service dogs

Hi NikkiChic, It seems that both the governments and businesses have been successful in revoking most of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)in actual practice. The parts of the ADA applicable to reasonable accommodations and service animals is in contentious spreading legal turmoil. A resourceful news trail includes: http://www.today.com/id/40907000/ns/today-today_health/t/school-bars--year-old-epileptic-boys-service-dog/#.UkZ93NJJmSo http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Once-Banned-Service-Dog-in-Heat-Not-in-School-113292424.html Just a short time ago, news broadcasts here in Northern California were labeling people who didn't have disabilities easily recognized by laypeople, but who utilized assistance animals in public and in ADA covered private places, as opportunists exploiting the law to the detriment of people with "genuine" disabilities, and as endangering the general public with the animals, noting that these "exploiters" must be stopped. So if a professional trains and/or recommends such animals, it may very well be held in propaganda polemics that they "must be stopped" too, and indeed: http://epilepsyu.com/blog/scam-alert-a-mans-seizure-dog-business-is-a-scam-says-ny-state-supreme-court/ http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20130523/NEWS07/705229702 http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/guide-therapy-service-dogs/277634-injunctions-against-seizure-dog-business.html Less than a year ago, I had an encounter at a Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) when I visited a relative at the facility, and with my using a GPS unit to accommodate my neurological disabilities. I had an Office of Civil Rights (OCR) ruling faulting (and ordering a correction of policy to)a Hospital that had banned visitors with assistance dogs, and I had my physicians' statement explaining my need for accommodation in using a GPS unit to minimize the dangers and effects of my disabilities. My not driving angered the officials at the SNF, and they soon threatened me with having me arrested for tresspass for my relying on my GPS unit, as they demanded and escorted me from the facilities, despite my rights to continue the visit with my relative and to seek ADA accommodation. Their extreme discontent and harangue continued onto public sidewalks as I activated more guidance recording equipment in my walk to the nearest bus stop, and their later harangue included a threat to expel my relative to the streets at midnight with exposure to sub-freezing temperatures, for my conduct with the GPS unit, OCR papers, and physician's statement. The State of California's officials held that threats of deadly exposure to the elements from forceful expulsion of my disabled elderly relative at midnight was not prohibited by law (this was about the same time as the news stories about "911 no CPR" nursing care, but before the right-to-die propaganda spin: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/03/elderly-woman-dies-after-nurse-refuses-to-give-her-cpr/ ). State officials with the state level ADA, et al. state programs, then quickly challenged my right to use a GPS unit also, and a dispute arose over using electronic devices in public places and the admissibility of, and what constitutes, threats of violence documented by electronic devices. The federal OCR became a non-responder, and, to my relative's OCR complaint, held that retaliation over others seeking ADA protection was not prohibited, and that threats of exposure to deadly cold temperatures was not a violation to any set of rights protected by any federal law or mandated medical practices under Medicare's & DHHS' jurisdiction. In similar court cases involving epilepsy dogs, the courts have been using every technicality imaginable (and some beyond) to side with businesses and service providers (state, public, and private) against service animals (very few token exceptions), much more so than with my GPS unit conflicts, and then in the exceptions, profesionals recommending and/or providing service animals involving token exceptions, are then being frequently persecuted for facilitating exceptions to the oppression of rights for disabled individuals. The federal courts granted me poverty status for court fees, etc., and I'm "judgment proof" because of asset/financial poverty due to epilepsy, still, the uncollectible legal expenses can be tremendous (an appellate lawyer opined that the government agency I sought redress from in federal court over a ten year period, had probably expended more than $200,000 to frustrate my legal rights under the Rehabilitation Act with federal employers). Tadzio

**