1 Assistance Dogs in general
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe, qualitatively the use of service dogs by persons with physical disabilities and the meaning of this experience. METHOD: Five service dog owners were observed and interviewed on multiple occasions through an ethnographic approach. RESULTS: Identified themes were increased community participation, “closer than family” increased social contact, personal skill development, having fun, responsibility, adjustment, challenges, independence, “someone to watch over me,” and “feel like an able-bodied person.” CONCLUSION: Service dogs are used to enhance independence in occupational performance areas and contribute to improvements in psychosocial functioning. Given these benefits, service dogs could be viewed as a form of assistive technology that occupational therapists may want to consider as an alternative to traditional devices for some clients.
Diese Studie hat die Nutzung von Assistenzhunden und ihre Bedeutung für Menschen mit physischen Behinderungen untersucht. Zu diesem Zweck wurden fünf Besitzer von Assistenzhunden zu zahlreichen Anlässen beobachtet und befragt. Zu den Ergebnissen gehörten erhöhte Beteiligung an der Gemeinschaft, verstärkter sozialer Kontakt, Entwicklung eigener Fähigkeiten, Spaß, Verantwortlichkeit, Anpassung, Herausforderung, Unabhängigkeit sowie das Gefühl, dass jemand aufpasst und dass man sich körperlich-gesund fühlt. Aus den Antworten lässt sich schließen, dass Assistenzhunde genutzt werden, um Unabhängigkeit in zahlreichen Lebensbereichen zu fördern und das psychosoziale Befinden zu verbessern. Mit diesen Vorteilen könnten Assistenzhunde als eine Form der assistiven Technologie agieren, die viele Therapeuten als Alternative für traditionelle Mittel vorschlagen könnten.
In a Guide Dog population, there is a higher return rate of handlers’ second dog compared with any prior or subsequent dog pairings. This phenomenon is called Second Dog Syndrome (SDS). Qualitative studies have identified defining features of this syndrome in Guide Dog handlers; however, there has been no peer-reviewed study into the experience of SDS in companion-dog owners or handlers of other assistance dogs. As such, this exploratory study aimed to define the SDS experience in companion-dog owners and assistance-dog handlers. Ten participants, all women, were recruited to participate in focus groups for companion-dog owners (n = 5) and assistance-dog handlers (n = 5). Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. SDS was characterized by a strong bond with the previous dog, ongoing bereavement related to the previous dog loss, negative emotions related to the successor dog, and inability to bond with them. This appeared to be due to comparisons made between the successor and previous dog and unmet expectations of the new dog. For companion-dog owners it was also characterized by a fear of getting hurt again; for assistance-dog owners it was an inability to trust the successor dog, differences in work ability, and a threat to their independence. Time since the loss of the previous dog, awareness of the phenomenon of SDS, and support from the community also influenced the SDS experience. One unexpected finding was that SDS was not exclusively linked to second-paired dogs and that it may be more aptly named “Successor Dog Syndrome.” Given that poor outcomes associated with unsuccessful dog–owner bonding may result in relinquishment, this study provides an important first step to being able to quantify the experience of SDS to develop interventions in the future.
Defining and predicting a dog’s personality is a major concern for groups providing service and/or working dogs. The Mira Foundation is a non-profit organisation offering service dogs to autistic children and individuals with motor or visual disabilities. Since its establishment in 1981, the Foundation has donated thousands of dogs and registered behavioural data on its dogs by relying on rigorous and standardised procedures. First, at 6 and 12 months of age, while the dogs are in a foster family, data are collected using questionnaires to assess the presence or absence of specific behaviours (QFFs). Then, at 1 year of age, just prior to receiving professional training, dog trainers conduct a set of short behavioural tests to evaluate dogs for various traits that are key for training. Exploiting the unique database created by the Foundation, this study aimed to investigate whether, as pointed out in the literature, fearfulness can be a reliable predictor of adult dog personality traits and of qualification as a service dog. More specifically, three goals were pursued in the present study: 1) to study the possibility of extracting fearfulness dimensions at 6 months and 1 year of age; 2) to assess the stability of this dimension across development and across the types of evaluations; 3) to assess its predictive value for future qualification as a service dog (i.e. guide dog, assistance dog, dog for ASD children, or breeder); and 4) to investigate the impact of sex and breed on the likelihood of achieving qualification as a service dog and on Fear/Reactivity at 1 year of age. The analysis revealed the presence of a Fear/Reactivity personality dimension in dogs across the three evaluations. The results confirmed the consistency of this dimension between 6 and 12 months of age (QFFs), and in the behavioural evaluation at 1 year of age. Furthermore, the Fear/Reactivity dimension significantly predicted dog disqualification from training programmes and also the subtype of the programme in which dogs will be certified. Finally, the results indicated that a dog’s Fear/Reactivity and likeliness to qualify in a specific programme varied according to its sex and breed.
Assistance dogs are trained to support persons living with disability and mitigate limitations that hinder their participation in everyday activities. Despite participation being a frequent challenge for people with disabilities, evidence linking assistance dog provision to improved participation outcomes is underdeveloped. This scoping review aimed to improve understanding by mapping the participation outcomes claimed in research on assistance dogs using the International Classification of Functioning (ICF), Disability and Health framework.
Previous studies have revealed cultural differences in perceptions of assistance dogs, but this has not been investigated in almost 20 years. This study aimed to develop an understanding of the Australian public’s perceptions toward both assistance and companion dogs. A questionnaire was completed by 258 Australians asking about their interest in, attitudes towards, and perceived happiness of the two types of dogs. Results revealed participants were equally interested in them, but supportive of the use of assistance dogs, and perceived them as happier. Qualitative analysis revealed participants commonly endorsed the practical benefits of assistance dogs and the emotional benefits of companion dogs. Differences in happiness ratings can potentially be explained by the common endorsement that companion dogs are sometimes neglected while assistance dogs enjoy working and constant companionship with their handler. However, several participants expressed concern regarding the restrictive nature of the assistance work. There was an increase in concerns raised for the welfare of both dogs as compared to previous studies, suggesting a rise in concern about dog welfare and the ethics of keeping dogs for human benefits.
Persons with disabilities, who own service dogs, develop strong relationships with them. Since the COVID-19 pandemic decreased the possibility of social contact and modified human relationships, we hypothesized that the COVID-19 lockdown would influence people with disabilities—service dog relationships. An online survey was conducted during the first COVID-19 lockdown in France and included information (e.g., MONASH score) both in the general context prior to and during the COVID-19 lockdown. Seventy owners participated. Compared to the general context, scores for the Perceived Emotional Closeness and Perceived Costs subscales were significantly higher during the COVID-19 lockdown, while scores for the Dog–Owner Interaction subscale were significantly lower during the COVID-19 lockdown. Our study confirmed that service dogs, like other pets, were a source of emotional support for their owners during the COVID-19 lockdown. However, people with disabilities found their relationship with their service dog costlier (e.g., my dog makes too much mess). Our study highlights that, in extreme situations, characteristics of a human–animal relationship can be exacerbated in both positive and negative ways.
Purpose: First-time assistance dog handlers experience a profound life change when they bring an assistance dog into their home. Therefore, this article investigates the broad context of handlers’ lived experiences prior to and throughout the first year after acquiring an assistance dog.
Materials and methods: To understand holistic experiences better, semi-structured interviews were conducted with first-time assistance dog handlers (n = 7), parents (n = 7), assistance dog instructors (n = 6), carers/other individuals (n = 3) at four time points: before an individual received an assistance dog, and then at three further times for up to one year after they received the assistance dog.
Results: Inductive content analysis revealed that four main contextual factors (societal, social support, environmental, and personal) influenced the lived experience of working with an assistance dog. Many of these factors were outside of the handler and the assistance dog organization’s control, and they were shown to cause many challenges for handlers.
Conclusion: These factors must, therefore, be taken into consideration when organizations make decisions about placing an assistance dog.
IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION
- Societal influences can both hinder and facilitate the benefits first-time handlers receive with their assistance dog in public.
- Support from others is important to successfully integrate an assistance dog into a first-time handler’s life.
- A handler’s level of environmental control can influence their experiences with their assistance dog.
- Personal factors such as a handler’s experience of disability and motivation or resilience can impact experiences with their assistance dog.
Introduction:
Assistance dogs are often written about and featured in human interest pieces that focus on the amazing talents of the dog. Those studies that do exist focus on the positive elements of partnership. The purpose of this study was twofold: to add a realistic assessment of positive and negative aspects of assistance dog partnership, and to provide the training agency data to back up anecdotal evidence that recipient’s lives have been changed by their dogs.
Methods:
A selected number of disabled people who had been partnered with assistance dogs for over a year participated in interviews. Interviews were performed face-to-face and over the telephone. The interview tool was a predominantly scale-based questionnaire with several open ended questions to capture both qualitative and quantitative information from participants concerning the life changes they have experienced since receiving their dog.
Results:
The most challenging aspect of owning an assistance dog was the physical act of caring for the dog. The rewarding aspect of the partnership was independence – both reduced reliance on human caregivers and increased ability to stay home or go out alone – as the major benefit. Secondarily, the respondents reported the emotional aspects of their relationship with their dog (having a constant companion and someone to love them unconditionally) as a strong positive element of partnership.
Respondent satisfaction was high, both with dog ownership and with the agency. Almost unanimously, interviewees agreed they would get another dog in the future and recommend this agency to friends seeking an assistance dog.
In vielen Werken von menschlichem Interesse wird über Assistenzhunde und ihre erstaunlichen Talente berichtet. Existierende Studien konzentrieren sich auf die positiven Elemente der Partnerschaft. Diese Studie hatte zwei Ziele: eine realistische Einschätzung über die positiven und negativen Aspekte der Partnerschaft mit einem Assistenzhund zu geben und die anekdotischen Belege, dass das Leben der Menschen durch ihren Hund verbessert wurde, mit Daten für die Ausbildungsagentur zu unterstützen.
Zu diesem Zweck wurden Menschen mit Behinderung interviewt, die seit mehr als einem Jahr einen Assistenzhund besaßen. Die Befragungen wurden persönlich oder per Telefon durchgeführt. Die Fragen basierten überwiegend auf Skalen mit einigen offenen Fragen, um sowohl qualitative als auch quantitative Informationen der Patienten bezüglich der Lebensveränderungen durch ihren Assistenzhund zu erfahren.
Die größte Herausforderung beim Besitzen eines Assistenzhundes war die körperliche Betätigung, um für den Hund zu sorgen. Der größte Vorteil der Partnerschaft war Unabhängigkeit, sowohl durch reduziertes Vertrauen in menschliche Pflegekräfte als auch durch die verbesserten Möglichkeiten, zuhause zu bleiben oder alleine nach draußen zu gehen. Zudem berichteten die Teilnehmer über die positiven emotionalen Auswirkungen der Partnerschaft (jemanden zu haben, der sie stetig begleitet und bedingungslos liebt). Die Zufriedenheit der Teilnehmer war hoch, sowohl im Bezug auf den Besitz eines Assistenzhundes als auch im Bezug auf die Agentur. Fast ausnahmslos gaben sie an, dass sie zukünftig noch einen Hund annehmen würden und die Agentur an Freunde, die einen Assistenzhund suchen, weiterempfehlen würden.
Purpose: Assistance dogs can provide many health and wellbeing benefits to people with disability, however challenges remain. Assistance dog providers provide crucial support to assistance dog handlers, however limited literature exists exploring their experience working with people with disability. This study aimed to understand the experiences of assistance dog providers working in Australia.
Materials and methods: Twelve assistance dog providers participated in semi-structured interviews. Inductive thematic analysis was used to analyse the transcripts.
Results: Five themes emerged describing the participant experience. Theme one discussed instances of discrimination experienced by assistance dog handlers, stemming from the lack of public awareness. Theme two captured the inconsistencies regarding the training of assistance dog providers with a specific focus on the gaps in the disability specific knowledge. Theme three emphasised the lack of clarity regarding legislation outlining the training requirements of assistance dog providers and the public access rights of the handlers. Theme four emphasised funding barriers, and theme five discussed barriers to interprofessional collaboration between assistance dog providers and allied health professionals.
Conclusion: These findings contribute to understanding the current barriers experienced by assistance dog providers and assistance dog handlers, as well as the legislative changes required to better support people with disability.
Anecdotal reports and limited available empirical evidence indicate that assistance-dog handlers are often denied access to places they are legally entitled to take their assistance dog. However, the frequency and contexts of access denials in Australia have not been established, and the emotional impacts of these denials are not well described. Furthermore, qualitative findings suggest that impromptu interactions with other people and dogs within the community can have both positive and negative impacts on the handler and assistance dog; larger-scale, quantitative research is needed. The aim of this study was to characterize the frequency and contexts, and emotional impacts, of assistance-dog access denials among handlers in Australia, as well as handler interactions with people and dogs. Handlers (n = 77) throughout Australia completed an online survey. Commercial passenger vehicles (CPVs, e.g., Uber/taxi) were the most commonly reported context for access denials, reportedly occurring about half the time, followed by hotels, restaurants, and cafés. Bystander support was rare in any setting. Some participants reported avoiding CPVs (52%), restaurants (13%), and medical/dental centers (13%) owing to prior access denials. The emotional impacts of the denials were very negative (e.g., annoyed, excluded, anxious, hurt). Having a visible or invisible disability had no bearing on the frequency of access denials, nor did having a conventional (e.g., Labrador Retriever) versus unconventional (e.g., Pug) breed of assistance dog. Unexpected interactions with people and other dogs were common; participants reported having a positive social interaction as a good outcome, and the dog becoming temporarily distracted as a common negative outcome. Unfortunately, eight participants (10%) had to retire a dog as an outcome of a negative interaction. Some free-text responses indicated that the reporting process for access denials is onerous and ineffective. Future research should seek to understand whether this can be remedied.
Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) can have corrosive impacts on family relationships and individual functioning. Emerging evidence has shown that psychiatric service dogs may be an effective complementary treatment for military veterans with PTSD, benefiting veterans’ mental and social health. However, few studies have examined the effects of psychiatric service dogs on the family members of veterans, specifically their partners. Mixed-methods data from 60 veteran-partner dyads examined individual and relationship functioning among partners of veterans paired with a service dog (service dog group; n = 37) and those awaiting placement (waitlist group; n = 23). While there were no statistically significant differences across groups, the effect sizes for group differences suggested that partners in the service dog group (relative to those on the waitlist) may experience higher levels of resilience and companionship, and lower levels of anger, social isolation, and work impairment. A topical survey of partner qualitative data within the service dog group indicated that service dogs provided more benefits than challenges. Partners reported improvements in veteran functioning, family relationships, and partners’ quality of life. Results, although preliminary, suggest that psychiatric service dogs may provide modest positive experiences for some veteran family systems.
Currently, the supply of service dogs is limited. Of the more than 49 million Americans with a disability, fewer than 16,000 have a service dog. Every year, the Delta Society’s National Service Dog Center—a clearinghouse for information about obtaining or training service dogs—receives thousands of calls from people who want, but cannot obtain, such a dog. This article reviews for professionals in rehabilitation the current research into the use of service dogs and/or animal-assisted therapy. Service dogs may help the clients of rehabilitation nurses meet their rehabilitation goals; therefore, it is incumbent upon nurses to be familiar with the research in this area. Another article by Susan Modlin, which discusses the author’s personal experience with a service dog training program, will be published in the January/February 2001 issue of Rehabilitation Nursing.
No abstract is available.
The use of assistance dogs has a long and honorable history. Guide dogs have been held in high regard since the 1930s and since the 1980s, assistance dogs have rapidly expanded to fill new roles, particularly in the U.S. (1). Alongside these burgeoning possibilities for canine assistance, the social and regulatory environment for these dogs has become increasingly complex and some areas of confusion and social conflict have emerged (2). The nomenclature used in describing these dogs adds confusion: at the worldwide agency Assistance Dogs International (ADI), the inclusive term used is assistance dogs for guide, hearing and service (all other assisting roles, including for autism or psychiatric disabilities) dogs (3). In contrast, the U.S. American Disabilities Act uses the inclusive term service dogs (4).
Veterinarians and social scientists have special responsibilities to work together to support people with disabilities and their assistance dogs. This requires a seamless integration of animal and human medicine that includes a full range of service providers. This “One Health” world is more often aspirational than actual, and scientists and professionals are critical to bridging this gap.
Many highly capable agencies support people with disabilities, provide and support service animals, and advocate for them. However, it is researchers, veterinarians, and human health providers that make the connections between domains that are needed to allow the assistance-dog handlers to carry out their everyday activities with the ease and access that is their right.
This Research Topic aims to showcase some of the work being done to find a constructive way forward, expanding the effective and responsible employment of assistance dogs while managing the associated risks and conflicts. This includes supporting research into efficacy and best practices, promoting wider access to and for assistance dogs, and developing the support systems for handlers and their dogs.
This report has been prepared for the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA). The NDIA is tasked with providing Australians with disability the reasonable and necessary supports they need to achieve their goals and live an ordinary life. Some Australians with disability currently use assistance animals as a disability support. Therefore, the NDIA commissioned a group of expert researchers from La Trobe University to review the effectiveness and cost-benefits of assistance animals, such that decisions made around assistance animal provision could be based on the latest available scientific evidence. In order to accomplish this task, the research team undertook a review of existing scientific literature, a survey of assistance animal provider organisations, consultations with current owners of assistance animals in Australia, and a health economics analysis. The existing evidence base supporting use of dogs to assist vision- and hearing-impaired individuals is considered established, so this study focused on use of AAs in other roles. Some data are included about traditional guide and hearing dogs throughout the report. This information is presented solely to provide context for the use of assistance animals in management of other impairment types.
I argue that the discursive tactics used to maintain a clear boundary between “legitimate” and “illegitimate” service animals rely on a set of assumptions that perpetuate unequal relations of power, and ultimately harm others (human and nonhuman alike). In support of this argument, I outline my theory of crip spacetime, which draws upon the material feminist notion that disability is an intersectional and emergent phenomenon, becoming (rather than being) through intra-active environments. Thinking through the ontology of service animals and their human companions in terms of crip spacetime demands that we apply what Christine Kelly (2016) has called accessible care in relationships.
Purpose: To qualitatively describe and compare the expectations and experiences of living with a mobility or medical service dog among those with a physical disability or chronic condition.
Materials and methods: A total of 64 participants living with a service dog and 27 on the waitlist to receive a service dog participated in a cross-sectional open-ended survey. Qualitative content analysis was used to identify themes and sub-themes.
Results: A total of 101 codes were summarized into themes of Physical Benefits, Psychosocial Benefits, and Drawbacks to having a service dog. Psychosocial benefits included the human–animal relationship as well as emotional, quality of life, and social benefits. Drawbacks included service dog care, public access and education, lifestyle adjustments, and dog behaviour. While participants on the waitlist were more likely to anticipate physical benefits of having a service dog, those with a service dog largely described psychosocial benefits. Findings also suggest that some drawbacks, such as public discrimination, may be unanticipated by the waitlist.
Conclusions: A comparison of expectations and experiences of service dog ownership highlights both the positive and negative aspects of the service dog–owner relationship and identifies potential aspects of having a service dog that may be unanticipated or overestimated by those on the waitlist.
Implications for Rehabilitation
When asked about helpful and important aspects of having a service dog, 98% of service dog owners described the psychosocial benefits of their dog’s assistance and companionship.
The human–animal relationship was the most discussed psychosocial benefit from both current owners as well as those on the waitlist, demonstrating the unique strength of the service dog–owner bond in this population.
Those on the waitlist to receive a service dog did not anticipate as many drawbacks as current owners described. In particular, difficulties with public access and education as well as dog behaviour were commonly experienced, but not expected, drawbacks to service dog ownership.
Findings identify aspects of having a service dog that may be unanticipated or overestimated by those on the waitlist, providing rehabilitation professionals with a basis for preparing those who may be considering incorporating a service dog into their lives.
Background
Caring for individuals teamed with service dogs requires complex practice knowledge intertwined with knowledge of legal protections and institutional policy. While healthcare professionals report not feeling fully prepared to care for this population, little is known about the care experiences from individuals teamed with a service dog.
Purpose
This study examined characteristics of individuals teamed with service dogs and their perspectives of what their healthcare providers know about caring for them.
Method
Cross-sectional analysis of survey data representing N = 204 individuals teamed with service dogs in the United States. Survey questions included demographic characteristics and measures of healthcare provider knowledge in the care of service dog teams.
Discussion
Less than 50% of respondents strongly agreed that their healthcare providers saw them as an expert in being supported by a service dog and communicated with them on meeting their needs. Between 56% to 65% strongly agreed to healthcare providers having knowledge of additional aspects of communication and interaction, awareness of legal rights for service dogs, organizational policies on service dogs, and acting as their advocate.
The purpose of this project was to assess and observe the matching process and to identify the role of an occupational therapist in aiding the evaluation process with potential handlers and assistance dogs. Three sites were explored within California: Canine Support Teams, Canine Companions for Independence, and Guide Dogs for the Blind. Interviews were conducted with twenty-five participants about roles, routines, physical environment, need for an assistance dog, and additional support.
Key findings from this project revealed a need for occupational therapy within the evaluation process and two-week team training. Therapists could aid with adapting learning material, addressing performance patterns, conducting home evaluations, and educating staff about a range of clients who have different disabilities.
Attachment styles have been shown to affect quality of life. Growing interest in the value of companion animals highlights that owning a dog can also affect quality of life, yet little research has explored the role of the attachment bond in affecting the relationship between dog ownership and quality of life. Given that the impact of dog ownership on quality of life may be greater for assistance dog owners than pet dog owners, we explored how anxious attachment and avoidance attachment styles to an assistance dog affected owner quality of life (n = 73). Regression analysis revealed that higher anxious attachment to the dog predicted enhanced quality of life. It is suggested that the unique, interdependent relationship between an individual and their assistance dog may mean that an anxious attachment style is not necessarily detrimental. Feelings that indicate attachment insecurity in other relationships may reflect more positive aspects of the assistance dog owner relationship, such as the level of support that the dog provides its owner.
Occupational therapists have recognized the benefits that service dogs can provide people with disabilities. There are many anecdotal publications extolling the benefits of working with service dogs, but few rigorous studies exist to provide the evidence of the usefulness of this type of assistive technology option. This systematic review evaluates the published research that supports the use of service dogs for people with mobility-related physical disabilities.
Articles were identified by computerized search of PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, OT Seeker, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, SportDiscus, Education Research Complete, Public Administration Abstracts, Web of Knowledge and Academic Search Premier databases with no date range specified. The keywords used in the search included disabled persons, assistance dogs or service dogs and mobility impairments. The reference lists of the research papers were checked as was the personal citation database of the lead author. Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria and whereas the findings are promising, they are inconclusive and limited because of the level of evidence, which included one Level I, six Level III, four Level IV and one Level V. All of the studies reviewed had research design quality concerns including small participant sizes, poor descriptions of the interventions, outcome measures with minimal psychometrics and lack of power calculations. Findings indicated three major themes including social/participation, functional and psychological outcomes; all of which are areas in the occupational therapy scope of practice. Occupational therapists may play a critical role in referral, assessment, assisting clients and consulting with training organizations before, during and after the service dog placement process. In order for health care professionals to have confidence in recommending this type of assistive technology, the evidence to support such decisions must be strengthened. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Therapeuten haben die Vorteile erkannt, die Servicehunde Menschen mit Behinderungen bieten können. Es gibt viele anekdotische Veröffentlichungen, die die Vorteile der Arbeit mit einem Servicehund anpreisen, aber es existieren wenige gründliche Studien, die Beweise für die Nützlichkeit dieser Form der Hilfstechnologie liefern. Diese systematische Untersuchung bewertet die veröffentlichte Forschung, die die Nutzung von Servicehunden für Menschen mit mobilitätseinschränkenden körperlichen Behinderungen unterstützt. Zu diesem Zweck wurden Artikel aus zahlreichen Datenbanken ohne spezielle Zeitspanne identifiziert. Zu den gesuchten Schlüsselwörtern gehörten Menschen mit Behinderung, Assistenzhunde oder Servicehunde und Mobilitätseinschränkungen. Das Literaturverzeichnisse der Forschungsarbeiten und die persönliche Zitationsdatenbank der leitenden Autoren wurden überprüft. Zwölf Studien erfüllten die Aufnahmekriterien. Die Befunde waren vielversprechend, aber nicht beweiskräftig und aufgrund des Beweisniveaus limitiert. Alle untersuchten Studien hatten Defizite bei der Versuchsgestaltung, unter anderem durch geringe Teilnehmerzahlen, schlechte Beschreibungen der Interventionen, Ergebnismessungen mit minimaler Psychometrie und einem Mangel an Kraftberechnungen. Die Befunde zeigten drei Hauptthemen, einschließlich sozialer Partizipation, funktionaler und psychologischer Ergebnissen, alle davon sind Bereiche der ergotherapeutischen Praxis. Ergotherapeuten könnten vor, während und nach dem Vermittlungsprozess der Servicehunde eine entscheidende Rolle bei der Verweisung, Bewertung, Begleitung von Klienten und beim Konsultieren von Ausbildungsorganisationen einnehmen. Damit medizinische Fachkräfte die Zuversicht haben, diese Form der Hilfstechnologie zu empfehlen, müssen die Belege, die solche Entscheidungen unterstützen, verstärkt werden.
Laws – Definitions – Standards
No Abstract available.
No Abstract available.
Assistance dogs are a very diverse group of working dogs that are trained to assist humans with different types of disabilities in their daily lives. Despite these dogs’ value for humankind, research on their welfare status, cognitive and behavioural capacities, selection criteria for the best fitting individuals, effective training and management practices, and genetic issues are so far lacking. This review highlights the need to address these topics and to promote progress in legal issues around assistance dogs. The topic of assistance dogs is approached comprehensively by outlining the current status of knowledge in three different dimensions: (1) the legal dimension, outlining important legal issues in the EU and Australia; (2) the welfare dimension; and (3) the dimension of research, covering assistance dog selection and training. For each of these three dimensions, we discuss potential approaches that can be implemented in the future in order to support assistance dog working performance, to protect the dogs’ welfare, and to improve our knowledge about them. Additionally, there remain many legal issues, such as the presence of assistance dogs in public areas, the resolution of which would benefit both the assistance dog and the owner with disability.
The aim of this study was to identify the outcomes expected and assessed by those providing service dogs to children with developmental disabilities. Seventeen registered service dog providers were invited to complete a mixed methods online survey. Five providers, who prepared dogs to work with a wide range of conditions and behaviours, mainly Asperger’s syndrome, autism and communication disorders, completed the survey. All five participants reported that they expected to see positive changes as a consequence of the service dog placement, in both the recipient child and their family, including improvements in attention span and language skills, as well as increased familial cohesion. Survey responses indicated that not all desired outcomes were routinely assessed. The range of assessments used were interviews, intake conversations, pre-placement questionnaires, child social dairies filled in by parents, follow up surveys after placement, and child observation by parents. No specifically named valid and reliable clinical or research measures were referred to, showing an emphasis on assessments from parents and service dog providers. It is not clear whether pre-intervention assessments are repeated systematically at follow-up, which could show robust intervention effects. There is scope for professionals in developmental disability to work with service dog providers to improve the evidence base in this field.
Service dogs working to ameliorate limitations for disabled individuals provide equality of access, a mandate firmly established by the United States Department of Justice. Unfortunately, imprecision in the law and policy regarding administration of service dogs as a valued public utility for disabled individuals has invited excessively broad, confusing, and problematic interpretations of how service dogs are regulated. The result has been a profound diminishment in public respect for service dogs in public spaces, which has the discriminatory effect of weakening equal access for disabled individuals. Narrower language would substantively regulate service dogs and reinforce the validity of their presence among the public and in public spaces.
No abstract available.
During the last 2 decades, service animals that are trained to help persons with disabilities have been making more frequent appearances in health care settings. After a long history of banning animals from these environments, many health care providers now endorse the presence of these animals in clinical and public settings. This APIC State of the Art Report (SOAR) examines the prevailing laws, scientific literature, and anecdotal data about service animals. The document gives an overview of the roles of service animals and their implications for health care providers. This SOAR will also suggest ways to develop prudent policies and practices for infection control and risk management.
In den letzten zwei Jahrzehnten sind im Gesundheitswesen immer häufiger Service-Tiere aufgetreten, die ausgebildet wurden, um Menschen mit Behinderung zu helfen. Nachdem Tiere für eine lange Zeit aus der medizinischen Versorgung verbannt wurden, befürworten heute viele Fürsorger die Anwesenheit von Tieren in der Öffentlichkeit und in Kliniken. Dieser Bericht beurteilt die vorherrschenden Gesetze, wissenschaftliche Literatur und anekdotische Daten über Service-Tiere. Zudem wird ein Überblick über die Rolle und die Bedeutung von Service-Tieren für Anbieter medizinischer Versorgung gegeben. Dieser Bericht schlägt außerdem Wege zur Entwicklung von umsichtigen Richtlinien und Verfahren für die Infektionskontrolle und das Risiko-Management vor.
When the function of a service, support, or assistance animal relates to a mental or emotional disability, a psychologist may be asked to write a letter for a patient seeking to live with the animal, usually a dog, or bring it onto an airplane or take it into a restaurant. Understanding the function of the dog will be important for the psychologist as there is no one-size-fits-all letter for all specialized dogs. This article analyzes the law and describes letters that helped patients and others that harmed them. The authors make recommendations about how to write such letters.
No abstract available.
No Abstract available.
The American with Disabilities Act (ADA), along with other federal legislation and many state laws, brought new protections regarding the use of service dogs by people with disabilities. But how does the law distinguish between a service dog and other kinds of dogs, and is the use of certain breeds of dog protected while the use of other breeds is not?
This study examines alleged discrimination towards people partnered with assistance dogs, as represented by Canadian newspapers. Doing so expands understanding of attitudes held toward assistance dogs and highlights everyday challenges faced by the people with whom they are partnered. Articles included for analysis were tabulated according to where instances of alleged discrimination happened, the type of assistance dog that was involved, and the reported reasons that were given as grounds for denying accommodation. Reported reasons were grouped further into five themes (health risks; ignorance; nuisance; cultural beliefs and/or religious convictions; and assault). Education programs, intersectoral collaboration, and policy changes are all recommended to tackle the challenges identified.
No Abstract available.
Companionship, emotional support, assistance for disabled family members, and general health benefits are just a few examples of why people choose to keep pets in their homes. This article explores the major legal issues that arise when people desire to keep companion animals in various types of housing. The Author examines the effects of federal, state, and local laws, as well as common contract clauses.
No Abstract available.
If an average person who lives with a dog were asked to describe the connection between “papers and dogs,” he or she may talk about American Kennel Club (AKC) registration.1 Some people might also reference dogs who are “paper trained.”2 However, individuals with disabilities, partnered with service or assistance dogs, may immediately think of the demands for documentation that they have been subject to when trying to enter businesses or rent housing.3 According to national surveys, the percentage of persons with disabilities in the United States is increasing.4 The number of persons with disabilities who choose to partner with service animals for assistance also appears to be growing.5 Even though the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) regulations regarding the permissible inquiries a public accommodation may make are straightforward, media reports and litigation, have made it clear that there is still widespread confusion.6 It is even more challenging for housing providers to determine their obligations under the Fair Housing Amendments Act (FHA).7 Although the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) regulations that became …
Canadian news coverage is reflecting and shaping an evolution of thought about how we must publicly account for animals’ roles in the disability rights movement. Through a textual analysis of 26 news media articles published between 2012 and 2017, this research demonstrates that the media play a key role in reporting on discrimination, yet media narratives about service animals and their owners too often fail to capture the complexity of policies and laws that govern their lives. In Canada, there is widespread public confusion about the rights of disabled people and their service animals. This incertitude is relevant to both disability and animal oppression. This research identifies nine frames within the media narratives, as well as evaluating perspectives from critical animal studies in the news articles. These frames, which emerge in the media reports, in their descriptions of human and (less often) animal rights, illustrate public confusion surrounding these rights. The confusion is inevitable given the many laws in Canada that govern service animals. Thus, to give context to the news coverage, this article also surveys the legal protections for disabled people who use service animals in Canada, and suggests that until the news media understand the legalities surrounding service animals, they will not be well equipped to fulfil their role of informing the public. This is a lost opportunity in light of the media’s potential role as a pivotal tool to educate the public about disability and animal rights.
The boom in trained service animal use and access has transformed the lives of travelers with disabilities. As a result, tens of thousands of people in the United States and Canada enjoy travel options that were difficult or impossible just a few years ago. Henry Kisor and Christine Goodier provide a narrative guidebook full of essential information and salted with personal, hands-on stories of life on the road with service dogs and miniature horses. As the travel-savvy human companions of Trooper (Kisor’s miniature schnauzer/poodle cross) and Raylene (Goodier’s black Labrador), the authors share experiences from packing for your animal partner to widely varying legal protections to the animal-friendly rides at Disneyland. Chapters cover the specifics of air, rail, road, and cruise ship travel, while appendixes offer checklists, primers on import regulations and corporate policies, advice for emergencies, and a route-by-route guide to finding relief walks during North American train trips.Practical and long overdue, Traveling with Service Animals provides any human-animal partnership with a horizon-to-horizon handbook for exploring the world.
No Abstract available.
This ongoing column is dedicated to providing information to our readers on managing legal risks associated with medical practice. We invite questions from our readers. The answers are provided by PRMS, Inc. (www.prms.com), a manager of medical professional liability insurance programs with services that include risk management consultation, education and onsite risk management audits, and other resources to healthcare providers to help improve patient outcomes and reduce professional liability risk. The answers published in this column represent those of only one risk management consulting company. Other risk management consulting companies or insurance carriers may provide different advice, and readers should take this into consideration. The information in this column does not constitute legal advice. For legal advice, contact your personal attorney. Note: The information and recommendations in this article are applicable to physicians and other healthcare professionals so “clinician” is used to indicate all treatment team members.
This article examines the social experiences of Service Dog handlers using survey data from adult US Service Dog handlers (N = 482). The main research question examined is how disability visibility impacts the experiences of Service Dog-related discrimination. Analysis reveals that half of all Service Dog handlers report experiencing discrimination but those with invisible disabilities report experiencing significantly more discrimination. For those with invisible disabilities, the decision to use a Service Dog prevents them from ‘passing’ while at the same time opening them up to increased skepticism about the legitimacy of their disability.
This article examines the relationship between the use of “fake” Service Dogs and the discrimination of Service Dog handlers using interview data from 25 adult Service Dog handlers in the United States. Most Service Dog handlers interviewed reported the use of “fake” or inadequately trained Service Dogs is the main cause for the discrimination they experience. This research finds many Service Dog handlers engage in boundary work, the ongoing process of creating and maintaining a division between those with a shared sense of identity as a “good” legitimate handler from “bad” or “fake” handlers to reduce discrimination. However, this boundary work ultimately supports internalized ableism with the main aim of keeping disability hidden. Changes in the current civil rights of people with disabilities to use a Service Dog should be based on the everyday lived experiences of Service Dog handlers.
The use of animals in various assistive, therapeutic, and emotional support roles has contributed to the uncoordinated expansion of labels used to distinguish these animals. To address the inconsistent vocabulary and confusion, this article proposes a concise taxonomy for classifying assistance animals. Several factors were identified to differentiate categories, including (1) whether the animal performs work or tasks related to an individual’s disability; (2) the typical level of skill required by the animal performing the work or task; (3) whether the animal is used by public service, military, or healthcare professionals; (4) whether training certifications or standards are available; and (5) the existence of legal public access protections for the animal and handler. Acknowledging that some category labels have already been widely accepted or codified, six functional categories were identified: (1) service animal; (2) public service animal; (3) therapy animal; (4) visitation animal; (5) sporting, recreational, or agricultural animal; and (6) support animal. This taxonomy provides a clear vocabulary for use by consumers, professionals working in the field, researchers, policy makers, and regulatory agencies.
This research topic aims to showcase some of the work being done to find a constructive way forward, expanding the effective and responsible employment of assistance dogs while managing the associated risks and conflicts. This includes supporting research into efficacy and best practices, promoting wider access to and for assistance dogs, and developing the support systems for handlers and their dogs.
No Abstract available.
Since 2005, service and therapy dogs have become more prevalent on campuses, whether utilized as part of an institutionwide effort to decrease anxiety in students during test‐taking seasons or for individuals with disabilities using therapy dogs regularly. Make sure that both your institution and your students are up to date on the responsibilities for both service animals and support animals on campus. However, the law defines service dogs and emotional support animals differently, and emotional support animals, therapy dogs and comfort animals are not necessarily covered by the laws and rulings that govern service dogs.
Japan learnt how to promote assistance dogs effectively by deliberating the issues and challenges that surrounded assistance dogs in the USA and Europe and the Act on Assistance Dogs for Physically Disabled Persons was issued in 2002. The aim of this paper is to provide information that may be useful for countries and areas that are seeking ways to regulate assistance dogs, especially in the context of the global problem in which dogs are falsely claimed to assist their partners. First, there is a description of the process through which Japan, where pet dogs have not been accepted in society, established the Act, which overcame the shortcomings of the previous situation. Second, it is shown the ways in which people living with assistance dogs have gained the right to have their dogs accompany them in public. Third, the current challenges faced by people with assistance dogs are documented. Finally, pictures of an example of an assistance dog certificate and of an assistance dog sign reveal how far the regulation of assistance dogs is achieved in Japan.
No Abstract available.
This case study evaluates the American’s with Disabilities Act requirements regarding service animal use. The first author was retained as a defense expert in a case where a woman placed her small dog on a table at a restaurant and when she was asked to sit at an exterior table, she sued the restaurant on the basis of disability discrimination. This paper evaluates the relevant facts of the case and clarifies when an animal qualifies as a service animal, and when a dog is just a dog.
This paper probes the distinction between the so-called emotional support animals (ESAs), a term that is specific to the USA and that has recently been the subject of significant media attention, and service animals. The attention devoted to ESAs has largely taken on the form of jokes and critical comments related to the absurdity of the ‘political correctness’ that makes it possible for pigs to fly in the passenger cabin of airplanes and llamas to accompany their owners on trips to the supermarket. Much criticism is meted out, also from within the disability community, against animal guardians who try to ‘pass their animals off’ as service dogs and ESAs, with a call for the establishment of clear-cut criteria for the definition of ESAs and service animals. The paper’s methodology is an analysis of the media accounts of legitimate and illegitimate service animals; an analysis that reveals how the boundary between legitimate and illegitimate is constructed through the building blocks of these stories. ESAs are something of a limit case that points to the cultural paradoxes that govern Americans’ relationships with companion animals and with concepts of disability. The paper also argues that the insistence on establishing firm boundaries between ‘legitimate’ service animals and ESAs actually fosters a politics of suspicion, which can easily slip into suspicion directed at the human handlers of the animals.
Psychiatric service dogs (PSDs) and emotional support animals (ESAs) play important roles for people with mental disabilities and their use is increasing dramatically in the US. However, there is little research on the effects of these newer types of working animals compared to the traditional service dogs, such as guide dogs, hearing dogs, and mobility service dogs. In addition, the increased use of inadequately trained service dogs and ESAs makes it difficult for people to simply appreciate the benefits of these animals and even people with disabilities who are accompanied by appropriate animals can be questioned and viewed with doubt. Although there are challenges and more research needs to be conducted on PSDs and ESAs, the reported benefits of companion animals, especially for vulnerable people, extend to PSDs and ESAs. Some studies on PSDs and traditional service dogs (SDs) have shown that both having dogs trained to perform tasks and providing them public access increase the benefits experienced by people living with such dogs. The US laws for people with disabilities that provide access to people with their animals to alleviate mental symptoms are revolutionary in the world. By providing guidance, mental health professionals can play a central role in improving the lives of people who are highly likely to benefit from these animals.
Dogs are filling a growing number of roles supporting people with various disabilities, leading to a chaotic situation in the U.S. Although the federal laws allow public access with working dogs only for people with disabilities, no governmental enforcement or management system for such dogs exists. Furthermore, there is no substantive way to confirm whether the dog is an adequately trained assistance dog or not, as neither the handlers nor the dogs are required to carry any particular certification or identification. Therefore, unqualified assistance dogs and incidents such as dog bites by assistance dogs sometimes are problems in the U.S. A governmental oversight system could reduce problems, but no information is available about the current uses of assistance dogs in the U.S. We aimed to investigate the current demographics of registered assistance dogs and the evolving patterns in uses of dogs during 1999–2012 in California. We acquired data on assistance dogs registered by animal control facilities throughout California. We used descriptive statistics to describe the uses of these assistance dogs. The number of assistance dogs sharply increased, especially service dogs, in the past decade. Dogs with small body sizes, and new types of service dogs, such as service dogs for psychiatric and medical assistance, strongly contributed to the increase. The Assistance Dog Identification tags sometimes were mistakenly issued to dogs not fitting the definition of assistance dogs under the law, such as emotional support animals and some cats; this reveals errors in the California governmental registering system. Seemingly inappropriate dogs also were registered, such as those registered for the first time at older than 10 years of age. This study reveals a prevalence of misuse and misunderstanding of regulations and legislation on assistance dogs in California.
History of Assistance Dogs
No Abstract available.
Formation of “The Seeing Eye,” a school for guide dogs, has played a vital role in fostering efforts to develop guide dog programs in the United States and throughout the world. This brief review is intended to highlight the historical evolution of guide dogs for the blind and to tell the story of The Seeing Eye.
The first guide dog school was established in Germany during World War I to care for German soldiers blinded in that war. Other schools in Germany followed. Observation by an American at one of the schools led to the creation of the first guide dog school in the United States in 1929, “The Seeing Eye.” Additional U.S. schools were opened during and after World War II. This article discusses the history of guide dog use by veterans, including the formation of the first guide dog schools in response to aiding blinded servicemen, and the involvement of federal agencies and guide dog schools in providing assistance to blinded veterans.
This subject will be covered in three sections, first, a brief history of how the idea of using trained dogs to help the blind was conceived, then the present-day methods of training guide dogs, and, finally, how the blind person is trained with their guide dog to work together as a team.
This article scrutinises issues around disability and dependent (interdependent) agency, extending these to non-human animals and service dogs, with a sustained reference to the training of guide dogs. It does this through a detailed engagement with the training methodology and philosophy of The Seeing Eye guide dog school in the 1930s, exploring the physical, bodily and instrumental means through which the guide dog partnership, and the identity of the instructor, the guide dog and the guide dog owner, jointly came into being. The novelty of the article lies in how it reconsiders what interdependence meant and means from the perspectives drawing from historical and sociological literature on dog training. In doing so it opens up new ways of thinking about service animals that recognise their historical contingency and the complex processes at work in the creation and development of interdependent agency.
This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made.
Dogs’ roles to support people with disabilities are increasing. Existing U.S. laws and regulations pertaining to the use of dogs for people with disabilities are only minimally enforced. Pushback legislation against some aspects of uses of assistance dogs currently is being passed or proposed in several states. Further, the U.S. Department of the Army and the Veterans’ Administration support only dogs trained by an Assistance Dogs International (ADI) or International Guide Dog Federation (IGDF) accredited facility. Lacking a mandatory national process for screening the selection, training, and placement of assistance dogs with persons who have disabilities, the U.S. offers a creative but confusing opportunity for people to train their own dogs for any disability. While no U.S. surveillance system monitors assistance dogs, other countries generally have a legislated or regulatory process for approving assistance dogs or a cultural convention for obtaining dogs from accredited facilities. We conducted an online survey investigating current demographics of assistance dogs placed in 2013 and 2014 with persons who have disabilities, by facilities worldwide that are associated with ADI or IGDF and by some non-accredited U.S. facilities. Placement data from ADI and IGDF facilities revealed that in most countries aside from the U.S., guide dogs were by far the main type of assistance dog placed. In the U.S., there were about equal numbers of mobility and guide dogs placed, including many placed by large older facilities, along with smaller numbers of other types of assistance dogs. In non-accredited U.S. facilities, psychiatric dogs accounted for most placements. Dogs for families with an autistic child were increasing in all regions around the world. Of dog breeds placed, accredited facilities usually mentioned Labrador Retrievers and Golden Retrievers, and sometimes, German Shepherd Dogs. The facilities bred their dogs in-house, or acquired them from certain breeders. Non-accredited facilities more often used dogs from shelters or assisted people in training their own dogs. Facilities in Europe and the U.S. place dogs in all roles; other parts of the world primarily focus on guide dogs. Expansion of assistance dogs in many roles is continuing, with numbers of dogs placed accelerating internationally.
