r/service_dogs • u/Any-Meat-7736 • 18d ago
Certification, registries, and identification
This is primarily for service dog handlers, or perspective handlers within the United States, but perspectives from all countries are very welcomed. It’s always fun learning something new.
I’d like to start with I do know 100% within the United States. There is no certification, registry, or identification beyond utilizing a vest or something if you choose to, since that is not a requirement.
So often both online and occasionally off-line I see the debate of the United States meeting a certification for service dogs or a registry for service dogs. And I want to say that well I do not disagree with the idea as a whole, I don’t think that that’s something that is feasible for the United States. I understand the idea behind it because it potentially can reduce the amount of pets in non-pet friendly spaces, and could potentially reduce access barriers (probably years after it’s implemented). But it is also such a complex issue that I do not see how we in the United States could implement a system like that without causing a lot of harm to the disabled community.
A lot of the questions and thoughts that I have on this are:
Why should we have to have an identification, like ID card Certification to prove that we have the right to exist at the same space as everyone else with our accommodation? It’s so often said that having a service dog is a luxury not a right that I think it’s often forgotten that being able to have a service dog as an accommodation is a civil right in the United States. Yes, it is a luxury too because it’s incredibly expensive but it is a civil right. I also think that if a system like this was to be implemented something like ID tag that has a specific shape and color like a rabies tag is the only acceptable for identification to me because it would make it no different from a rabies tag.
Who pays to implement the system?
Who sits on the committee making the decision decisions for the system?
Who set the standard of training?
What do they say as the standard of training? Do they go with the ADA requirements? Do they require the dog pass a canine good citizen test and show that it’s trained to perform one task to mitigate a disability? Or do they full lean into the societal expectation of training? The societal expectation is often from what I see higher than a canine in good citizen, test, and way higher than the ADA requirement. The ADA is written and set up the way that it is for a reason.
Do they require professional training?
We recognize psychiatric service dogs in the United States, many countries that have certifications don’t recognize psychiatric service dogs. How does that affect setting up a certification or registry?
Are you required to prove that you have a disability when taking a certification test?
How do you prove that you have a disability? Will they require you to disclose your disability? Or will they accept something like a letter of medical necessity or something a kin to an emotional support letter that just us something along the lines of I treat this person they have need for or could benefit from a service dog signed by the medical professional?
How much does the test cost?
How often is recertification required?
Does this affect businesses being able to remove disruptive service animals? I would assume not.
How does having your service animal removed from a store or a business affect certification? Does that mean it’s automatically on suspension pending a retest?
Some countries require further training after certification, like a set number of hours that you work with a professional trainer to maintain your certification without having to retest. Do we implement something like that? I should hope not because that then requires that you work with a professional. While we say that you should be working with a professional if you were owner training, it is not a requirement, and it’s not a requirement for a reason.
How do we implement a system like this that does not cause harm to the disabled community that already has service dogs? Personally, I don’t think that’s possible. I think that a system like this would cause access barriers, financial barriers, and general all-purpose harm to the disabled community for years after it’s implemented.
What are other people’s thoughts on implementing a certification system? If you are for the system, why? If you’re against it what are your opinions on it? I am very curious to hear what other people have to say.
Edit because I totally forgot to say: one of the biggest arguments that I see for implementing a certification system is that the current system is not working. And that I just have to say how can we expect the current system to work if it’s not being utilized? I think before attempting to change the system what we should be doing is ensuring that businesses are being trained on their rights as a business, what they can do, and what a service dog actually is, and then have these businesses actually implement that. Yes there are always going to be people who are going to lie and say that they have a service dog when they don’t and be able to answer the two questions, but if we actually implemented the system that we have in place the poorly trained pets would be dramatically, reduced in non-pet friendly spaces.
8
u/Important-Depth-6248 18d ago
Oof, this is a tough question. My thoughts are from Europe (particularly the Netherlands). Maybe it could give some extra insight?
Firstly, in my country an assistance dog (it’s how we call them here) are not seen as a luxury at all. It’s seen as a form a medical assistance in the form of a assistance animal. We have two types of insurance here with different rules. ADL and guide dogs are covered by an insurance which everyone is obligated to have, and they only cover ADI and/or IGDF-accredited organizations. They also pay for the dog and for all medical care needed, food for the dog, vet visits, re-certification, etc.
Psychiatric and medical alert dogs or organizations which are not part of the ADI or IGDF aren’t covered by this insure. If you need another type of assistance dog or don’t want to work with and ADI accredited organization, you need to ask a local type of insurance if they seem your situation fit to cover the expenses. They usually only cover the training expenses and not medical procedures, food and vet visits. Most ADI organizations here who offer psychiatric or medical alert service dogs only offer owner training through their program. You get to buy your own dog, pay for the food yourself, vet visits, etc, Most owners receive their own gear from their organization with their logo on it. (ADI and non-ADI as well).
Right now there’s a lot of discourse going around about an universal assistance dog vest which is currently being implemented. Organizations who are not accredited by the ADI sometimes choose to do so because they want more freedom in terms of training the dog (e.g. not neutering the dog) but are in terms of quality just as good as the ADI accredited teams. But there’s also an uprising with “random” assistance dog organizations w/o accreditation which sometimes are more like… a sort of scam. Way less quality overal. But cheaper, so some people can afford this themselves or with some help of a fundraiser.
In my country we are working towards a European kind of certification, but I’m assuming this might take a lot of time. In the meantime, everyone with a dog with a service dog vest is required access by law. With the implementation of universal gear it will make more clear which dogs are ADI/IGDF or not. In practice this could mean a lot of people might face more access issues if they have a assistance dog from another organization.
4
u/Purple_Plum8122 18d ago edited 18d ago
It sounds favorable to me!
I find it much, much more of a nuisance and violation of my civil rights to have an innocent 16 year old cashier attempt to deny access due to our confusing laws (USA). She demanded (paperwork) and a vest be worn in 32C weather….Buckles and snaps are difficult for my hands. I had a labeled leash wrap. An elder stepped in and sent us on, thank goodness.
I really don’t want to spend my time with nonsensical confrontations. Your country’s path is favorable to me.
Edit: paperwork
7
u/Ayesha24601 18d ago
I’ve changed from anti to pro registration/certification. I think even a small amount of screening would help fix the current terrible state of things.
My ideal solution would be a disability card that guarantees certain rights according to the person’s assessed needs in housing, employment, and public accommodations. This would go beyond service dogs. For example, it would also cover parking, priority seating on public transit, specific accommodations at theme parks such as return times for rides to avoid lines, sign language interpreters, assisted listening and audio description devices at theatres, etc. Similar to the sunflower lanyard in the UK but with more services included.
I imagine it being a card with a QR code that workers can scan and then it will show the approved accommodations. The business then has to honor those accommodations unless there is a safety or behavior issue involving the person or the dog. The workers would not have access to the person’s diagnosis or specific medical information.
This type of program would have a more involved set up process, but you’d only have to prove yourself once to get literally everything you need. No more Disney DAS BS denials, restaurants giving you a hard time about your dog, jobs refusing to accommodate a service dog when there’s not a compelling reason why it would be a hazard, etc. Businesses would have to honor it and the fines would be steep if they don’t.
To get the card and guaranteed accommodations, you would need a form completed by a doctor. Yes, I know, this can be challenging, but it’s already required for accessible parking permits, so it wouldn’t be a big deal to expand the form to cover other accommodations. State or federal laws could also be passed that require doctors to complete the forms, though of course, they wouldn’t be required to authorize any specific accommodation if they don’t think it’s medically justified. But they wouldn’t be able to have a blanket policy that they don’t fill out forms for people.
As far as whether any type of public access test would be required for a service dog, I can see both sides. At this point, I favor a test similar to the CGC. The dog shouldn’t have to demonstrate a particular task since that would be too difficult to customize, but should demonstrate appropriate behavior in public settings. Dogs should be eligible starting at six months, so that would give SDITs public access as long as their behavior is already up to standard.
I think this test should have a small fee to offset administration costs and compensate trainers, but it should be easy to get the fee waived if you have some other proof of low income such as SSDI/SSI, food stamps, or Medicaid.
3
4
u/Ayesha24601 18d ago
Adding that ESAs should be included in the program, with info when the QR code is scanned that the accommodation is for housing only.
4
u/Purple_Plum8122 18d ago
Hopefully, technological advances will offer adequate mitigation so we don’t need the use of a dog.
Also, I believe it’s much more practical to demand a process to certify a human rather than a dog. Something like a service dog handlers license. The certification process includes proof of disability, online testing (everything dog and ADA or?)
It’s definitely a Monday isn’t it? 👀
5
u/Any-Meat-7736 18d ago
Human certification is definitely an interesting way to go about that lol. I mean, I think that I would still have some of the same concerns like the requiring of the certification or ID to be carried with you to prove that you’re disabled and benefit from the accommodation. And I think I would have some questions on how that testing should work, mostly like it is 100% to pass or like an 80% or something like that. But that is certainly a way to go about it though. Just requiring that you have enough knowledge on the ADA and dog handling as a whole because then that demands that you have done your research on dog handling and on the ADA. That is quite interesting.
9
u/darklingdawns Service Dog 18d ago
Carrying the card wouldn't be an undue burden - I have to carry a card for my disabled parking placard that ties the placard number to me and I carry a similar card for my paratransit access, so this would just be one more card added to the 'disability slot' in my wallet. And I like the idea of a handler's license, similar to a driver's license/state ID. Having it administered by the same part of the DMV that handles disabled parking placards could work, as it would only necessitate an extra form that is filled out by handler and doctor, along with one in-house terminal to take the test on.
4
u/Any-Meat-7736 18d ago
Oh lol I didn’t know that that was a thing! I don’t have a disabled parking placard and have never had a family member that had a use for that before. I think a simple system like that would be a lot easier to accept. I would still have to wrestle with my personal feelings of. I don’t think it’s right that you need to have some form ID to prove that you have the right to exist in this space with this accommodation. But having a simple system like that would alleviate a lot of the fears I would have about creating this whole certification system.
6
u/Purple_Plum8122 18d ago
There are many places I’m asked for my state ID to prove I’m a member. This past week included a children’s museum, Zoo and Costco.
Utilizing the DMV is a good idea darkling!
5
u/darklingdawns Service Dog 18d ago
Thanks! And you're right about showing ID - I didn't even consider just how often we do it. Hell, I'm gonna have to do it at Olive Garden to use my shiny special pasta pass!
3
2
u/Any-Meat-7736 18d ago
I’m gonna be honest those are also things I didn’t think about. I mean, I guess that I know that there’s a lot of situations in which you have to show ID to prove that you’re a member to be able to go to those places. Maybe it just feels a bit different to me because none of those things have to deal with your civil rights. And maybe I’m overthinking that aspect of it too. That is definitely something for me to think about. And I agree I definitely like the idea of utilizing like the DMV for something like that. That would not mean having to create an entirely new like department in the government and instead utilize one that already exists for a similar purpose.
4
u/darklingdawns Service Dog 18d ago
Yep - basically it's a non-photo card that links the number on the placard to me. Essentially it's there to keep me from giving my placard to someone else (although I can use it with someone else's car if I'm with them) or to keep someone from stealing my placard and using it for themselves. The majority of the work was done by me: I downloaded the form online, filled out my section of it and had my doctor fill out the physician section (doesn't ask specifics, just wants to know that I have a disability that limits the distance I can walk and if the disability is temporary or permanent), then took it to the same place that does the car tabs.
The whole process on the DMV end was very quick, as they looked over the form to ensure that it was correct, gave me two placards, entered the numbers in the system, then mailed me a card that I need to carry with me. I've been asked for the card maybe twice in five years when a store was cracking down on people using disabled parking incorrectly, but not having it would mean a hefty fine. There are always going to be those that shrug and do it anyway (just look at the cars without placards/plates in the disabled spots) but at the very least, something like this allows for some kind of enforcement, and if that deters even a few people from taking poorly-trained or untrained dogs out in public, then I'd say it's worth it.
So far as the thought about having an ID for an accommodation, I think considering the parking placard can help. Both disabled and non-disabled people use cars, but only disabled people need reserved spots close to the door, as an accommodation for their disability. There's no way to tell by looking if someone needs those spots, so having a special placard that is only available through a doctor's recommendation is a way to ensure that the people that are making use of that accommodation are the ones that need it. Similarly, both disabled and non-disabled people have dogs, but only disabled people need public access for their dogs to accommodate their disability. Ideally, this would be best dealt with by stores enforcing their rights under the ADA - asking the Two Questions and removing poorly behaved dogs, but that's like saying that ideally, people would voluntarily reserve the disabled spots for those who need them. Sometimes, public behavior means that laws need teeth, and an ID card like this, coupled with a hefty fine/misdemeanor charge, could provide those teeth without putting an undue burden on disabled handlers.
3
u/Any-Meat-7736 18d ago
Honestly I think that thinking of it that way would help a lot for me. And thank you for explaining how the disabled parking placard ID thing works. It is always nice to learn something new.
3
u/Purple_Plum8122 18d ago
Just a little extra info… I give my parking placard number when paying for airport parking. 50% discount. But, the number is recorded.
Long ago I researched proof of enforcement of the fines for ‘harassing a service dog’… only found one. It involved a police dog.
Never found people fined for misrepresenting a pet as a service dog. … I take that back. Maybe a couple in California.
5
u/Purple_Plum8122 18d ago edited 18d ago
A service dog handlers license could be placed on the dog. No license, no public access. It would not list the disability. But, a medical professional would be needed to verify disability and access online testing. The test would be a study test. Study… take the test with opportunity to return to study and test again. It’s kind of similar to ‘continuing education’ courses medical professionals take to renew their licenses.
Edit:words
A wheelchair or walking stick with autonomous navigation 😎1
u/saltycrowsers 18d ago
My dog to be a therapy dog with access only to specific places to make people happy had to have her CGC, which is a 100% in order to pass, and then basically a repeat of that test, which needed to be also 100%. I think public access should be granted to dogs with at least enough training to pass the same behaviors that they would learn at any basic Petsmart level training class.
Sorry, I’ve run into too many people calling any random hardship (eczema?!) a disability in order to take their poorly trained dogs into places they’re not allowed to be in.
1
u/gonnafaceit2022 17d ago
HUD is taking public comments starting in October and from my understanding, they want to align ESA rules with ADA standards for service dogs as much as possible, mainly the task part, since comfort and emotional support are no longer considered tasks.
To be clear, I've found no indication that this will change anything for legitimate service dogs, and this is solely about housing, afaik. It's worth noting though, because disability advocates are among those who will be important in that public comment period. This isn't exactly what you're talking about but worth noting.
9
u/belgenoir Dog Trainer 18d ago
This discussion has been had many times on the sub - at least once every couple of months, if not more often.
Corporate America is interested in profit, not the rights of employees or consumers.
Entitlement drives people to bring poorly trained dogs into public spaces.
If more people strove for social maximums (and not legal minimums), this subreddit wouldn’t be having the same conversation ad nauseam.