Getting her certified as a therapy dog might be a fine thing to do, but it won't cause her to be legally covered by the ADA. A therapy dog is not a service dog, does not have public access rights, and is not protected from the idiocy of breed-specific legislation. As far as protecting her from Miami-Dade's law on pit bulls, you can just straight-up lie like everyone else, without the effort of certifying her as a therapy dog.

Your local ACOs may be too ignorant to know it, but they ARE allowed to ask some questions: 1. Is this a service dog? 2. What's an example of some task or work this dog does to assist you?

And it's not just tacky, and not even just illegal, to lie about service dog status in order to evade legal restrictions on pet dogs generally, or pit bulls in particular. Widespread flouting of the law in this way WILL undermine the ability of people who genuinely NEED service animals to rely on the ADA to protect THEIR animals.

I have total sympathy for your desire to protect Pinky from Miami-Dade's brain-dead law on pit bulls, but this isn't the way.

Do everything necessary to save her. It should not be the race that is banned but individual dogs of whatever race who behave in a dangerous manner. Let's face it, mostly owners are responsible for how their dog behaves. Miss Pinky is obviously not a dangerous dog and so should come under no such regulations.

Breed bans are wrong on so many levels. Just so very wrong.

As always, it's the human who is at fault as opposed to the critter when a bully dog is aggressive toward humans. Sadly, it's the animal who pays who pays the price.

ACOs will posibly become savvy to differentiating between the labels of therapy and service dogs. Then you're back to square one.

Perhaps it's time for a massive letter writing campaign, phone calls to the city council members and attendance at council meetings. Make it clear that work will be done to campaign against any council member who supports the ban. Campaign and vote accordingly.

When it comes down to it, (usually) the ultimate goal of any politician is to get reelected.

As someone who volunteers at a shelter in PA - I can tell you most Pit Bulls are as sweet as they can be! Any dog who is trained to fight to the death and prodded with cattle prods is likely to be mean - doesn't matter what breed they are. The fact that Pitties were so often abused in this manner has given them the bad rep.

If communities had any sense, they would ban dog fights, and lock up the people who support them instead of banning pit bulls. I lived in Miami for 18 years - it's not the pit bulls that should be put down!

Claiming they are service dogs is a dangerous way to save them, but if that is what works...

Watch out though - the next time a so called "service dog" mauls a kid next door - service dogs will be banned too :(

Arbitrarily "conferring service dog status" on a dog is one thing, getting a dog certified is something else -- whatever the reason. I see no "fairness" issue here.

That being said, breed bans -- dogs being killed because of their breed -- is no only "unfair" but is inhumane and immoral.

If you really do the training and she's a good service dog that anyone would be happy to have in their family, no, you're not cheating. However, if you just slap on the tag and forget it, you're probably doing a disservice to those animals that have trained to meet the qualifications.

BTW, I've long wondered how I could get training for myself to train dogs as service dogs. If I could do that, I could foster dogs one-at-a-time and train them as service dogs so that people that need them could adopt them. Any hints?

Julie

As pointed out before, just certifying an animal as a Therapy Dog, will not protect you from Breed Specific Legislation. A therapy dog, while they perform a great service for the community and its hospitals, nursing homes, and schools, is not protected by the ADA. However, it may be worth looking into laws that could declare the dog an Emotional Support Animal (ESA). ESA’s are not Service Dogs, but are prescribed by doctor’s to help a person psychologically, such as a person with depression, a child going through a serious illness, and other conditions where the dog encourages the person to get out of the house as is needed to care for the animal. These dogs are providing a therapeutic benefit to their owner. I’m not fully sure that it would overrule your county’s BSL, but it may and is definitely worth looking into.
Pittie SDs are AWESOME dogs, I think my Jenna is a pitty/lab mix. However, the public perception of the breed makes it difficult even for authentic Pitty SDs to gain access. While many SD handlers do stand up for their rights, it does get exhausting.
I encourage you to work on Miss Pinky’s training, even get her ready for Therapy work. Perhaps find for her a forever home where she would be protected as a ESA. If anything, it will make her a good ambassador for a breed that gets such a dirty reputation that is most definitely not earned.
Jberry – Training SDs is a challenge (and SDiT’s rights are given by the state you’re in, so if BSL applies to you, your SDiT may not be protected. Then again, SDiT is state law and that usually trumps County/City law where BSL is.) I owner trained Jenna. Obedience amongst distractions is a MUST. Temperament is crucial. Jenna can sit through cannon fire and barely bat an eye, she may look up at the direction of the sound, but it doesn’t bother her. Crowds have to be a no brainer for her too, she can’t solicit attention from people. To make the dog a service dog though, requires more than JUST obedience. The dog must have tasks that help with some of the disabling parts of the condition. Probably the easiest to train for, is wheelchair bound paraplegics. Tasks such as retrieving items and opening doors immediately come to mind. I would suggest at least with your first dog or two, work with a trainer to pick up hints on how to do it. A trained retrieve isn’t too difficult to do, and opening doors can either be target work to hit the buttons out in public and tug work to pull a rope connected to a door that needs to be opened.

I think that calling any dog a "service dog" when, in fact, they are not, is going to do greater harm to the "service dog" program in the long run. However...I think if that could save my pittie I would probably do it. I agree with the others that BSL is both inhumane and immoral. Pit bulls are probably my favorite breed. Unfortunately..even the insurance companies have BSL and will not insure people with pit bulls or, if they DO insure them, charge the people exhorbitant prices. It's just so sad and unfortunate that the few can always manage to ruin it for the many.

You are not- at least, that you've ever mentioned- legally disabled. Pinky's not- again, that you've mentioned- individually trained to mitigate your (nonexistant) disability.

This is not just 'bending the rules'.

This is FRAUD, and it's WRONG.

BTW, therapy dogs have no legal rights to be anywhere that regular old pet dogs don't, except by invitation of the property owners. Therapy dogs aren't exempt from the BSL in Miami- or anywhere else, AFAIK.

You're a professional, educated woman, and frankly, I'm really disappointed that you would even consider this okay. I'm hoping that this post was really tongue in cheek and I just missed the humor nuance.

I really feel for your situation. While I dislike (intensely) people who try to pass off unruly, untrained dogs as "service animals," I HATE killing dogs solely due to breed more. So, you are either protecting your innocent dog from the consequences of what irresponsible people have done in the past, or possibly playing a part in unforseen but probably negative consequences for service dogs by acting if not irresponsibly, insincerely.

I wish you good luck and hope that she can find a home where she can live unmenaced by BSL.

Work with Miss Pinky, Save her life, she would do the same for you.

As both a person with disability who is a service dog handler and as a person who trains service dogs for others, I have to say that what you are thinking of doing is incredibly low. As others have said owners of therapy dogs have no dispensation for avoiding breed bands that service dogs may or may not avoid. In most areas of the country it will not matter if your pit bull or pit bull mix is a service dog or emotional support dog or dog who can sing the star spangled banner the breed ban still holds and your dog may be confiscated by animal control and potentially euthanized before you can say boo. Whether or not I agree with this or not (I don't) matters nothing it's what the laws are. If you have an issue with the law go about changing it through the proper channels not through an underhanded way that is the "easy" route for you.

Emotional support dogs and service dogs are for people who are legally DISABLED. The majority of people with mental health problems are NOT DISABLED by their illness, therefore they do not qualify for a service dog or an emotional support dog. Only a court of law can determine if you are disabled by your condition so your doctor writing your a letters stating that you have depression or anxiety that may be helped by a pet really is a meaningless piece of paper and is illegal if you are not indeed disabled by this condition.

People who go about trying to break the law just so that they can have a dog whose breed is banned in their community hurt those who really need service or emotional support dogs. People have been fighting for their rights to independence for decades and every time someone fakes a disability to get what they want the easy way undermines all that hard work and hurts the people who really need the assistance of a trained dog in the end.

All I have to so is don't do it! It is wrong, it is illegal, so don't do it. If you do I hope that someone reports you and you are forced to meet the reprocussions for your poor choices. I don't wish any ill upon your dog, but I do hope that should you make such a poor choice that you have to face the consequences however dire those may be.

This is 100% off topic and I apoligize for that. But I didn't know how else to call your attention to a recent column in The Washington Post about cats with FIV. I assume you will have a comment on it, Dr. Khuly. Thanks for youe great blog.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/12/AR2010071204940.html

I just want to disagree with people who think that violating the law is inherently wrong. It is not. There are bad, immoral, dangerous laws which good people should violate.

It is sad, lawmakers are bought and paid for and people still feel some inherent need to obey them, without question.

I think the better point of your article is that BSL is never the answer. Instead of putting the time into training Pinkie to pass her therapy dog test (which, as several people pointed out, doesn't guarantee her the same rights as a service dog), why not spend the time campaigning against BSL in Miami Dade county? I know they have some of the oldest BSL in the nation, but that doesn't mean it can't be changed. I've found in the south that vets and vet techs are some of the people most likely to defend pit bulls.

Claiming SD status - don't go there. You're a working professional and this could really come back at you. Get your Canine Good Citizen and your Therapy Dog Intl. or Delta Society status for sure. It not only shows Pinky has done her training, but looks good for the breed - whatever that may turn out to be. As many has said before, Therapy Dogs and Service Dogs/Emotional Support Animals are two different things entirely. What people in the county are doing could have some seriously bad repercussions for those that truly need their service animals.

BSL is wrong, regardless of which breed it is designed to eliminate from society. Until the law can be stricken, do whatever it takes to save your dog. Your dog is worth it and depends on you to save her life. Bad laws need to be changed and this law is at the top of the list of the very worst.

Best of luck to you and especially to Pinky.

The AKC, for all of it's faults, has one thing that I absolutely love, and that's the Canine Good Citizen certification. I would propose that the county use the CGC or other behavior specific certification (Therapy Dog International, for example) as a way to have your pit or other power breed to be an exception to the rule.

As far as your efforts, I am mixed. I have to go to my heart and my heart says that stupid rules, rules that kill the innocent, are meant to be broken. If I was in your situation, I'd press on with all efforts to save a good dog.

Breaking a law isn't inherently immoral; doing so in a way that makes problems for other innocent people is. Widespread faking of service dog status to save individual pets from destructive, stupid, immoral BSL will undermine every REAL service dog user in the area. It's deeply harmful to them, and as was pointed out, could really come back to bite Dr. Khuly, with her professional license and professional reputation to protect.

The correct way to save Pinky, as long as Miami-Dade's BSL remains in force, is to find her a forever home outside Miami-Dade. And yes, in the meantime, train her for her CGC and possibly for therapy dog certification; even if her new family doesn't want to do therapy dog work with her, she and they will benefit from the training and certifications.

The ADA protects service dogs, NOT therapy dogs.

Impersonating a disabled person or faking a service dog is against the law and will get a person into big trouble.

If you have a service dog, you had better have proof from MD's that your disability requires the assistance of a dog and further proof that your service dog is able to perform at least three functions that help compensate for your disability.

Anyone who abuses the ADA should be publicly shamed for making life even more difficult for the truly disabled and their service animals.

Hmm . . We can't “profile” or speak opinions about ethnic background or race of people, yet we can sum up all dogs actions based on full or partial breed. What a tangled web we weave. If the pet is good with people and not a threat, do what you can to keep it. Is there a law that states what breed can and can’t be used for assistance?

I don't think so. If the dog that Doc had was strapped to a telephone pole in the back yard, and she said it was a service dog, or she was taking it to eateries and sporting events and said it was a service dog, well, then that's one thing.

But we're talking about a stupid law being broken for all the right reasons. If everyone did what the Doc is doing, which is rehabbing a pit bull and then, while keeping it at a house or dog park said "yeah, it's a service dog" what would happen? Umm, nothing bad in my estimation.

I have a complaint. I would like to be able to comment on things in general but it appears to be impossible.
60 years working with animals and I could frequently rub shoulders with you. Your site is helpful, informative but VERY OPINIONATED and a little too commercial for our liking.
I would like to make three points very clear:
1: We have vets. Not an easy job when the patient can't tell you where or how it hurts.
2: We have 'animal behaviourists' some are good and some just cash in.
3: We have the animal owner who cares, often doesn't have funds for treatrment and tries to do what he/she can.
All three have offshoots. BUT, there are exceptions to every rule. I have spent 20 years in Spain, where we have a tremendous problem with cruelty, an enormous problem with ticks, and mosquitos and all the relevant illnesses.
Sadly, perfection is hard 'nay, impossible' to acheive.
I originally checked out your site to see if it could benefit our organisations (Spain animal hub represents many in Spain)but to be honest, it is too opinionated and comercial to really be of assistance.
In general, we move more than a thousand dogs a year out of Spain, to good, loving homes in Austria, Belgium, Germany and even Canada. Many are the dogs that are not only one of the best races you can ever find, Greyhounds, but are the worst treated in this European but still 3rd world country
We commented on your article re dogs in storms. I was dismayed to see our comments mis-used.
I also think you contradicted yourself yet again maybe for commercial benefit.
http://www.spainanimalhub.org has been very disappointed with your site and your comments. Is it possible to be a dog behaviourist/owner/vet and have all the answers? 60 years and I still spend every day learning about our dogs. Not from text books, not from scientific experiments but from hands on experience. No matter the breed or mixture, they have their 'doganalities' just as people have their 'personalities'
We feel that you are losing the thread of your website. Shame.
We would appreciate a reply to web@spainanimalhub.org
Yours faithfully
Ian
Spain Animal Hub http://www.spainanimalhub.org

First off, I could be wrong, but since when are therapy dogs considered service dogs? I believe they are not one and the same, and a therapy dog really doesn't qualify as a service dog. A service dog provides a genuine service to a person with a disability. A therapy dog, while it may provide a "service" with its presence at nursing homes, hospitals, hospices, etc., doesn't actually provide a service that allows a disabled person to function independently of others.

I think Eilis is right on target...it's not acceptable to claim a pittie is a service dog if it is not. If Pinky is a pittie and she is not allowed in your county, you might do her a real service and find her a home in another county (or another state) that doesn't have a pit bull ban. There are still many counties that allow pitties. To continue to keep (harbor) a pittie in a county that doesn't allow them is breaking the law, and breaking the law is never good, whether one deems it a necessary evil or not.

Didn't you say you had people with allergies at your house? Maybe you could train her to sniff out peanuts in food. Just a thought.

amirek, I'm sorry, but I have to DISagree. The moral issue is not that Dr. Khuly is breaking the pit bull ban. That's a stupid, counterproductive, evil law, EXACTLY the kind of law that promotes disrespect for the law.

The moral issue is that she's contemplating committing ADA fraud by falsely claiming Pinky is a service dog. That's a law that NEEDS respect, because having lots of fake "service dogs" out there promotes hassles and access denials for people who have REAL service dogs, and NEED them.

First, with respect to that DNA test, I'd jump on that right away. Then (being me and being "sneaky,") I would get a fancy little "backpack" with "Service Dog In Training" on it.

Actually, I'm really just teasing. The poor pits, I mean really, it's not their fault that a**h*les -- oops, I mean, people who are stupid will take these perfectly lovely dogs and not socialize them or even worse, train them to be ferocious.

It's too bad that there isn't a way to get the pits certified as "safe to be in the community."

It's really too bad that people feel they would have to go so far as to possibly commit fraud, Or, at least be pushed that way.

We have to get licenses to drive vehicles. Why can't we have licenses for owning certain breeds of dogs? Having them certified as safe?

Though I don't believe in BSL or killing Pit Bulls based solely on misleading information, I certainly don't believe in mislabeling a dog in order to get around such legislation. I have a service dog and I have a disability that can't be seen and it's my right under federal law to have my dog with me and have no one ask questions. Now, I'm all for getting a Pit Bull CGC certified under LEGAL (and I know when it comes to service dogs, that can be a lose definition) and having those Pits being ambassadors if the owner of the service dog so chooses. I know people want to keep their Pit Bulls and not be harassed about DNA testing and such. But, please, if you live in place that bans Pit Bulls DON'T get a Pit Bull! If you have to lie as a last resort to reduce or eliminate harassment, then don't insist on owning a Pit Bull where it's know they are banned or restricted. Individuals with disabilities have a federal law to protect them for a reason and I don't not agree with people using the fact that it's against the law to ask someone who claims (or legitimately owns) to have a service dog.
My verdict? Not fair. People who purchase or raise Pit Bulls in a restricted already know what they are themselves into. Deal with it.

Neither you nor your son (again, as far as you've mentioned) are disabled.

Perpetual in training status is not a way to get an animal into places they aren't allowed when they aren't afull-fledged SD. It's STILL unethical.

Until Pitbulls are no longer discriminated against in general, anything a dog owner has to do seems perfectly fair to me. The law in Dade County isn't fair to the majority of pitbulls, why do the owners have to be fair in response?

The idea is that Pinky would actually be certified as a therapy pet and ultimately serve as an ESA (emotional service animal).

1) For whom?

2) It seems as if you are still fuzzy on the difference between a therapy dog and a service dog. The law paints a very clear line there.

3) Hadn't you ought to attend to her basic training, manners, chicken menacing, etc. before speculating about her ability to perform stressful and demanding work that requires both diligent training and a bombproof temperament?

4) As Denver has proven, the ADA is not an obstacle to local authorities enforcing BSL on legitimate service dogs.

loisl, yes, the law is unfair to pit bulls.

However, the people towards whom Dr. Khuly wants to be unfair IN RESPONSE to the unfairness of the pit bull law, ARE THE LEGITIMATE USERS OF ACTUAL SERVICE DOGS.

These are not the people who wrote Miami-Dade's pit bull ban, voted for it, or who enforce it. They're innocent bystanders, and a big uptick in FAKE service dogs will seriously undermine their ability to move freely with their service dogs--especially if their REAL service dogs are ALSO pit bulls.

Dr. Khuly, a therapy dog is not a service dog. Not Not Not. And NOT protected by the ADA in any way, shape, or form. It's a great thing to do in terms of helping to find her a home OUTSIDE Miami-Dade, but it's useless for claiming the protection of the ADA. A therapy dog has no rights beyond what a ordinary pet has.

To have an Emotional Support Animal, just like a service animal, you need to be legally DISABLED. If neither you nor your son is disabled in a way that would cause a doctor to prescribe an emotional support animal for you, no matter what you call her, Pinky won't legally be an Emotional Support Animal.

And from what you've said about her behavior elsewhere, Pinky is a LONG LONG way from qualifying as anything MORE than an Emotional Support Animal (which does not require any special training at all, and likewise carries with it no public access rights.)

Please rethink this.

If I had a pit bull and someone came to take my dog away and kill it, you bet your behind that I would claim service dog status. They are not legally allowed to ask about disability and I wouldn't be bringing the dog with me anywhere and therefore trampling on the rights of those who do have legitimate service dogs. But I would do ANYTHING to save my dog. BSL are inhumane, cruel, and disgusting. The law deserves absolutely no respect.

If you had a whole community full of people rehabbing mutts and telling people they are service dogs, what's the harm? I could see it if she was going to plaster it on the side of her house and take the dog to church, but good grief folks, lighten up!! Animal control isn't going to give a damn anyway as they are more concerned with the aggressive and neglected dog in the back yard. This law is not meant to police the good. It gives Animal Control the ability to take the aggressive dogs in custody with a black and white, clear and concise law.

Let me give you an example. We have a big huge sign at our walking trail that says "LEASHES REQUIRED!!" I haven't used a leash with Tina for 2 years. I run on the trail, she sniffs around and is about 50 to 200 feet ahead. If a person approaches, running or on bike, I whistle. She drops to a down position until the people pass. If she sees them first, she'll drop to a down position without my whistle.

Now the trail bosses have seen my dog off leash. You know what? Only one of them has said anything (good for her, doing her job). The rest of them know the dog doesn't need a leash as she is under my control at all times. Some even pet her when they see her. So they wink, I wink, and all is well. But if a dog is off of a leash and gets ahold of a biker or runner, they have the black and white law that can address the incident swiftly and without question. The law is there to keep people with dogs NOT under the control of their master/owner from being a nuisance and to keep people safe.

So, if every dog was as well behaved as mine, the law wouldn't exist. If every pit was as sweet as Doc's, well, the law wouldn't exist.

So, let's cover this again. Animal control sees Doc taking the dog to the dog park. The dog is clean, well behaved, and in all ways a good dog. Animal control walks up and, with a wink in their eye, says "umm, that's a service dog, eh?" and she says "yup!" And all is well. So what if we have 100 or even 1000 people in Miami Dade doing the same thing. If we did, I doubt there would even be a pit bull ban.

Don't go off the deep end, folks. Laws are there to keep idiots in line. Authorities will, for the most part, let the responsible take care of their own. That's all that's being done here. So please, lighten up.

In fact, I said just as much on MY BLOG...

(Just kidding!!)

Therapy dogs are not covered under the ADA, and never have been.

Service dogs, those individually trained to actually do something the owner cannot do for themselves might be exempt from breed ban laws, but this is not clear. It's being tested in court right now. Regardless, therapy dogs are not exempt.

You're confusing three different terms: psychiatric service dog, emotional support animal, and therapy dog. Only one ("service dog") is addressed under the ADA and to qualify that dog must belong to someone who is severely mentally ill (ie disabled by mental illness) and the dog must be trained to do something the owner cannot do for themselves, or it doesn't count.

So make her a therapy dog and visit hospitals to cheer people up. But do it because it is a good thing to do. You'll gain nothing else by it. Any positive karma from helping others would just be negated by using the disabled in the way you are proposing. There are too many fakers already, as you pointed out.

Verify this with the US Department of Justice through their ADA information line at: 800 - 514 - 0301 .

See also: http://www.servicedogcentral.org/content/node/297 and http://www.servicedogcentral.org/content/node/76

Service dogs in training are not covered under the ADA. It applies ONLY to people who are disabled, not to dog trainers. See http://www.justice.gov/crt/foia/tal727.txt for a copy of a letter issued by the Department of Justice in answer to a question about service dogs in training under the ADA (letter available under the Freedom of Information Act).

Florida state law gives some rights to trainers, but only to trainers of dogs for PHYSICAL disabilities. Not mental. See FL statute 413.08.

It's not fair, but it's the law. You said what you were doing wasn't illegal. Actually it is, and you are documenting it publicly which would make prosecution rather easy should someone decide to follow through. Make a stand by breaking a law if you feel you must, but know you are doing it against the law and the potential consequences including the people you hurt in the process.

In addition to what the others have said, I'd like to suggest that if you're going to break a law, break the stupid law instead of rendering it moot by breaking a very unrelated law.

Could you board Pinky at your hospital? I know it's in Dade county, but I wonder if it would be more acceptable to say she's a patient of the hospital?

Otherwise, I'd try to be discrete about having her, until she can be placed in a new home in a pit bull-friendly county.

As kirsten07734 mentioned, you're confusing service dogs, ESA's, and therapy dogs, none of which are interchangeable.

If you feel the need to break a law to make a point, as I mentioned earlier in this post, I'd sooner break the BSL law. Impersonating a service dog (which is the ONLY type of animal that the ADA protects, NOT ESA's or therapy dogs) violates the ADA and causes problems for those who need service dogs under the ADA. And, I'm worried, may come back to bite you and perhaps hurt your reputation and get you legal ramifications.

Training her as a therapy dog is great, but won't get her access to the county.

Labeling her an Emotional Support Animal (no training required for ESA's) won't gain her access to the county either.

Personally, I wouldn't recommend breaking a law unrelated to the breed ban in order to make the breed ban moot. It could get problematic for you, Pinky, and the people that are protected by the ADA.

Frankly, I'm disgusted that you would even consider this.

If this dog is a foster, and you fear for her safety to the point that you would break a VALID law that protects the rights of the disabled population to have a decent amount of self reliance thanks to the efforts of properly trained and utilized service dogs - rather than simply break the law that protects... no one - I think it's time to move on.

This dog needs to be placed out of county - YESTERDAY.

If you have no intention of keeping her, and living with you is putting her in danger, the solution is to remove her from danger. I can assure you that there are rescue groups everywhere who will happily take on this lovely dog and ensure that she finds a loving home.

The solution is NOT to make a TOTAL MOCKERY of the service dog designation that is already constantly under attack by fraud and misuse - without your assistance.

Shame on you, Dr. Khuly.

Shame on you.

I am deaf and trained my own corgi as a Hearing Ear Dog. I can't live without her especially when I travel. I once was asked to leave a MD store not so politely and sent and email to MD officials on their website. They never replied.
There is the LAW and there is the ENFORCEMENT of the law. Firstly, ADA needs amending to resolve this issue where states have "vicious breed “laws and are in conflict. It would state that the exception is where states have banned a breed. That would cover the ADA superseding the state law on ownership.
This means that in FL a pit bull would not be able to be trained as a service dog. All arguments aside as to whether or not pits would make a good service dog but there has to be agreement of laws to enforce them.
Secondly, I never realized that people were flaunting the law until my VA friend told me that she knows someone who puts a vest on her dog as a service dog so that she doesn't have to leave the dog in the car to go shopping. This is a serious offense and needs to be addressed by another amendment to the ADA law.
Although there is people are not allowed to ask the disability, etc., I believe that law enforcement should be able to ask and require a doctor's proof of disability if needed. There may be other solutions but I am offering one here as an example.
The point is that the laws need to be in agreement and that no loopholes for flaunting the law be available. Thirdly, as far as Pinky, you should have proof of breed and not break the law.
Even if we are in disagreement to the laws, breaking them is not going to change them. I could ruin a person's reputation if done as a professional, such as yourself.

" Firstly, ADA needs amending to resolve this issue where states have "vicious breed “laws and are in conflict. It would state that the exception is where states have banned a breed. That would cover the ADA superseding the state law on ownership.
This means that in FL a pit bull would not be able to be trained as a service dog. All arguments aside as to whether or not pits would make a good service dog but there has to be agreement of laws to enforce them."

Hmm. So, you're saying that the ADA should be amended so that local law takes precedence over it? That Miami-Dade SHOULD be able to tell you what breed of dog you can have as your service dog? What about someone who lived in a state that has banned BSL, and their service dog is a pit bull--and their company reassigns them to the Miami office? Are you seriously saying that local law should override the ADA, and Miami-Dade should be able to ban her service dog from the county, and if she doesn't leave it elsewhere, they should be able to seize and kill the service dog?

"Although there is people are not allowed to ask the disability, etc., I believe that law enforcement should be able to ask and require a doctor's proof of disability if needed. There may be other solutions but I am offering one here as an example."

You may have no problem telling people you're deaf; it's not a particularly embarrassing or stigmatizing disability. Other people are NOT so comfortable revealing what may be VERY personal medical information. Businesses ARE allowed to ask 1)if the dog is a service dog, and 2)what's an example of a task or work the dog does to assist the person. They ALSO have the right to refuse the dog entrance or to eject it from the premises if it is not clean or if it behaves disruptively. That's all they need, and that's all the police need.

Under limited circumstances, such as boarding an airplane, under some circumstances documentation can be asked for--but no, they don't need to know what your disability is.

"I never realized that people were flaunting the law until my VA friend told me...."
"...and that no loopholes for flaunting the law be available."

The word you are looking for is "flouting." "Flaunting" the law would be waving a copy of it around very dramatically--which, granted, many people with service dogs may sometimes be tempted to do. :D

I feel like a broken record saying this, but you have a dangerous lack of understanding of the issue. For pit bull owners who live in BSL territory, enforcement of the issue is not a "wink wink nudge nudge" sort of affair. It ends, many times, with the dog being seized and euthanized, no matter how well behaved it is. Please see all the pictures of the piles and heaps of dead pit bulls in places where BSL is strictly enforced, such as Denver. Perhaps this is not as disturbing to you, since many of these dogs are purebred.

I love this breed. They make a wonderful pet very loving and I would not trade mine for anything. I'm 63 and they make my life full of love and lots of laughter. As the saying goes it's not the breed it's the trainer. I remember when other breeds had the bad reputation.

I still don't agree how a lot of people can call Pitbulls as "mean and dangerous" dogs. I own a pit and he's really adorable. All this talk about making an excuse to own a pit is discrimination against the poor creature. I do hope people woke up and see that pitts are just like other dogs; loyal and trustworthy.

Ok, I am a vet tech, and have been an office manager in a vet clinic for years.
I am also a certified groomer, certified dog trainer, Certified Behaviorist, have a BA in Psychology and Social work, one of the military's only civilian certified Military Work Dog Handlers, retired military, etc.
I am also disabled, with hypoglycemia(which often results in seizures), MS, and Hearing impairments(result of war wounds sustained in Desert Storm and other military incursions that I was involved with).

I was horrified, appalled, and sickened to hear about this Vet lying and cheating the system.

I train service dogs for people with disabilities. The 120 hours that someone spoke of? That ain't nothin....I require my dogs to have over 600 hours of in house training PRIOR TO PLACEMENT. I require my handlers to complete an intensive 2 week handling course.

I don't place Pits/Bully breeds. Why? Because in Colorado a pit service dog(professionally trained, by a real professional, not a make believe one), was euthanized. This dog was a wheelchair service dog, and the city in CO had a breed ban.

I get that they can do the job----they can. However, why lie and cheat to fight the system.

What ever happened to honesty? Honor? Reputation?

This vet has nothing to offer anyone, and frankly, should commit herself for her delusions.

Yes, I am angry...Yes, I am pissed. People like this make it harder for those who are legitimately disabled.


BTW, My service dogs(I have three---but not all three go out at once, unless it is a dog friendly establishment), are Rottweilers. All have obedience, conformation, herding titles etc. All my service dogs are OFA/CERF/CARDIAC/THYROID Tested prior to placement. All my service dogs are tested with my test(which makes the ADI/DELTA Test look like a joke), by two separate dog trainers, whom I pay to do this. The handlers are then evaluated by two separate dog trainers, whom I pay to do this.

My dogs that I train for others, have at least 1-2 legs of an obedience/rally title prior to placement.

My handlers are required to re-certify yearly. They are required the first year of placement to attend group obedience classes---basic, intermediate and advanced. They are required within the first year to complete the obedience/rally title that was started, and get at least one leg on the next title.