Woman goes nuts seeing a service dog in a restaurant

Maybe because I have dogs/enjoy dogs, I don't find having service dogs in public restaurants "nasty" or unsanitary. I've seen them before and their presence has never ruined my meal. The dogs wear clothing similar to this dogs vest indicating that no, I'm not an ordinary pet I am working. This woman seems very unhinged and uncaring of why the dog is with the soldier and the support the animal provides to this soldier. Not sure if the man standing near her is her husband but if so, he deserves the Lifetime Henpecked Award for standing silent, doing nothing to diffuse his wife's brutish behavior and not escorting her off property.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4898954/Angry-woman-shouts-veteran-PTSD-dog.html#v-4308840336497528429

I wonder if her anger was about something else, slowly bubbling on the surface and then seeing the dog set her off. I just can't imagine someone losing it over a dog that was just sitting there. It wasn't bothering anyone. 

ElizMcCord said:

I wonder if her anger was about something else, slowly bubbling on the surface and then seeing the dog set her off. I just can't imagine someone losing it over a dog that was just sitting there. It wasn't bothering anyone. 

I was thinking the same thing. It just doesn't seem rational in the least. Perhaps she is dog-phobic and knows she is not supposed to see one in a restaurant???

A mental illness episode, no?  

dog phobia is what I was thinking.

I haven't read the article yet, but we're tackling this issue in my workplace. One of my long term participants now has an assistance animal for pain, balance and anxiety (as well as other support I haven't been given details of). She hasn't been able to attend since Easter, when the dog qualified. 

Some of the participants cannot see that a dog can be more than a pet once you're at home (or inside). Once you're inside, a dog is 'dirty', especially around food: if you need to wash your hands after petting/handling it, why do allow this 'thing' near you when eating or when others are? That's like eating near a rubbish bin or a toilet! (In their minds)

So we have to get in a special educator from Guide Dogs, together with interpreters because some of the participants understand other languages better than English, to explain in greater detail what these dogs do for individual that friends and staff can't do - like know 3 to 4 hours ahead of certain kinds of pain or illness episodes, or when medication is needed, or to get help when the person can't speak, etc. 

DailyMail, now I'm not sure that service animals exist. 

Also, no indication (that I can find) where this happened. 

This is silly behavior by most likely intelligent adults. What do they think seeing eye dog's are for? From our childhood memories when we saw these dogs, w/out knowing the term, seeing eye dogs were indeed service dogs. 

I took a course many years ago to become an aid to the blind and one of the things I do recall is that we do not touch the dogs unless necessary as they are NOT pets (the woman I assisted did not have a dog). They are loved and cared for by the owner and the team of people who train them but they aren't there to catch balls. They're legitimately working. 

IMO, dogs are as clean or as dirty as their owners. And yes, after petting, handling, playing with my dogs I always wash my hands before food prep, etc., as it's just good hygiene. These people are wayyyy overthinking this process. Hope that the training of humans helps. 

joanne said:

I haven't read the article yet, but we're tackling this issue in my workplace. One of my long term participants now has an assistance animal for pain, balance and anxiety (as well as other support I haven't been given details of). She hasn't been able to attend since Easter, when the dog qualified. 

Some of the participants cannot see that a dog can be more than a pet once you're at home (or inside). Once you're inside, a dog is 'dirty', especially around food: if you need to wash your hands after petting/handling it, why do allow this 'thing' near you when eating or when others are? That's like eating near a rubbish bin or a toilet! (In their minds)

So we have to get in a special educator from Guide Dogs, together with interpreters because some of the participants understand other languages better than English, to explain in greater detail what these dogs do for individual that friends and staff can't do - like know 3 to 4 hours ahead of certain kinds of pain or illness episodes, or when medication is needed, or to get help when the person can't speak, etc. 

I wash my hands after petting a dog if I am prepping food. But I wash my hands if I shake a human's hand if I am prepping food. Heck I wash my hands before prepping food period. So no big deal. 

Will the PTSD dog now have to get a PTSD cat?

This woman is obviously unbalanced.  Though the argument that he should be allowed the dog because he fought for our country is false, he is allowed the dog by law due to it being a service animal, and that the Dept of Health has to abide by that.  Much different than arguing he should be given special privileges due to his previous service.

spontaneous said:

This woman is obviously unbalanced.  Though the argument that he should be allowed the dog because he fought for our country is false, he is allowed the dog by law due to it being a service animal, and that the Dept of Health has to abide by that.  Much different than arguing he should be given special privileges due to his previous service.

Well, there's law and the there's custom & culture. Generally speaking people do offer greater latitude to service folks. They're not compelled legally to do so. They may be culturally compelled. Not a judgment on my part, just a statement of fact.

I have come to dislike dogs because of their owners behavior & reluctance to control their animals. They are over indulgent and expect society to care for their dog & put up with their dog's antics ("don't worry he's friendly!".... the last thing you hear before an unleashed "sweetie" jumps on you). I am also sadly allergic to them. 

All that said, the man and dog were bothering no one, and this woman is nuts.

In the workplace I can understand someone making an issue of it, but even then, not like she does. Call HR. In a restaurant, finish your meal and leave.

As to why the boyfriend puts up with it.... lets' face facts. She's cute. Men will put up with a lot more than the occasional histrionic fit for cute. Not a judgment on my part, just a statement of fact.

My point was that if it were a person with a seeing eye dog who had been born blind, and who never served in the armed forces, they would still be allowed to bring their service dog in, and should still be defended for doing so.  Serving in the military has nothing to do with someone's right to bring in a service dog, and should have nothing to do with defending someone who is being wrongly attacked for doing so.  But I guess that's just my view on it. 

And if the dog is a trained service animal, then even if they brought the dog to work they would still have the right to do so and HR couldn't do anything about it.  Federal law clearly states that allergies or fear of dogs are not legitimate reasons to bar service animals.

Legitimate service animals are highly trained and are not the ones jumping on people, acting up, or attacking people or animals.  It is the "assistance" animals (not the same as a service animal, and many times untrained) that have been causing issues, a few service animals have even been attacked by untrained pretend service animals.  Though these incidents are admittedly rare, service animals are vital to the people they serve, take a tremendous amount of training, and can easily cost $10,000, $20,000, or more, and are there for a reason, so having one attacked by a glorified pet wearing a vest that someone bought off of Amazon so that they could bring it into a restaurant with them is wrong on so many levels. Service animals are considered medical devices.

People with disabilities have a hard enough time without asshats like that getting in there faces. The owner or manager should not have let this go on as long as it did. He should have gently walked the disabled person away from her while another employee escorted her out the door. 

In France a few years ago it was common for customers at casual restaurants to bring in their pet dogs.  I was equally pleased as when the person at the next table lit up a cigarette.  Different mores, and hopefully different times.  I hope they have changed.

Legally, a store owner is not permitted to ask what your disability is. He/she may ask to prove that it's a service dog, just not why you need one. I just learned this recently.

marylago said:

Legally, a store owner is not permitted to ask what your disability is. He/she may ask to prove that it's a service dog, just not why you need one. I just learned this recently.

You actually can't even ask them to prove it is a service dog.  And even if you did, you can buy "certifications" for animals on the web, similar to becoming an online minister I guess.

• When it is not obvious what service an animal provides, only limited inquiries are allowed. Staff may ask two questions: (1) is the dog a service animal required because of a disability, and (2) what work or task has the dog been trained to perform. Staff cannot ask about the person’s disability, require medical documentation, require a special identification card or training documentation for the dog, or ask that the dog demonstrate its ability to perform the work or task.

https://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm

I think there actually should be a registry for trained service dogs.  It would stop questions such as what the dog does, etc, just show the gov't issued ID, and the dog is legit and must be allowed, no more questions.  Some people abuse the misunderstanding of the law to bring pets into restaurants, calling them service animals, or emotional support animals (emotional support animals and comfort animals are also mentioned in the link, and do not qualify as service animals under ADA).  A woman I know recently brought her dog into a local restaurant, didn't have the dog on a leash (against the ADA guidelines linked above) and was encouraging children in the restaurant to come up and play with the dog, something no person with a legitimate service animal would ever do.  Working service dogs are supposed to be working, interactions like that can distract the animal from performing its duty, or encourage laxity in being on guard for events such as anxiety attacks or epileptic seizures if the dog is so trained.

Growing up I did know a woman with a seeing eye dog who let us pet the dog, but only when at her home and the harness was off.  Taking the harness off was the dogs notice that he was "off duty."  When the harness was put on we were strictly not allowed to interact with him as he had a job to do.

here, you can ask to see the accreditation, depending on where you are and what the situation is - and yes, even assistance/therapy animals need to be trained and accredited. (That includes the social recreation animals brought in to amuse residents in supported aged or disability care etc)

For example, if a jacketed assistance animal is on public transport, and not sitting under the seat, is busy sniffing around and fidgeting etc and passengers complain, the driver or conductor can ask to see accreditation. (Accredited service animals have their own Go cards) if the accreditation is too old or faked there are stiff penalties; training can taking many months and accreditation to be renewed annually. 

Part of the real acceptance issue here is that most people don't recognise the service jackets for non-Guide dogs, they barely recognise Guide dogs anyway. When you factor in the wide variety of breeds that other service dogs might be, then the other animals* that might used depending on your condition, it gets quite complicated. 

*Most non-canine service animals tend be of most use at home, I believe, unless their humans live in rural or non-metropolitan places 

re the interaction with a jacketed service animal: it depends on the nature of the service. My participant's dog trainer, licensed under international standards for this work, has instructed L to encourage such interaction. It's good for both the public and the dog. It does not interfere with this dog's duties: in fact, it helps identify which humans will be easier to call for for fast aid should it be needed. 

A Guide dog has different duties: get through a sea of obstacles, most of which are moving randomly, quickly and safely. Avoid distractions. Just navigate and stay close and steady. A Guide dog is like a body guard.

This dog however is monitoring for things such as: is she balanced and moving easily? Is she breathing easy? Is there a pain attack coming on? Any odd smells? Is her voice odd? Why are we stopping? Why have we stopped for so long? Why have we stopped so long but she's not moving or saying anything? Why isn't anyone noticing? Are we lost? Are we somewhere new? Is this person friendly? If they're friendly why are they sticking something sharp in her? Etc. Most of the time Bonnie will stay in her basket on L's walker; but when she's needed for An Incident she's a tigress. (You'd swear she's a pet until An Incident occurs, then you've never seen anything like it. I can't say more without breaking confidentiality) Bonnie was trained because she was doing this anyway; it made sense for her to learn how to do it properly so humans would understand. 

Having service dogs be certified would also do more to protected the privacy of the person with the dog.  Sure, right now in the US you can't ask what the disability is, but you CAN ask what the dog is trained to do.  So if you mention that the dog is trained to alert you to a sudden drop in blood sugar, you might then have a waiter recommending you not order certain foods since they now know you're a diabetic and are butting in where they have no business.  Or a dog trained to calm a person during anxiety attacks might now have management running over to repeatedly ask if everything is okay to make sure the diner isn't nervous, when all they really want to do is enjoy a nice meal.  By having a government entity certify animals as service animals, businesses would know that they had to legally allow the person to have their dog accompany them, but would know nothing else, ensuring the privacy of the person in question.

Joanne, I disagree about petting service dogs.  Here there was recently situation where a young woman suffered a bad seizure, and had no forewarning because someone was petting her dog and had distracted it from its job, robbing her of the early warning she usually had where she would have gotten into a safe place while waiting for onset.  She suffered serious injuries.  

Most service dogs are there to work, period.  While a certain minority of service dogs might not be distracted, by inviting people to pet these dogs while they are out working, this behavior condition people to not take seriously the warning that service dogs are working and need to concentrate on their job.  And yes, I'm sure people ask if they can pet the dogs, but again, this isn't a person walking their pet, most people want to just be able to go about their day like everyone else, and don't want to be asked 20+ times a day if it is okay to pet the dog.  Unlike pet owners who might walk their dog 3x a day, most people with service dogs have them with them most of their waking hours.  If someone has a service dog and wants the dog to get interaction with people, then invite friends over who know the situation, or take him for a walk down the street without his vest so people think he is a regular pet and can approach him asking to pet him without inadvertently training the general public that it is okay to interact with service dogs. 

If a dog has a vest on, then he is working, and shouldn't be distracted.  

I've been told that petting is by invitation, brief, and depends on the duties and settings. 

http://www.assistancedogs.org.au/studies.php/23/the-wicket-and-nursery-road-school-story Specific instances when patting is actually actively encouraged as part of the working day with over 100 human 'owners' plus others.

Epileptic episodes can be predicted up to several hours in advance, depending on the relationship between dog and human, so there may have been other factors not as quickly identified. 

Her reaction was definitely way beyond the situation.  She was unhinged.

marylago said:

ElizMcCord said:

I wonder if her anger was about something else, slowly bubbling on the surface and then seeing the dog set her off. I just can't imagine someone losing it over a dog that was just sitting there. It wasn't bothering anyone. 

I was thinking the same thing. It just doesn't seem rational in the least. Perhaps she is dog-phobic and knows she is not supposed to see one in a restaurant???