Harris 1

Nathan Harris

Ms. Jorgensen

English 10H Per. 5

7 September 2018

The Fido Fiasco

Emotional support animals are some of the most beneficial things for those with

limitations, so why do people want them gone? The topic of whether an animal should be

considered a support animal is a controversial subject at this time. While many people are

supportive of allowing support animals to travel with their owner, others are skeptical about what

the authenticity of the animal really is. One thing that has lead to this sudden change in people’s

behavior, is the harsh reality that those who want special treatment will go to great lengths to act

like they need it, without realizing that they might be taking away the opportunity from someone

who truly requires it. Support animals should be continued to be used all around the world, so

long as they are for a legitimate purpose.

Most sources that have argued for the continued use of support animals throughout the

world have discussed a similar topic within them; what the legitimate use of support animals

should be considered. The general consensus of a support animal is “an animal that provides

assistance related to a person’s disability, and enjoys broad access to public locations”

(Schoenfeld-Tacher et al., 2017, p.642). There are many situations that depend on support

animals to provide for their owners physical or mental conditions; such as those who suffer from

anxiety “These pets spend the entire day with their owners are thus present when their owner

becomes emotionally distressed” (2017, p.1).

 Harris 2

On the contrary to those who benefit from the presence of an animal’s support, there are

persons who are greedy and will go to desperate measures to receive benefits and make their own

lives easier. Some examples of this are certificates that non-certified websites offer “free initial

screenings” that always come back positive, then turn around and tell you “to pay $159 dollars”

for a “bogus” letter (Herzog, 2016, p.1). The rise of websites such as this are also causing

copious amounts of stress for doctors and therapists who are qualified to write letters of

recommendation for support animals, but are having a hard time judging the authenticity of a

person's’ conditions that would require such need. Due to the influx of such requests between

2002 and 2012, “the use for psychiatric services and emotional support had increased tenfold,

much faster than medical or mobility-trained assistance dogs” (Herzog, 2016, p.1). There is a

legitimate way to obtain such qualifications; talking to the therapist or doctor who is treating the

condition. Even then, there are therapists who are not qualified to administer support animal

letters for the people they are treating and “are treading murky ethical waters” (Herzog, 2016,

p.1).

Finally, it may be concluded that the continued use of support animals should be allowed,

but only if that animal has proper qualifications to do so. The use of service animals has

increased drastically, and along with this, the rise of deceitful certifications and claims for

animals: “a woman tried to board a United Airlines flight with a peacock” (Proulx, 2018, p.1)

People need to be able to realize that if someone truly has some kind of condition or limitation,

then taking away that animal could be catastrophic to that person’s mental or physical state. If an

animal is supporting a person with their physical limitations or mental condition, then by no

means should anyone be allowed to restrict access to said animal from being with their owner.
 Harris 3

Work Cited

Schoenfeld-Tacher, Regina. “Public Perceptions of Service Dogs, Emotional Support Dogs, and

Therapy Dogs.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 14, no.

6, 2017, p. 642.

Herzog, Hal. “Emotional Support Animals: The Therapist's Dilemma.” Psychology Today. 2016.

Proulx, Natalie. “Are Emotional-Support Animals a Scam?” The Learning Network, 2018

“How Emotional Support Animals Help.” 2017