Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2018/01/30...ted-flight.html
MY OPINION (and nothing more) is that this is yet another example of our culture's manifestation of "no harm/no fowl" running wild (pun intended!).
I have no problem whatsoever with true "service animals" such as well-trained dogs from a certified facility, assisting the blind. That makes total sense to me. The laws were first put into place so that people with real needs could utilize an animal that truly improved their ambulatory mobility. "Seeing eye dog" was the term back in the day.
But a "emotional support peacock"? That's just hogwash. (another pun intended, as people have tried to get pigs on flights as well).
Well, it's a good thing a mod didn't start a "political thread" here.
But, I agree people abuse the 'service' pet thing.
But you're a (edit- mod) as it is absolutely scientifically validated by multiple studies that animals DO help people with PTSD, or that are elderly and lonely, etc.
So, the peacock should have been allowed?
Sorry, this accommodation of special needs has been abused by pet owners who want to circumvent the rules and bring their pets on board when there is no legitimate disability.
Leave your peacock at home.
Leave your untrained dog at home. You don't have the right to subject your fellow passengers to being urinated on, bitten or experiencing public defecation. Flying is stressful and crowded enough without the entitled pet owners adding to the mix.