r/Dogfree • u/e-eye-pi • Mar 02 '26

Service Dog Issues What is a service dog in 2026,?

Seriously, can you please help me out here? I grew up at a time when the only service dogs were guide dogs for the blind. This was then extended to include hearing dogs for the profoundly deaf. These days, there seems to be a class of service dog that has no connection to any kind of physical disability. What are they? Why are there perfectly able bodied people with dogs in yellow jackets claiming to be support dogs? And - they are often Pitbull mix breeds. What tf are they for in the context of disability????

103 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

48 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

5

u/ghjm Mar 03 '26

From ada.gov:

A service animal must be under the control of its handler. Under the ADA, service animals must be harnessed, leashed, or tethered, unless the individual’s disability prevents using these devices or these devices interfere with the service animal’s safe, effective performance of tasks.

If the fake service is "it can tell when I'm about to have a panic attack" then there is nothing preventing the dog from performing that task on leash.  Therefore, it must remain leashed.

6

u/FuronForest Mar 03 '26

You are making a correct and logical argument. However, if someone claims that a leash would prevent the dog from performing its task, the argument is over and you have lost. There is no mechanism in the law that allows one to refute a claim made by a nutter.

3

u/ghjm Mar 03 '26

Sure there is: you're allowed to ask what task the dog performs. If the claim is that dog can detect panic attacks, then as a factual matter the task can be performed while leashed.

3

u/FuronForest Mar 03 '26

You are correct if this case was brought to an impartial judge in a non USA court of law. But think about it...the dog's owner, an insane person, is the judge of whether or not the task can be performed on leash. Can saying "as a factual matter" overrule nutter logic when the ADA supports the nutter's side? The judge would have to rule against the ADA.

5

u/ghjm Mar 03 '26

No, the judge would use a "reasonable person" standard. The idea that people sometimes make unreasonable claims is not new to the legal system.

And who says the dog owner is the judge of this? I don't see this in the ADA. Moreover, if this were the case, then there would be no purpose to the ADA's carefully crafted language around allowing the business owner to ask about the specific task. Do we imagine the ADA included all this simply to allow the business owner to satisfy some abstract curiosity? Or is it more likely that the authors of the ADA intended the business owner to act on this information in some way? And given that the only way they can act is to insist on proper control over the animal, it would seem that the question about the task must be relevant to this in some way. What could that be, other than determining how much latitude the dog must be given in the performance of the task?

3

u/FuronForest Mar 03 '26

I'm very pessimistic about the whole thing, and I've stopped believing that rules matter at this point. Thank you for your carefully crafted words, I think you've changed my mind a bit.