I’ll admit it; I watch Grey’s Anatomy. I’m under no illusion about its realism, nor do I have a subconscious friendship-quality obsession with any of the characters. I enjoy many of the story arcs, I find the medical terminology interesting, and occasionally I find one of their attempts to tackle “modern issues’ (whatever the heck that mans) thought-provoking.
One of the things I appreciate about the show is their treatment of the different stages of and experiences of disabilities. They have characters acquire disabilities through accidents or through failed medical procedures, through diseases, or through congenital defects. They show characters dealing with their congenital and acquired disabilities from all points on the responsive scale, ranging from the girl who refuses to be the “heartwarming differently-abled girl” because she feels her chronic, intense pain would go unacknowledged, to the doctor who loses her leg in a plane crash and has a full recovery from depression to resume her career and repair her family. Then they tried to make a mockery of fake service dogs, though, and I’m afraid they didn’t quite send the message they meant to.
Now, I’m all about mocking fake service dogs as one of many means of ending that phenomenon. If a little shaming will get people to stop trying to bring Fifi into the grocery store because they feel guilty about leaving Fifi in her perfectly warm, dry, safe, snuggly crate for an hour, go for it. Get anxious about flying? Get therapy, a prescription, or don’t fly. If you have a legitimate disability or mental illness there are legitimate paths to having a service dog. Use them. But what happened in Grey’s AnatomySeason 14, Episode 3, titled “Go Big or Go Home” came off more like mocking emotionally stunted and entitled Millennials and included inaccurate information about service dogs.
In this episode the Chief of surgery and the Head of Hospital Education are interviewing candidates for their internship program. One of the candidates brings in a little yappy dog of some kind, which is clearly out of control. The Chief of Surgery, clearly discomfited by the dog’s behaviour, asks in a tone of mild disbelief “you brought a dog to your interview?” “He’s for emotional support, and legally you can’t ask me that” the candidate replies smugly. Needless to say, she was not selected for the program.
I have three problems with this scene.
1. Emotional Support Dogs ARE NOT SERVICE DOGS
2. You CAN ask if a dog is a service dog, and you can ALSO ask what service the dog performs.
3. If the dog is out of control, service dog or no, you CAN legally ask – and enforce – the dog’s removal.
1. Emotional support dogs are not service dogs.
Ok, there’s got to be another way to say this because people do not seem to get it no matter how many times it’s referenced in newspaper articles, radio spots, Facebook, or Twitter. “Emotional support dog” is not a real thing. It’s not a legal term. It’s not an industry term. It’s a layman’s made-up term that means…nothing. What most people mean is by that term is “I haven’t learned coping skills and/or have the right support system and medication in place so I want to take my doggy with me” or “but I can’t leave Fido at home all alone!” Anxiety, depression, Autism Spectrum Disorder, and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder are all legitimate reasons to get a service dog – a SERVICE DOG. If you think you may suffer from one or more of these conditions, please contact a counselor or psychiatrist and get help. If you think that a dog is a good option, discuss it with your therapist, then apply to a legitimate school for a well-trained dog who will physically meet your need by being more than an animated body pillow with a tail and a tongue. There is help available, and I want you to receive it. No one should have to go without it. But “emotional support dog’ is not a synonym for service dog. Nor is it a category covered under the ADA – there is only ONE category under the ADA, and that is service dog. Emotional support dog is not a category or subgroup of service dog.
Is the horse dead yet? Can I stop beating it? My arm’s getting tired!
2. Employers, proprietors of businesses, employees of businesses, public servants, et cetera…all those people you encounter in your daily lives? Yeah – they CAN ask if that dog with you a service dog is. AND they can ask “what service does that dog perform for you?” This is a GOOD thing. It’s a check against…fake service dogs! It’s not a very powerful check; it’s more of a reminder that you’re on the honour system because it’s easy to lie. But it is there to protect both service dog handlers, business owners and their employees, and other patrons. It’s good for everybody. The Chief of Surgery in that episode was perfectly within her rights to question the presence of a dog. Now, she could have been more diplomatic about it instead of simply feeling her disbelief into words. But given the dog’s behaviour – I’m on her side 100% And that brings us to #3
3. Service dogs are permitted into all areas where the general public is permitted, with a handful of limited exceptions for the dog, handler, and others’ protections. This is a privilege that service dogs did not have until the 1980’s. Previously their admission into stores restaurants, and offices was based ENTIRELY on the goodwill of proprietors. This goodwill was earned through demonstrating exceptional behaviour. Service dogs are known for being so quiet and inobtrusive that, unless you see it, you wouldn’t know it was in the room. Service dogs sit, heel, stay, lay down, keep their noses to themselves, keep their yappers shut, do not aggress or alert on people, objects, or animals, and they DO NOT JUMP UP ON PEOPLE like the dog in the interview! Now – service dogs are dogs, they’re animals. They have instincts and biological drives they have to follow. They get distracted sometimes. But they are trained to ignore these instincts. And, more importantly, their handlers are trained to correct their incidental misbehavior and continue their training to constantly maintain and improve the dogs’ behaviour. Heaven knows my dog isn’t perfect. Greta is a kiss-thief, she has a fascination with motorcycles, still, and she still struggles with ignoring other dogs. I work hard to expose her to these distractions as often as I can to correct her behaviour. I constantly review my notes and lectures from TSE, go on service dog blogs and read dog training books to ensure that her behaviour is as excellent as possible at all times. I do this because, though right now the law protects my access to public places with great, laws can change. And if service dogs were not known for such superb behaviour, if they were known for snitching fries out of baskets, jumping up on store employees, leaving messes in offices, chewing on furniture, or other such egregious behaviour, I would be first in line to vote service dogs out of the ADA. A dog that is distracted is a danger to its handler, and a dog that misbehaves is a danger to others AND the handler. The point of the dog is to help; if the dog is not helping, or hurtinginstead of helping, lose the dog. Store owners have the right to request that a service dog be removed from the premises if he is out of the handler’s control. The handler may remain, or come back in after putting the dog in the car or something, but the dog that is out of control – out of control, not merely making a mistake, mind – are not welcome, and shouldn’t be. So, what does “out of control” mean?
Well, there’s no leash or harness standards or requirements, but most schools use a harness or leash of some kind. TSE uses both a harness and a leash so I have absolutely no excuse for Greta being out of my control. I am able to both physically and verbally restrain her if the need arises – and it has, in both instances. Another service dog barked at Greta and she engaged, tried to lunge at the other dog, and I had to physically jerk her back with the leash with both hands, then I used a combination of leash correction and verbal discipline and commands to turn her around and go a different way while the other handler did the same. Greta is not only under my physical control but she is also under my verbal control. That is, when I tell her to do something with words or hand signals, such as “left,” “forward,” or “down” she will obey me.
That’s a great anecdote but doesn’t answer the question. Ok, it’s not even a great anecdote; it’s blank and short. But more importantly, it doesn’t answer the question. What does “out of control” mean? The best way to paraphrase that is “not responsive to verbal commands and not under the physical control of the handler,” or maybe “disregarding verbal commands, and the handler is unable to physical restrain and/or subdue the dog.” Now, in this instance “subdue” does not mean “wrestle the dog to the ground.” It means “restore to proper behaviour.” So, when Greta lunged at the other dog I used a heavy leash correction and verbal reprimand to return her to proper behaviour. That is a dog that is under control. She alerted on another dog and acted inappropriately, but I was able to swiftly and effectively correct the disobedience and return her to work with minimal fuss and no disruption of store operations. That is the goal – not to be perfect, but to maintain excellence, and to recover it when necessary.
If your dog is not leashed you had better make absolutely sure he responds to verbal commands. If he is leashed, you had better make sure he responds to verbal commands – and that you keep hold of the leash! A dog running around with a loose leash is a hazard to himself and others. A dog can snag his leash on something and strangle himself, if he has a constricting collar, or pull something down on top of himself. The leash is a tripping hazard for people, can damage property such as shopping carts, and does no one any good if it is not in the handler’s hand. If you are physically unable to control your service dog with a leash and/or a harness, then you should look into some alternative assistive technology other than a dog. I admire a woman in my last class at TSE who decided that she did not have the physical capacity to care for and correct her dog, and so she dropped out of the class. Dogs are not panaceas; they aren’t for everyone.
And just because a dog isn’t for you does not mean you’ve failed some test or other. People with disabilities are as individual as able-bodied individuals. Their needs are varied, and should be assessed and handled on an individual basis. If I ever reach a point where I am unable to care for and control a dog I know I have a cane to fall back on. I encourage the use of as many assistive technology tools as you think you MIGHT need to fit each situation. Dogs are not good for every situation. For example, dogs do not do roller coasters very well. Frankly, neither do I so I haven’t faced that problem. However, I have discovered that Greta likes karate too much for me to take her to class. However, one of my classmates is brought by his grandmother who has a PTSD dog, and that dog doesn’t seem to care how wild and violent our movements are. He is indifferent to the martial arts. His loss, but at least his handler gets the benefit of his presence to help her control panic, migraines, and other symptoms of her disorder.
Now, if the writers of Grey’s Anatomyintended to include a message about legitimate versus fake service dogs, they failed. If they meant to simply make fun of Millennial quirks – though fake service dogs are not a phenomenon limited to Millennials – they succeeded. But they succeeded at the cost of denigrating the significance of dogs that do help handlers with severe anxiety and depression disorders. They succeeded at the cost of relaying false information without correcting it. Rhetorically, this scene is inaccurate at best, and at worst it contributes to a culture of shaming people with severe anxiety, depression, Post-Traumatic stress Disorder, and similar diagnoses by giving them additional reasons to believe people will not take them or their legitimate coping mechanisms seriously.
Imagine, if you will, the fear that comes with wondering if you will be believed when you tell someone “this is a service dog; he calms me when I have panic attacks and helps me concentrate on coping when I feel a panic attack coming on.” Not only are you worried about having a panic attack in public, people staring at you, shouting, telling you to get a grip, hovering in your space, but now you have to worry that someone will take your therapeutic tool away from you. It would be like someone walking up and demanding to see the pills in your purse before you were allowed to take them in a restaurant, then questioning whether or not it was a legitimate prescription, or if you were scamming drugs. Raise your hand if you think this would contribute to general anxiety.
Gotcha – I’m blind! I can’t see if your hands are raised! I got to pull that one on a kindergarten class last week when their teacher invited me to educate them about service dogs ;) That was a great group of kids with a lot of fun questions.
But you get my point; adding to the confusion about legitimate versus fake service dogs is not a good thing. In fact, it’s a pretty bad thing. Grey’s Anatomyhas a…decent reputation for treating minority issues, but in this particular instance if I were to give them a letter grade I’m afraid it would be a D. I would say F but I’m sure there’s something worse they could have done – I just really don’t want to think about what that is. So, solid D. Please try again, and do better. Excellence is worth the effort, and anything less than excellence on an issue like this is counterproductive.
No comments:
Post a Comment