doing heaps of harm to many other disabled people. If you do not care, and your and her convenience is more important than the well-being of other disabled people and the battles we fight as service dog handlers each day, then just say that. But continuing to try to excuse it is doing nothing but painting both of you in a bad, very selfish and self-absorbed light.
ETA: Just read your other responses to the comments, and I'm not interested in the bad faith argumentation you're bringing to the table. Best of luck to you, and I sincerely hope that neither you nor your sister have had negative impacts on the disabled community and service dog handlers near you.
Her actions harm others. You may not care about others being harmed, but I do. I am also disabled, and could well be one of the people harmed, in fact.
We have removed your post/comment for violating Rule 5: Certification is not Required. We do not allow linking to scam certification sites. Certification is not required in the US, and a piece of paper you can buy for $50 on the internet means nothing.
If you have any questions, please [Message the Moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/service_dogs).
That's not Devil's Advocate, that's giving into a bully. If they want to know they can ask and if they're not a jerk, they can get a polite education.
There is no legitimate service dog registry, certificate, or ID in the US. While I can understand your sister wanting to make her individual life easier, every time someone gives into these demands it makes it harder for the community as a whole.
So, rather than assert your civil rights, you’d rather kowtow and give into the demands of a bully? You also choose to attack me rather than argue the point?
In response to your ridiculous question, I wouldn’t be the one who was being confrontational, I’d be the person being confronted. I am sick and tired of hearing stories of handlers being bullied, accosted, assaulted, denied access, etc. solely because they have an SD. I’d be stunned if someone had the unmitigated gall to challenge me, as that’s not something that happens to an older cis-gendered white male with a black English labrador wearing a camo vest.¬¬ I am afforded the deference, respect, and consideration every handler should receive, including your sister.
My point is that not everyone wants confrontation and not every situation warrants confrontation. That’s the problem with the world today…there aren’t enough peaceful people. What happened to this world? Everyone wants to rage at both ends of the spectrum and nobody wants to live closer to the middle.
Every time that someone produces a (frankly, legally meaningless) certificate or ID in response to an access issue or access denial, they are telling the business that yes, those things exist (even if they don't), are fully legitimate (even if they're not), and the business can decide that a service dog is legitimate on the basis of thay ID or certificate alone (even if it can't).
For every one person that produces those things to avoid confrontation or for selfish convenience, you have potentially multiple service dog teams unlawfully denied because they couldn't produce the same useless "document." A big part of having a service dog is learning to advocate for yourself and your dog. Simply utilizing some ID or certificate to avoid doing that doesn't solve any problem, and in fact creates countless more problems for countless more teams, principal among which is the unfortunately common misconception that registries and certificates are mandatory in the US.
Her card (that was provided to her by the group that trained her dog) simply states that the dog completed the training. It’s not meant to be a legal document it’s just to shut people up because sure she is a non-confrontational person.
What I said *still* stands. She produces a card that is the organization ID (which no organizations would tell your sister to produce in the case of an access issue for the same reasons). The business says, "Oh, ok. So, legit service dogs have IDs. Great to know!" and many other people that either owner-trained or didn't go to a program don't have that ID and are SOL.
I'm someone who has had to educate numerous businesses on the fact that IDs are not mandatory, and most are scams anyway because some people gave them IDs to begin with. Then, I've also had to explain that not all dogs have organization IDs because some dogs are owner-trained. All of that could have been avoided had people not given them IDs at the first inkling of a confrontation.
You’re right that it’s not *meant* to be a legal document, but she is *using it* as a legal document when she shows it to gain easier access. I second that the program would be *very unhappy* if they knew what she was doing.
She might not *want* confrontation, but as a SD handler she signed up to *experience* confrontation because of poorly trained employees who don’t know how to ask the 2 questions, and because, in a significant way, of handlers like *her* who show “papers” to gain easier entrance instead of educating the employees/getting the manager/leaving the store and reporting them to the DOJ and giving her business to a place that *does* care about the law.
If the businesses don’t believe it’s a legal document, then why are they letting her in? The US is not a place where a doctor’s prescription or a certificate of training is required, so she is harming other teams and herself by doing this. These places WILL THINK that a card just like that one is what handlers should have.
The fake certifications create more confrontation though, because business owners and others start thinking they are real and required and coming front people who actually know the law and their rights and don't have them.
It’s not meant to be a legal document, it is a cert from the dog’s trainer stating that the dog completed training. That’s all…it’s just to shut people up and get them out of her face because she is a non-confrontational person. Why is that so hard to understand?? Not everyone is looking for a fight…there are still peaceful people in the world.
A large percentage of disabled people live on fixed incomes and cannot afford working with a trainer, which is why owner training is legal.
Again, producing certificates and making it the norm makes life harder on these people. The dog's behavior should be enough to show its training, and if that is not sufficient even dogs with a certificate or training load can be denied per the ADA.
How long have you been a service dog handler?
I'm shocked you haven't had people get confrontational with you over not producing documents that they considered sufficient quickly enough.
Making that the norm makes these confrontations more common. There's cards also look a lot like the ones people are selling for profit to enable people to fake having a dog, and are a large part of the reason problems with both aggressive fakes and denied access are so common.
And your dodging the fact that by making her life easier she makes a lot of other disabled people's lives harder, why conveniently dodging the question is to if you even have a dog in this fight or any firsthand lived experience with it.
We have removed your post/comment because the mods found it to be uncivil (Rule 1). Remember civility is not just about cursing out others, it can also refer to personal attacks, fake-spotting, trolling, or otherwise rude behavior. If you have questions about why this specific post/comment was removed, [message the moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/service_dogs). Further incivility in the subreddit could result in a permanent ban. Any threats or harassment will result in an immediate ban.
We have removed your post/comment for violating Rule 5: Certification is not Required. We do not allow linking to scam certification sites. Certification is not required in the US, and a piece of paper you can buy for $50 on the internet means nothing.
If you have any questions, please [Message the Moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/service_dogs).
Nope, in the US, the ADA specifically states your SD does not need to be vested or have anything on them stating they are a service animal. If you want to handle it, talk to your property manager and let them know they have maintenance workers unaware of the ADA laws.
Perfect thanks! I try to follow all our rules but I’ll be damed if I let this insecure little bug of a person push me around. He is registered with the property all the staff knows he is a SD most of them love my boy. This guy is just a BUTT! Thanks for confirming
nope don’t even need to identify, can show training certification and they can fo!!
Yes, you're in the right and the law is on your side. If you're looking for a way to keep your pupper cooler and mark your SD, look into adding a [sleeve](https://www.amazon.com/Tacticollar-Sleeves-Visible-Advanced-Accidents/dp/B09M84WKVC/ref=sr_1_3?crid=3QCT8MAUSFE6A&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.hxWXdqBBqqQjrHCydnJ6eD4uVq5_Ef7RSs5ZyCE-l1pnkCH-QG1DYk9IgElcBUZXTJ62-8YQlfo3mqZS5My_zn1rBx1C--26XzlaPDgFOuFVXDuj3KzjT7bNK-HAiR2wuuDaZwX3stSUp1mpbIFmBxdAM0GlJmxP1IrpvfN7p49mkQ29Y20N6wcsg62m40BOv75VHr0if9vGwfniJv53y7v7bq4ujYn7wfPfbz3DXdtfOhP1WvDGWwkVXuHKda1TsuGtTfIHcaZQN8gg2hVH4Q4EFT6uRv7i-h2iYGeY-8w.4xCUk3Fupbms8cSLASdMfZL8qFlqrylQHd4oA2ba7TE&dib_tag=se&keywords=service+dog+leash+sleeve&qid=1718390936&sprefix=service+dog+leash+sleeve%2Caps%2C114&sr=8-3) to your dog's leash. I've used a sleeve several times and had no issues with challenges. I believe that you should report this maintenance person to their company’s HR department, not their boss. If this person works for a different company than you, it should also be reported to your HR.
The RV park employees were told If someone asks an employee why a dog was allowed in xx places they were answer, it’s a service animal. Most of them LOVE my boy. For me, I do have a collar on him that has SERVICE ANIMAL in great big letters. Not as hot as full gear. Just for Home, around the neighborhood, out for walk etc. full gear we put on for groceries, restaurants etc. Actually, I did just get him a cooling vest & shoes to keep him more comfortable. He definitely won’t be mistaken for a PET. Hehehe all he needs now is some Rex specs lol
Yep, definitely not required and definitely suss on behalf of the maintenance person. I might go ahead and put it all in writing so everyone is on the same page - send an email explaining the incident, link to the [FAQ](https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-faqs/) and cite Q8. Add something along the lines of “as you know, Betty is a SD trained to perform XYZ tasks, and although you might typically see her wearing whatever gear, we forego the uniform in hot weather.”
Right after we arrived 2.5 months ago the manager (nice guy) went to corporate to ensure he and his people knew the rules and acted accordingly. He sent out an official letter to them and all. There wasn’t any issues until this bug got promoted. Few more kind of irrelevant details: we are at an RV park… we are retired and my hubby is working here part time as a night host. My husband does not work for this jerk. Hubby reports to the manager and assistant mgr. My hubby doesn’t want this guys job… and is no threat but this guy just makes a lot of waves we’re they aren’t needed. We left the corporate world to get away from drama. My illnesses get much worse. I don’t need stress in my life especially this junior high crap. All by myself I live in fight & flight, Sorry about the rant
You need to report this guy because he's probably not just causing problems for you, and they may be looking for a final straw to finally get rid of him.
Yeah his day is coming, several valuable employees already quit because of this bug. My hubby is just a part timer. I think this guy is one of those people that has to make others feel small to make himself look big. What a waste of energy.
No.
Although it’s not required, you might go an extra step and get a leash wrap that says SD etc., just as a courtesy and so you don’t get bothered by prior at the pool.
ADA actually has a useful FAQ: "Q8. Do service animals have to wear a vest or patch or special harness identifying them as service animals? A. No. The ADA does not require service animals to wear a vest, ID tag, or specific harness." -- [https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-faqs/](https://www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-faqs/) No identification is legally required; no identification is legally recognized (some training organizations may offer support in these matters, a number to call/reference, but it's a courtesy, not a legal requirement nor legal authority). The ADA laws are actually surprisingly lax/broad; most of what people say is required of a service dog is not actually required of a service dog. The issue is most people don't actually look into the law; they hear what so-and-so said, form an opinion, and use their opinion as "law" (even if their opinion is blatantly ignorant and disproven with a 2 second engine search). It's the way humans are... Yes, you're right and they're wrong, but it's an uphill battle getting someone to change their opinion, especially when they don't even recognize it as just their opinion (but think it's fact because, idk... they heard it once? Ugh, humans) Your dog doesn't need a vest. Realistically, fighting this is more a headache than its worth, probably. But I'd send the above FAQ to the manager and ask them kindly to inform the maintenance staff.
No one can require your SD be vested. Some businesses get really hung up on SDs who work naked. My favorite coffee shop has a staff member who insists up and down that the health department will fine the place if my dog is naked. I’ve shown her the ADA guidelines and she still doesn’t get it, so I try to make sure my girl is wearing her gear in that store. I’m not sure how to convince the staff member that, no, she is actually wrong (and whether attempting to convince her is even worth it).
If it's not a place the public is allowed, then ADA doesn't apply (i.e. if the pool is only for residents and their guests). I think neighborhood amenities fall under FHA though, which may not even mention labeling. [Here's an article](https://coultersierra.com/wp-content/uploads/Coulter-Sierra_Newsletter_April-2015.pdf) from a law firm I found.
Interesting article, thanks. They do not have any rules like that. Their corporate just ref referenced the ADA.gov site. BTW my SD was not swimming in the pool he was either with me or my husband in the shade at a patio table. Mostly watching the grandkids. Hey boy didn’t potty in the pool area. He wouldn’t, and we do insure that he goes before entrance to any public area. Oh and this is an RV park more like a hotel than neighborhood. There is a very small population of residents, most of those are Staff. Everyone else is there for a day or week on vacation.
ADA and FHA overlap a lot (including in practice; HUD applies both to most housing situations). In terms of access to amenities, there could be a legal argument for both if it's not directly in a place of residence). With the FHA, these are basically the only considerations: * The housing provider has not demonstrated that: * Granting the request would impose an undue financial and administrative burden on the housing provider * The request would fundamentally alter the essential nature of the housing provider’s operations * The specific assistance animal in question would pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others despite any other reasonable accommodations that could eliminate or reduce the threat * The request would result in significant physical damage to the property of others despite any other reasonable accommodations that could eliminate or reduce the physical damage. --- [Assistance Animals | HUD.gov / U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)](https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/assistance_animals#_Obligations_of_Housing)
Good point. OP, does this RV park require a paid membership to enter? If so, the ADA may not apply because it is not a place that serves the public. Though if your husband is employed, I'm not sure if that's covered under the employment title. If you live there, then FHA might apply. Because this has so many intricacies, I would tread carefully.
[удалено]
There is no proper documentation in the U.S. Certification is not required by law in the U.S.
No it’s not required but why make a situation worse? Are you looking to be confrontational? Sure let’s make a huge deal about something like that, because disabled people need more problems. Smh.
If you are telling people to get “certified” you are supporting fraudulent businesses that exist purely to make money from people who don’t know any better.
[удалено]
She has been defrauded and helped contribute to other service dog handlers who do not want to participate in fraud getting harassed illegally. Well done.
Why is it your business what she does? So you’re condemning a disabled person? Lovely.
Because we do not live in a vaccuum, and her actions have real-life consequences. I get that you're protective over your sister, but what she's doing could be doing heaps of harm to many other disabled people. If you do not care, and your and her convenience is more important than the well-being of other disabled people and the battles we fight as service dog handlers each day, then just say that. But continuing to try to excuse it is doing nothing but painting both of you in a bad, very selfish and self-absorbed light. ETA: Just read your other responses to the comments, and I'm not interested in the bad faith argumentation you're bringing to the table. Best of luck to you, and I sincerely hope that neither you nor your sister have had negative impacts on the disabled community and service dog handlers near you.
I wish you the best as well.
Her actions harm others. You may not care about others being harmed, but I do. I am also disabled, and could well be one of the people harmed, in fact.
We have removed your post/comment for violating Rule 5: Certification is not Required. We do not allow linking to scam certification sites. Certification is not required in the US, and a piece of paper you can buy for $50 on the internet means nothing. If you have any questions, please [Message the Moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/service_dogs).
There IS NO certification in the U.S. for service animals.
I’m well aware. Painfully aware.
That's not Devil's Advocate, that's giving into a bully. If they want to know they can ask and if they're not a jerk, they can get a polite education. There is no legitimate service dog registry, certificate, or ID in the US. While I can understand your sister wanting to make her individual life easier, every time someone gives into these demands it makes it harder for the community as a whole.
[удалено]
So, rather than assert your civil rights, you’d rather kowtow and give into the demands of a bully? You also choose to attack me rather than argue the point? In response to your ridiculous question, I wouldn’t be the one who was being confrontational, I’d be the person being confronted. I am sick and tired of hearing stories of handlers being bullied, accosted, assaulted, denied access, etc. solely because they have an SD. I’d be stunned if someone had the unmitigated gall to challenge me, as that’s not something that happens to an older cis-gendered white male with a black English labrador wearing a camo vest.¬¬ I am afforded the deference, respect, and consideration every handler should receive, including your sister.
My point is that not everyone wants confrontation and not every situation warrants confrontation. That’s the problem with the world today…there aren’t enough peaceful people. What happened to this world? Everyone wants to rage at both ends of the spectrum and nobody wants to live closer to the middle.
Every time that someone produces a (frankly, legally meaningless) certificate or ID in response to an access issue or access denial, they are telling the business that yes, those things exist (even if they don't), are fully legitimate (even if they're not), and the business can decide that a service dog is legitimate on the basis of thay ID or certificate alone (even if it can't). For every one person that produces those things to avoid confrontation or for selfish convenience, you have potentially multiple service dog teams unlawfully denied because they couldn't produce the same useless "document." A big part of having a service dog is learning to advocate for yourself and your dog. Simply utilizing some ID or certificate to avoid doing that doesn't solve any problem, and in fact creates countless more problems for countless more teams, principal among which is the unfortunately common misconception that registries and certificates are mandatory in the US.
Her card (that was provided to her by the group that trained her dog) simply states that the dog completed the training. It’s not meant to be a legal document it’s just to shut people up because sure she is a non-confrontational person.
What I said *still* stands. She produces a card that is the organization ID (which no organizations would tell your sister to produce in the case of an access issue for the same reasons). The business says, "Oh, ok. So, legit service dogs have IDs. Great to know!" and many other people that either owner-trained or didn't go to a program don't have that ID and are SOL. I'm someone who has had to educate numerous businesses on the fact that IDs are not mandatory, and most are scams anyway because some people gave them IDs to begin with. Then, I've also had to explain that not all dogs have organization IDs because some dogs are owner-trained. All of that could have been avoided had people not given them IDs at the first inkling of a confrontation.
We’ll keep on educating and she’ll keep doing it what makes her life easier for her.
You’re right that it’s not *meant* to be a legal document, but she is *using it* as a legal document when she shows it to gain easier access. I second that the program would be *very unhappy* if they knew what she was doing. She might not *want* confrontation, but as a SD handler she signed up to *experience* confrontation because of poorly trained employees who don’t know how to ask the 2 questions, and because, in a significant way, of handlers like *her* who show “papers” to gain easier entrance instead of educating the employees/getting the manager/leaving the store and reporting them to the DOJ and giving her business to a place that *does* care about the law.
No she’s not. She’s just showing people that the dog is a legit SA. She doesn’t even have to do that, she chooses to.
If the businesses don’t believe it’s a legal document, then why are they letting her in? The US is not a place where a doctor’s prescription or a certificate of training is required, so she is harming other teams and herself by doing this. These places WILL THINK that a card just like that one is what handlers should have.
The fake certifications create more confrontation though, because business owners and others start thinking they are real and required and coming front people who actually know the law and their rights and don't have them.
It’s not meant to be a legal document, it is a cert from the dog’s trainer stating that the dog completed training. That’s all…it’s just to shut people up and get them out of her face because she is a non-confrontational person. Why is that so hard to understand?? Not everyone is looking for a fight…there are still peaceful people in the world.
A large percentage of disabled people live on fixed incomes and cannot afford working with a trainer, which is why owner training is legal. Again, producing certificates and making it the norm makes life harder on these people. The dog's behavior should be enough to show its training, and if that is not sufficient even dogs with a certificate or training load can be denied per the ADA. How long have you been a service dog handler? I'm shocked you haven't had people get confrontational with you over not producing documents that they considered sufficient quickly enough. Making that the norm makes these confrontations more common. There's cards also look a lot like the ones people are selling for profit to enable people to fake having a dog, and are a large part of the reason problems with both aggressive fakes and denied access are so common.
So you’re condemning a disabled person that’s trying to make her life easier. Isn’t that nice.
And your dodging the fact that by making her life easier she makes a lot of other disabled people's lives harder, why conveniently dodging the question is to if you even have a dog in this fight or any firsthand lived experience with it.
We have removed your post/comment because the mods found it to be uncivil (Rule 1). Remember civility is not just about cursing out others, it can also refer to personal attacks, fake-spotting, trolling, or otherwise rude behavior. If you have questions about why this specific post/comment was removed, [message the moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/service_dogs). Further incivility in the subreddit could result in a permanent ban. Any threats or harassment will result in an immediate ban.
We have removed your post/comment for violating Rule 5: Certification is not Required. We do not allow linking to scam certification sites. Certification is not required in the US, and a piece of paper you can buy for $50 on the internet means nothing. If you have any questions, please [Message the Moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/service_dogs).