Privilege or right

From Service Dog Training

One of the things that bothers me the most when talking to other dog users (and guide dog users are particularly bad about this) is how often they describe service dog use as being a privilege. I do not consider service dog use to be a privilege, I consider it to be a right that I have as an individual with a disability. Let's look at the definitions of "privilege" and "right" taken from the Merriam-Webster online dictionary.

Privilege: a right or immunity granted as a peculiar benefit, advantage, or favor ; especially such a right or immunity attached specifically to a position or an office.

Right: something to which one has a just claim: a: the power or privilege to which one is justly entitled <voting rights> <his right to decide>.

Therefore, in a nutshell, a privilege is something you get generally because you have achieved a certain elevated status or position and a right is something you inherently have because of who you are or something that is central to you. A disability is not generally considered an elevated status or an achievement, it is something that is a part of an individual, whether that is acquired during the lifespan or present from birth.

The use of a service dog, then, is a right that an individual with a disability has as a result of possessing the characteristic of having a disability. You do not need to be "super-disabled" or better than the general population to have a service dog. As a person with a disability, you have the right to use a service dog if you choose, just like you have the right to free speech if you choose to exercise it. State laws tend to support the opinion that service dog/service animal usage is a right of individuals with disabilities. I have randomly selected a few states and put the relevant sections of their laws below:

Alabama: Every totally or partially blind person shall have the right to be accompanied by a guide dog, especially trained for the purpose, and every hearing-impaired person shall have the right to be accompanied by a hearing dog, especially trained for the purpose

Colorado: A person with a disability, including but not limited to a blind, visually impaired, deaf, hard of hearing, or otherwise physically disabled person, has the right to be accompanied by an assistance dog specially trained for that person

Florida: An individual with a disability has the right to be accompanied by a service animal in all areas of a public accommodation that the public or customers are normally permitted to occupy.

Iowa: A person with a disability or person training an assistive animal has the right to be accompanied by a service dog or an assistive animal, under control, in any of the places listed in sections 216C.3 and 216C.4

Missouri: 3. Every person with a visual, aural or physical disability shall have the right to be accompanied by a guide dog, hearing dog, or service dog, which is especially trained for the purpose

This is just a sample. State law overwhelmingly supports the position that service animal usage is a right granted to those with disabilities, not a privilege provided to an elite few. Using the term privilege when speaking about service animal gives the general public the impression that service dog users have somehow earned a special status that allows them to use a service animal and that service animal use is somehow attached to a "super-disabled" status that grants the ability to use a service animal. If service animal usage is ever to be normalized and accepted among the general public, it must be considered as much a right for individuals with disabilities as using a wheelchair, a cane, or any other assistive device. I have never heard wheelchair use, or cane use, being described as a privilege, and likewise, service animal use should never be described that way either.

--Tiffany Huggard-Lee 17:08, 27 July 2008 (CDT)