Blog

From Service Dog Training

Tiffany's periodic thoughts on service dog training, access issues, and other things. For more short essays on disability issues, see other related issues.

Comments and discussion are welcome. To leave a comment, click on the title of the blog and scroll down to the 'leave a comment' link. You can also follow me on Twitter

More information on service dogs can be found on my main page

CALIF v. Los Angeles

Summary of CALIF v. City of Los Angeles Case

This case was initially filed in January of 2009 against both the City and County of Los Angeles alleging that the city violated Title II of the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the California Disabled Persons Act, and California Civil Code section 54 by failing to include the needs of people with disabilities in their emergency preparedness programs. In June of 2010, the County of Los Angeles began to develop a functional needs annex; as a result, the action against them was stayed. This summary judgment concerns only the City of Los Angeles. The summary judgment looks particularly at effective emergency notification of people with auditory or cognitive disabilities and the evacuation, transportation, and sheltering of people with disabilities during and after an emergency.

The representatives of the people with disabilities argue that:

People with disabilities suffer discrimination as a result of their disabilities because the city’s emergency plans fail to account for their needs.
People with disabilities are disproportionally vulnerable in an emergency because of their exclusion from the city’s emergency preparedness programs.
People with disabilities have felt fear, apprehension, or unease because they are not included in the emergency program, and they believe they have the right to be included.

The City of Los Angeles argues that:

The responsibility for addressing the needs of people with disabilities has been delegated to specific city departments.
The American Red Cross, not the city, is responsible for mass housing and care in an emergency or disaster.
The city has not taken any action which disproportionally burdens people with disabilities.
The city cannot be held liable for alleged violations because they have not excluded people with disabilities because of those disabilities.
The class of people with disabilities cannot prevail on a motion for summary judgment because there is no evidence that the plaintiffs requested and were refused reasonable accommodations from the city.
It is sufficient that the city can provide reasonable accommodations during a disaster when requested.
It is the responsibility of people with disabilities to perform their own personal planning.

The Court holds that:

Despite the City’s assertion that the responsibility has been delegated to specific departments, the city fails to show that any of these departments have undertaken any specific planning.
Despite the fact that the city’s current policy is facially neutral to the issue of disability, it is discriminatory because people with disabilities lack meaningful access to emergency preparedness programs because the programs do not include provisions for emergency notifications for those who have auditory impairments or cognitive disabilities or to evacuate, transport, and shelter people with disabilities during and after a disaster.
People with disabilities are disproportionally burdened by the city’s failure to consider their unique needs in its emergency preparedness programs.
Providing ad hoc reasonable accommodations during a disaster is inadequate because the purpose of emergency planning is to anticipate the needs of the city’s residents and to minimize last minute requests during a disaster.
Whether or not people with disabilities should engage in personal preparedness planning is irrelevant for the purpose of the case.
The denial of meaningful access to the emergency preparedness programs is because of the plaintiffs’ disabilities
Reasonable modifications to the city’s emergency preparedness program are available and would not cause undue hardship.

What does this mean for emergency planners? This case, as the first of its kind, sets the record clear that including the needs of people with disabilities in emergency plans is NOT optional, it is required by Title II of the ADA. If your city, county, or other Title II entity has an emergency plan, you must also explicitly plan for the needs of people with disabilities. For people with disabilities, it means that the ADA protects your right to the same kind of access to emergency and disaster services as a person without a disability, and that there is now legal recourse if those plans are not in place.

In short, including people with disabilities in emergency planning is no longer just a good idea, it’s required!

You can find the entire text of the summary judgment here.

--Tiffany Huggard-Lee 20:42, 13 February 2011 (CST)

Service Animals and the New TSA Screening Procedures

I think most people have heard about the turmoil caused by the TSA implementing new stringent screening requirements at airports, and the difficulty this has caused for many in the disability community either due to difficulties with the screening process itself, or because the TSA agents are violating their own regulations. One question that hasn’t been much discussed though, is what the enhanced screening requirements mean to service dog users.

The information on screening service animals on the TSA website has not been updated, giving service animal handlers no information on what will be done if they are selected for the “enhanced” screening. This is especially important for those service animal users that cannot walk through a metal detector without their dog, or who wear a non-removable medical device that will trigger a metal detector. At airports with the new screening technology in place, setting off the metal detector will cause you to be selected for additional screening.

Most people selected for the additional or “enhanced” screening will be asked to go through the new backscatter X-ray machine. However, many people with disabilities will not be able to use this device. In a letter dated Nov. 22nd, 2010, Kimberly Watson, the special counselor for the TSA, lists those that cannot use the backscatter X-ray machines. These people are: those that cannot stand up or cannot stand without a mobility device, those that cannot raise their arms to shoulder level for the duration of the scan, those that use supplemental oxygen, those that are providing assistance to people with disabilities, and, most important to use, service animal users. What this means is that as a service animal user, if you are selected for “enhanced” screening, you do not have the option of using the backscatter X-ray machine, and MUST submit to the pat-down. The TSA has not clarified if a service animal will receive a pat-down that is more involved than those previously used, or if that part of the screening process will remain the same.

If you want to avoid the intensive pat-down that now comes with setting off the metal detectors, keep these things in mind:

If you are able, go through the metal detector separately from your dog.
Have as little metal in your dog’s gear as possible to reduce the chances that you will set off the metal detector.
Make sure you have taken everything out of your pockets to minimize the chances that you will set off the metal detector.
And finally, if you are going to receive an “enhanced” pat-down, take advantage of your right to have a witness of your choice if you are traveling with someone you trust.

You can find a copy of the letter from the TSA here (opens as a PDF) http://www.pva.org/site/DocServer/TSA_letter_new_procedures_112310.pdf?docID=14765

--Tiffany Huggard-Lee 09:22, 4 December 2010 (CST)

Disaster Supplies For Your Service Dog

Hopefully you have a disaster plan and a kit of emergency supplies for yourself and your family, but what about your service dog? Preparing for a disaster with a service dog is a little different than preparing with a pet, because you will be able to take your service dog with you into emergency shelters, and you may need your dog’s assistance during the disaster and possible evacuations. Below are some things to consider adding to your emergency kit to ensure your service dog will be safe in a disaster.

Service Dog Disaster Kit

Dog boots – The aftermath of a disaster can leave dangerous debris on sidewalks and roads. Evacuating over the debris and even a potty break can be dangerous for your dog’s feet if you don’t protect them. Make sure you have dog boots available for your dog in case of emergency, and make sure your dog has learned to tolerate them before you need to use them.

Eye protection – Eye protection can be useful for the same reasons as dog boots. Your service dog’s eyesight is important, make sure you protect it during disasters.

Spare collar and leash – Things can break, especially during the stress of disasters, and the last thing you want to be caught without is a way of controlling your dog. Make sure you have a spare leash and an extra of whatever type of working collar you usually use.

Bowls for water and food

Grooming supplies

First aid kit

A blanket or some type of bedding – If you end up spending time in an emergency shelter, it will be important for your service dog to be able to be comfortable. If your service dog is small, you may be able to bring a dog bed. If your service dog is larger, you may want to bring a fleece throw, a blanket, or a crate pad as a more portable bed.

A crate or kennel - If your service dog is small enough to be contained in a regular crate or kennel easily, you can use that. People with larger service dogs may wish to consider a collapsible crate. The reason for having this is not as much to confine your service dog (though it can certainly be used for that) as to give your dog a safe space to relax if you find yourself staying in an emergency shelter or with family for a while.

A minimum of one week’s supply of food and enough water for at least 3 days– Try to make your stockpile of dog food mimic your dog’s regular diet as much as possible to minimize the chances of an upset stomach. If you feed a raw diet, you may want to look into dehydrated raw diets, either commercial ones or homemade dehydrated food.

Any medications or supplements

Information about your service dog in case you must be separated due to severe illness or injury (to either you or your dog). A sample information form can be found here.

--Tiffany Huggard-Lee 11:01, 12 September 2010 (CST)

Issues in Personal Preparedness for People with Disabilities

Personal Preparedness for People with Disabilities

In honor of National Preparedness Month, the Dog Blog will be featuring a series of articles on a variety of topics associated with emergency preparedness for people with disabilities. Today’s post will focus on some often overlooked aspects of personal emergency preparedness for people with disabilities.

General emergency preparedness information both for people with and without disabilities is widely available online. However, certain critical aspects of preparedness for people with disabilities are often glossed over or not discussed at all. Below are a few things to consider.

Special Diets and Stockpiling Food

Recommendations for how much food a person should stockpile in their preparedness efforts ranges from 3 days to a week’s worth of food. However, it is generally assumed that this is food you will be using if while you take shelter in your home, and that it would not be practical to move all this food with you during an evacuation. This presents a special concern for people who must eat certain diets. Emergency shelters and distribution points for emergency food supplies are not often equipped to deal with special diets, especially those that are very restrictive. If you are on a special diet or have medically necessary dietary restrictions, plan to evacuate with the food you need to keep yourself safe and healthy. Keep this food in a water-proof container that is easy to grab as you evacuate your home.

Accessible Shelters

By law, emergency shelters are required to be accessible to people with disabilities, however, the reality is that many are not. In addition, during a disaster, emergency staff may not be aware of what features are necessary to call a shelter “accessible” and may not be able to accurately direct you to a shelter that meets your needs. Before you need them, find out where the designated shelters are in your area and check them out yourself. If you find some (or all) of the shelters are inaccessible, it is important to bring that concern to your city or county emergency manager.

“Special Needs” Shelters

The use of “special needs” shelters was initially designed to provide a safe sheltering environment for people who need intensive medical care and/or monitoring. However, they have instead become a sort of dumping ground for anyone with any sort of disability or medical need, including those that can be easily accommodated in an accessible general population shelter. There are several problems with segregating people with disabilities into special needs shelters: First, it is against the law, which requires city and county governments to provide services in the most integrated setting possible. Second, people entering a special needs shelter are usually allowed to bring, at most, one person with them. This means that people may be separated from family and friends that are crucial to providing moral support during a disaster. Third, people assigned to special needs shelters are often required to bring a personal care attendant. For someone that lives alone, this can be difficult, if not impossible to achieve during a disaster and can lead to people being denied access to essential sheltering services because of their disability. Find out if your city or county has a special needs or medical needs shelter, and what sort of people will be sent to those shelters. If all people with disabilities are sent to the special needs shelter, you should bring this problem to the emergency manager before you need the shelter to make sure you won’t be unnecessarily separated from your friends and family during a disaster.

Next week: Preparedness for Service Animal Users

--Tiffany Huggard-Lee 17:05, 4 September 2010 (CST)

Heaven Scent Paws Lawsuit Update

Some time back, I posted about the lawsuit that the Missouri attorney general had filed against the diabetic alert dog school Heaven Scent Paws and its owner, Michele Reinkemeyer. A variety of charges were brought in the lawsuit, most notably that many of the dogs could not alert to diabetic lows as advertised, and many of the dogs were unsuitable as service dogs due to temperament problems ranging from aggression and biting to extreme fearfulness. The recipients of these dogs were not given refunds when their dogs proved to be unsuitable, unsafe, or too poorly trained for service dog work, because Heaven Scent Paws claimed that the money that exchanged hands was a donation to the school and not a fee to purchase the dog. Heaven Scent Paws also claimed that all of the problems with the dogs were caused by poor handling on the part of the new handlers, despite outside experts confirming the dogs had no chance of becoming effective service dogs. You can see the text of the attorney general’s complaint here: http://ago.mo.gov/newsreleases/2008/pdf/HSP.pdf

After dragging on for over two years, the case was finally heard in court. It came as no surprise to those following the case that the attorney general won the lawsuit, and Heaven Scent Paws is now out of business permanently. The results of the case were, in summary:

Heaven Scent Paws and Michele Reinkemeyer are permanently prohibited from working with diabetic alert dogs in the future.
They are prohibited from trying to reclaim or claim ownership of dogs they have already placed.
They must pay restitution in the amount of $192,216.56 to repay those who filed complaints against the school.
They must pay the state of Missouri $5,000.00 for attorney fees and costs.

Hopefully this case will serve as a warning for other schools that may try to operate in the manner Heaven Scent Paws did. I’m working on getting a copy of the full judgment, and I will update again when I have read over the entire document.

--Tiffany Huggard-Lee 14:19, 22 August 2010 (CST)

Service Animal Changes in Title II and III

Title II and III Updates – Service Animal Overview

I was honored to be a guest at the White House ADA 20th Anniversary Celebration this past Monday, and was happy to hear President Obama announce the release of the new regulations for Title II and III of the ADA. These regulations have been much anticipated by the service animal community given the substantial number of expected changes. In July of 2008, I testified at the public hearing about these changes, and I’ve been following the issue closely ever since. I will describe the changes made to the service animal rules in brief in this post, and will follow up with a more thorough analysis shortly.

Title II

Prior to the release of these regulations, there was no explicit language in Title II pertaining to service animals. The text of the regulation is the same as in the revision to Title III and can be found at 28 CFR§ 35.136.

Title III

Title III, covering public accommodations, contains most of the changes that were put forth in the NPRM several years ago. In summary, here are the key changes:

-Service animals are now defined primarily as dogs, with the exception of trained miniature horses. This means that monkeys, parrots, snakes, rabbits, etc. no longer have coverage under the ADA as service animals.

-The list of sample tasks for service animals has been greatly expanded, recognizing the increase in the types of things service animals can do for people with disabilities. Some of the notable new inclusions: detecting the presence of allergens and preventing or interrupting impulsive or destructive behaviors.

-There are a few new requirements on handlers. A public accommodation may exclude a service animal if the animal is out of control and the handler does not effectively control it, or if the animal is not housebroken. The “control” aspect requires that the animal be on a leash, harness, or tether unless the handler cannot use one due to a disability or the use of one would interfere with the animal’s work. In those cases, the animal must be under control in another effective fashion.

-The DOJ guidance on what questions a public accommodation may ask is included in the regulations. These questions are whether the animal is required because of a disability, and what work or tasks the animal has been trained to perform. The regulations also state that these questions cannot be asked when the work the animal is doing is obvious.

-The fact that public accommodations may not require any proof of certification, licensing, or training is reaffirmed.

-Service animal users cannot be charged a fee because of the presence of the animal, nor required to do anything else that is not required of people not using service animals.

-Public accommodations may assess miniature horses used for service work based on whether or not the facility can accommodate the size of the horse, the handler’s control of the horse, whether the horse is housebroken, and whether there is a legitimate safely threat to having the horse present. Miniature horses are otherwise covered by the same provisions and protections given for dogs.

--Tiffany Huggard-Lee 18:36, 30 July 2010 (CST)

Treat College Like A Job

This post is part of the Bloggers Unite Disability Empowerment Event

“Treat College Like a Job:” The Sanitization of Disability by Disability Services Providers

“Treat college like a job!” It’s a nice statement, isn’t it? Encouraging, prompting, and generally well meaning…it’s the type of statement you’d expect to find hung up with thumb tacks on the wall in your college advisor’s office, a not-so-subtle reminder that you should be doing more than sleeping late and partying. What could possibly be the problem with this statement?

This statement appeared on the website for the disability services office at my alma mater. It was, in fact, the motto for the office. Students with disabilities should “Treat college like a job!” Ok, yes, students with disabilities should take college seriously, but shouldn’t all students? And, when it comes down to it, is it any of their business if students with disabilities are treating college like a job?

The sole purpose of institutions like higher education disability services offices is to level the playing field between people with disabilities and people without disabilities. These offices take many different names; in employment they may be human resource directors, or equal opportunity offices. Government offices have ADA coordinators. All with the same purpose…to ensure equal access and equal participation for people with disabilities by the removal of barriers and the provision of reasonable accommodations. These offices are not staffed with counselors or life coaches, if a student parties away her undergraduate career or an employee performs terribly at his job despite accommodation, these offices are not responsible. Since these offices supposedly hold the institutional experts on one thing, making the legally required reasonable accommodations to ensure equal access and equal participation to whatever program, service or employment opportunity is in question; why is it that we find them so very often in the business of marketing cute slogans, encouraging people with disabilities to “treat college like a job,” implying that if we try hard enough, we can do anything, or that the only real disability is a bad attitude?

People that work in offices like these are the “disability people.” If it concerns disability, and is in that institution, it comes to them. This does not mean, unfortunately, that these people have any relevant education or experience in this field. Often, disability related duties are tacked on to other jobs, especially in employment based disability services offices. I conducted an extremely informal survey at a recent conference attended by many new ADA coordinators and was surprised by the number of people that told me they were assigned these duties because they were on vacation when the vacancy arose and thus could not protest. Are these people well-meaning? Yes, usually. Are they qualified and sensitive to the needs of the disability community? Unfortunately, rarely.

So, we get cute slogans. These slogans come from a deeply seated discomfort with the concept of disability. For many people, and somewhat understandably, disability is bad, thus, no disability is good. The strategy of many offices then becomes to minimize the disability as much as possible. What they don’t realize is that not only is this deeply hurtful and offensive to the disability community, it’s an entirely ineffective method of dealing with accommodations.

The reality is that there is still a deeply held, if somewhat subconscious belief, that disability means there is something wrong with you. Disability is conventionally defined as something about you not working like most people would expect, ie, something that is wrong with you. What I mean by “wrong” in this context, though, is that disability represents to many people more than just a loss or difference of function in a particular physical, mental or emotional capacity, but instead something that fundamentally, inherently makes that person less of a human. For people that feel this way, the only way to make disability somehow “ok” is to make the disability not the issue. Struggling in college? You need to “treat college like a job!” Can’t get up that flight of stairs to your office? “If you try hard enough, you can do anything!” The problem is no longer the disability…the problem is the person, somehow, if the person with a disability has failed, it cannot possibly be because they were not provided with the tools to even have the slightest chance of success, it is because they didn’t try hard enough, they didn’t want it enough, or they had a bad attitude about it.

This results in a culture that cannot stand un-sanitized views of disability. They cling to the one incident where a person with a disability made it work without asking for accommodations and hold that person up as the model of everything a disabled person should be…the disabled person who worked hard enough, who had a good enough attitude, and somehow magically managed to get through life without any *known* accommodations.

What happens to the un-sanitized disabled person? They are forever compared to the mythical other person. They are told that so-and-so had a disability like theirs and didn’t need X, Y, or Z accommodation, so why should they? After all, they should just try harder and then they wouldn’t need any help at all! Inevitably, this method of approaching disability forces people with disabilities into the incorrect and damaging belief that they are never good enough, never try hard enough, and if they could just have a better attitude, everything would be ok.

Please…on the day when having a better attitude adds elevators and when trying harder makes print books morph into Braille let me know. I’ll come out to join you in looking for the flying pigs.

--Tiffany Huggard-Lee 13:15, 24 July 2010 (CST)

Service Animal Disaster Information Sheet

In September, I’ll be doing a blog series on disaster preparedness for service dog users. This blog is sort of a preview, since I had it ready in advance.

Service animal users generally prepare their disaster plans with the assumption that they will never be separated from their service animal. Usually, this is true. Disaster services, such as evacuation and sheltering, must be provided in compliance with the ADA, and this includes permitting service animals to remain with their handlers. However, there is always the worst case scenario that must be considered. A service animal bolts during evacuation and gets lost in the crowd. A service animal user is seriously injured and the animal must be sheltered apart from the handler until the handler recovers enough to care for the animal. In these situations, it is important to have the necessary information available to disaster responders to ensure that your service animal gets appropriate care during the disaster.

You can find a sample emergency information sheet here. There is also a downloadable PDF version and an example of a completed emergency information sheet. I recommend that you keep this form in a safe place, preferably in your disaster kit. During an evacuation, a copy of the information sheet should be kept on your dog and one on your person. I also keep one with me when traveling. Hopefully you will find this information useful as part of your disaster planning.

Service Animal Disaster Information Form

--Tiffany Huggard-Lee 20:12, 11 July 2010 (CST)

Combating Boredom In Your Service Dog

Recently I noticed that my service dog, Kain, was starting to slow down at work. When I would get up from my desk, he wouldn’t get up until coaxed, and in the halls he would walk as slowly as possible, definitely not his usual hard-driving personality. I wondered for a bit if his age was starting to show, he is, after all, approaching 8 years old, which is getting up there for a giant breed mix. However, after watching him chase squirrels in the back yard and jump around at dinner, it certainly didn’t seem like a lack of energy was the problem. I had one other idea, and it turned out to be correct. He was bored. The life of a graduate student during comprehensive exams and finals is neither exciting nor particularly active, and both Kain and I had gotten into a rut. I’ve added a few things to our daily routine to alleviate the boredom, and I give them here for your own use, along with a couple of other ideas.

-Use a new or special reward occasionally for a normal task. This can make work more exciting for the dog.

-Do something differently while working; take a new route around your building or change up your schedule a little.

-Give the dog a new toy or bone to work on during your downtime. A puzzle toy can help occupy spare time.

-Teach a new task or trick. This will give your dog something new to work on.

-Set aside some time to play a game or interact with your dog outside of work.

-Try a new activity with your dog. Take a rally or agility class, or find another exercise you enjoy.

--Tiffany Huggard-Lee 09:59, 29 May 2010 (CST)

Let the Buyer Beware Part 2

Let the Buyer Beware: Part 2

This post is a continuation of Let the Buyer Beware about the issues that have been in the news lately regarding problems with medical alert dog schools such as Heaven Scent Paws and Betheden Kennels.

The first topic for this post would seem to be basic, but it’s an issue that many people struggle with: When to refuse to accept a dog. Many of the people who have received unacceptable alert dogs get dogs that begin to show troubling behaviors during training. Certain dogs should not be accepted under any circumstance, regardless of any explanation the trainer or school may offer. Signs you definitely should not accept a dog include:

Growling, biting or lunging at any person, including children
Unprovoked growling, biting or lunging at other animals
Strong fear responses, without immediate recovery, to loud noises, sudden sights, people, or objects. This is not something a dog usually gets over or grows out of.
Dogs with obvious health issues, severe limping, etc.

Dogs with these issues should be rejected outright. They are not likely to make suitable service dogs, even with extensive remedial training. Other signs that should make you question whether or not you are getting an acceptable dog are:

A dog that cringes from being touched or that is unusually timid.
A dog that is not housebroken.
A dog that does not seem responsive to commands you have been told it already knows.
A dog that appears stressed in public.

Dogs that show these issues may or may not eventually make acceptable service dogs after a significant amount of additional training (likely not), but they definitely are not trained to an acceptable level for a dog that is at the point of placement with a new handler. Dogs with these behaviors should not be accepted.

If you do accept a dog that is showing signs of trouble, or that begins to demonstrate problematic behaviors after placement, you need to document these issues effectively if you want to have any chance of pursuing either a replacement dog or a refund.

Most of the trainers that are placing substandard medical alert dogs are very resistant to the idea of replacing or refunding an unsuitable dog. As a result, it is necessary for the handler to be able to conclusively demonstrate two things: first; that the dog is unsuitable for work, and second, that the handler did not cause the problem and followed the trainer’s instructions on maintaining the dog’s training.

Both of these things require a huge commitment to documentation. The second the dog begins to show problems, the problem should be written down, along with any surrounding circumstances and corrective actions taken. If the issue was significant, such as an attack on a person or another dog, any police reports, vet records or witness statements should be copied and kept in a file. Small problems should be noted as well, with a note of any witnesses that could speak on your behalf about the issue. If the problem with the dog includes temperamental unsuitability for service dog work or insufficient training, you may wish to contact another dog trainer or evaluator who can test the dog and provide an expert opinion about the suitability and training of the dog.

Most service dog schools provide directions for ongoing training after you return home with your dog. One of the most frequently used defenses by a school that has placed an unsuitable dog is that the dog was suitably trained when it left their facility, and that the lack of appropriate follow up training has damaged the dog’s training. As a result, it is important to document all the follow up training you do with your dog. Keep as many records as possible, maintain a checklist of your daily sessions and video tape some of your training sessions if possible. If you take an obedience class or work with a trainer, keep your receipts and any certificates or notes from the trainer you receive. If you have to pursue a trainer or a school for placing an unsuitable dog, these records will be extremely valuable.

The final issue is one of contracts. Be very careful what you sign, and if you aren’t 100% sure of every detail of the contract, find a lawyer to go over it with you. There are a few contractual issues that problematic schools and trainers tend to display. The first one of these is asking the potential dog handler to sign a contract and pay for the dog before receiving and training with the dog. This is basically like buying a used car sight unseen. You have no idea what you are getting in return for your money and commitment, and you are locking yourself into a contract which may not leave you much recourse if the dog is not what you expected. In short, never purchase a dog or sign a contract for a dog until you have completed your training with the dog and are sure this is what you want to agree to. Try to get a copy of the contract before you begin training with the dog so you can familiarize yourself with the terms.

Second, find out what remedies you will have if the dog does not work out. If you have to return the dog because the dog is not suitable, will you get a full refund? Will you get a replacement dog? Can you choose between a replacement dog and a refund? Make sure you are comfortable with these terms before you sign the contract. Third, find out under what circumstances the dog can be returned and how allegations of an unsuitable dog placement will be handled. Typically, less ethical schools blame the handler for any problem with the dog and refuse to refund the money with the assertion that school/trainer performed as agreed and the handler subsequently ruined the dog. This is why it is so important to maintain detailed documentation on your service dog…if you must demonstrate that the dog was unsuitable from the beginning, you will have to show that you did everything possible to maintain the dog’s training appropriately.

Third, find out the fee structure of the school or trainer. In some cases, the money you give the school for the dog is considered a purchase price for the dog, however in many other cases, the money is considered a donation to the school, and the dog is provided (supposedly) free of charge. This means that if the dog must be returned for unsuitability, the school may claim that they have no obligation to refund your money because the money was not to purchase a dog, but was a donation to the school and independent of the success of the dog.

Finally, find out who will own the dog. Many service dog schools maintain ownership of the service dog after placement, either for the entire working life of the dog, or until the partnership has been successful for a certain period of time, usually about one or two years. However, if you do not own your dog, the school can generally reclaim the dog at any time, for any reason. If the school becomes upset with you, they could take the dog, as it is technically still their property. Be very careful when signing any contract that does not give you ownership.

And last, do your research on a school before applying for a dog from them. Check with the Better Business Bureau and the state attorney general to see if there have been any complaints about the organization. Check online message boards and news archives to see what people are saying about the school. Never assume that other people who are having issues with the school are bad people, incompetent dog handlers or are trying to harm the reputation of the school without cause. Always try to get to the bottom of complaints before you commit to a school.

--Tiffany Huggard-Lee 11:22, 23 April 2010 (CST)

Dog Blog Archives...