In a major reversal from recent policy, the Department of Transportation (DOT) has reclassified “emotional support animals” as pets for commercial flights, effective January 4, 2021. From that date forward, only service dogs will be permitted in airline cabins on commercial flights.
Specifically, to be classified as a service animal, a dog must be “individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of a person with a disability.” All other animals, emotionally supportive or not, will be checked into the cargo hold for a fee.
This controversial decision was made in the wake of some travelers “gaming” the system, and in its heyday led to all manner of animals catching free flights on their owner’s laps including monkeys, snakes, hamsters, and perhaps most memorably - a kangaroo (said kangaroo hopped on an American Airlines flight in Australia, naturally).
The DOT’s decision was not made lightly, but in response to disruptions caused by these unusual critters that they say eroded public trust in legitimate service animals. And to be sure, there were folks abusing the liberal policy.
The data suggests there are about 200,000 legitimate service dogs in this country - animals with highly specialized training for people with a wide range of disabilities, including psychiatric issues. To illustrate the scope of the fraud at play, Delta said it allowed more than 250,000 “emotional support animals” in 2017 alone. The industry trade group Airlines for America reports that over 750,000 passengers traveled with emotional support animals in 2017.
The new rules are already sparking pushback from some mental health professionals, who say that the policies discriminate against an already stigmatized group - the mentally ill. Further, some people say that the stress of flying during a pandemic makes emotional support animals all the more crucial for some travelers’ health.
The policy revisions also allow airlines to require service dogs to be tethered or leashed at all times, and can remove any animal exhibiting aggressive behavior to other passengers. The airlines are given permitted discretion to allow “emotional support animals” to continue to fly for free.
You’ll be required to do a little paperwork, but the DOT was painstaking in its efforts to avoid burdening the disabled in creating a barrier to flying. If a service dog handler books a flight more than 48 hours in advance, they will need to submit their paperwork prior to the date of travel. However, booking last minute will not create a hardship for travelers, who will be permitted to submit their paperwork at check in.
How do you feel about the new crackdown? Is this a solid remedy to rampant fraud or obvious discrimination against those with emotional or mental health disorders?
Good idea….
This is all bad
As usual, the people that abuse the system ruin it for the legit people. I find it absolutely amazing that the DOT can make such a bold decision and yet the SCOTUS can’t uphold a legal issue in Kansas….that unless you are a US citizen you can’t vote…..that is the law but the highest court in the US won’t uphold that…..but the DOT can stop someone that needs an emotional support animal to travel with them……I’m just shaking my head…….
Should never been started
Concerning the banning of emotional support animals (ESA). I understand this policy; however, I am not an individual who is in need of an ESA, so my opinion is not relevant. That stated I believe this question should be put to those who are dependent upon the animals for support. My question to the airlines would be is this an arbitrary denial of service to a population in need? Or, is this a denial of service to enhance the travel experience of all passengers and if so how is it better as opposed to when service animals were allowed? If this denial of service is to increase airline profit then I believe it is wrong. jwt
This could have been handled so much better. Many people need their support animals. Yes everyone know it went out of control but to deny all is wrong. Please examine and make better decisions. Banding all is as bad as letting everything get out of control in the first place.
I was planning a trip to Reno, but I won’t be going without my little dog!
I have had a bad experience on a flight with the passenger sitting next to me who would not keep her “pet” in the traveling container under the seat ahead of her. She continually removed the animal who caused ME great anxiety because it kept crawling over to myside, and, when asked to put the pet back in the container the passenger refused and told Me there was something psycholologically wrong with me. This person refused to adhere to the airline requirements to keep the pet is the box. I asked for help from the attendant , she did tell her to keep the animal in it’s container . However, a while later she once again took the animal out and told me to change my seat if I didn’t like it. I consider this to be an abuse of my rights to travel safely and comfortably with the ticket that I payed an extra $120.00 for “comfort”, as I was traveling home to attend my sister’s funeral. I complained when the plane landed to the airline representative and was offered a voucher but not an apology nor a compassionate reponses. I wholeheartedly agree with the DOT desicion to limit so called support animals on flights.
My husband and I have an ESA 15 lb dog who has traveled several times successfully in-cabin from Denver to Honolulu. I understand both sides to the recent DOT decision but we not only have complied with all previous requirements, we also ensured least amount of intrusion to fellow travelers. We make sure we are in 2 seat only rows, keep her quietly in our laps for the 7 hr flights. We would pay any additional fee but now we don’t have any options w/ our preferred United Air. Additionally, UA doesn’t allow in-cabin pets for domestic flights to/from Hawaii. She is also not allowed in cargo because of her breed. We are now in a quandary, now penalized for other people’s abuse or lack or consideration. We would support any lobbying efforts for this ruling or for airlines to provide workable options for legitimate ESA owners.
Yes, it is true that there are many who abuse & misrepresent their animals in order to save a buck. But to ban all ESA is not only extreme but prejudicial. It discriminates against those who suffer from emotional & psychiatric conditions, conditions that are pacified with the love and attention of their pet. I do believe the ACAA (Air Carrier Access Act) needs to be modified, like no peacocks, pigs nor small ponies! But an emotional support dog or cat should not be banned. I personally purchased an extra seat during my last flight which cost me an additional $800! So for many of us, it’s not about saving a pet fee! Would you rather sit next to a restless disruptive passenger or one who has been consoled by the love and attention they receive from their pet.