As a travel blogger I aim to be diplomatic when possible. I try to keep an open mind when it comes to situations that may seem obvious but underlying factors may be at work for which I am unaware. This post is anything but diplomatic. I am tired of the abuse of systems that are in place to protect those that are most vulnerable amongst us. Instead those regulations are skirted by those who want to board first or don’t want to leave their dogs at home even for a weekend trip. I’m not being polite any more, I am being blunt.
If you are considering booking travel or signing up for a new credit card please click here. Both support LiveAndLetsFly.com.
If you haven’t followed us on Facebook or Instagram, add us today.
Miracles
Let’s start with a bit of the miraculous. It’s rare that someone with a serious disability, especially in the case of use of their legs, is able to overcome their challenge during their lifetime. Perhaps with years of physical therapy, counseling, doctors, procedures, prosthetics – just maybe can those that are disabled begin walking again.
Somehow, oddly, miracles seem to happen on most domestic flights I take. Just yesterday a woman was shuttled down the jetway (at least 100 feet) during my flight, then maneuvered over a small ramp to the CRJ700, taken to her seat where she was able to transfer herself from wheelchair to bulkhead. Then, over the course of an hour and fifteen minute flight to Chicago, a miracle happened and she was able to walk off the airplane unassisted. The conversation I witnessed went like this:
FA – “Please be patient and wait until the other passengers are off first, sometimes [ground gate staff to assist the disabled] take a little while to get here to help.”
Passenger – “You know, I think I can make it.”
FA – “Ok, whatever you feel comfortable with doing.”
The Truth: I know, and the passenger knows that they are able to walk on and off the plane just fine. I see this on almost every flight. A passenger utilizes gate assistance to board with ease and then when they no longer need the advantage they are seeking, they simply will not wait for the help they so desperately needed before.
I’m not talking about the truly disabled. They should take all the time they need, and neither I, nor anyone else needs to get on a plane so fast that they would suggest anything other than the truly disabled take their time and are able to board and be seated with dignity and privacy. And I am also not talking about the elderly like my own grandparents who genuinely would be out of breath and unable to walk through a large airport, through security, etc. Those that have mobility issues have it both getting onto the plane and off of the plane. They need the help both when it is convenient and when it isn’t – because they genuinely need help. This post isn’t about them either.
If an airport-provided wheelchair is the only aid they use, it’s pretty unlikely that they are disabled when they are outside of the airport too. I can give only anecdotal experiences, and I am sure that there will be some readers who insist that there is a valid reason for this and my assumptions are inaccurate and heartless. They may be right. But they can’t be right about all of them and I doubt that I am the only one to have noticed this.
On my last trip to Rome I was awaiting a flight to Chicago with my wife and her cousin. A spritely older couple came by and sat next to us. They were moving things around and asked us to watch over their things while one of them ran to Duty Free before the flight. They disappeared after they finished their purchase and we soon joined the line for priority boarding (though not business class on this flight). Wheeling by us was the same couple who felt good enough to make it through Rome’s Fiumicino airport by themselves, do a little shopping, who knows what else – but the last 100 feet down the jet bridge was just too much for them. The same distance was no problem upon landing and learning they would have to wait for the plane to clear before the same service could be provided upon landing.
You can call me a cynic, but the honest amongst you will agree – some people are repulsively abusing a system put in place that should help those that truly need it and not provide an easy way through TSA and onto the plane a little early.
That’s Not A Service Animal
There seems to be some confusion about the difference between Emotional Support Animals and Service Animals (usually dogs). Service Animals go through hundreds of hours of training, costs thousands of dollars, have a clear uniform (a dog vest marking that they are Service dogs). Service dogs should be allowed on the aircraft, in public spaces, despite their usually larger size. Soldiers returning from war with PTSD have a particular need and should be allowed anything benefit that may help them overcome or manage their struggle.
But then there’s the vanity pet addict. This referee to the one who violates the system to avoid paying pet charges, putting their pet in the hold, or simply because they believe their pet doesn’t apply to the rules and limitations airlines and the FAA have put in place.
Emotional Support Animals are permitted and are difficult to disallow than Service Dogs. While Service Dogs must have marking, significant training and the user must demonstrate a specific and substantial need, Emotional Support Animals (ESAs) do not adhere to the same strict guidelines. In fact getting paperwork and processing for your Emotional Support Animal couldn’t be faster, easier… or cheaper.
For one low, easy payment of $79 you too can skirt the airline system at will. Don’t want to pay for your animal to join you in the cabin? No problem, establish your animal as an ESA and you can bring just about anything on board – even a pony!
I’m not suggesting that all ESAs are invalid – I am sure that they are not. But it’s gotten way out of hand. Whether it’s because passengers don’t like taking their chances with the baggage personnel caring for their animals in the hold or pilot’s remembering to turn on the heating – invalid ESAs are not the answer. Whatever happened to leaving your dog with the neighbors or a friend for a few days? What about doggy daycare?
As a rule, if you don’t medically need your animal to survive and make your way through the world it’s no different to me than parking in a handicap stall because you have to just run in for one thing. It’s a matter of convenience, of cost and not of need. If a real psychologist wouldn’t put their medical license on the line to defend your need to have an ESA, then it’s not a need, it’s a want.
Have you seen abuses of these systems with your own two eyes? Am I just too cynical to see the truth that all of these ESAs and gate assistance are needed?
I have scene a medical emergency called to also get off the plane first.
You are absolutely correct. As a retired airline pilot I saw this hundreds of times, and the flight attendants I flew with saw it even more. It was such common knowledge it was unremarkable.
I find it frustrating that we all have to pretend everyone’s “need” is an actual need and not an open abuse of the system.
You may not suggest all ESAs are imvalid, but I will. If you are truly so emotionally fragile that you can’t part with you maltese for a few hours, then how are you going to behave in a real emergency? You have no business on an airplane. The entire ESA concept is a farce, end it now.
Agree 110%
That’s unbelievably callous.
Agree as well !
As a retired airline employee (ground staff), we’ve been seeing this escalate for years. Problem is nobody seems to have a solution or do anything about it. Call (non-genuine needs) people out on it and you’re up against all kinds of lawsuits, cries of discrimination, demands for compensation etc.
Like you mentioned, when it’s obvious that people need assistance (elderly, physical and “obvious” mental handicaps) it should definitely be provided but letting this go to the dogs (no pun intended) is ridiculous. Solution?…..have a DOCTOR’s not for emotional support animal needs and make it a mandatory statement on driver’s licenses (additional charge incurred by DMV offices nationwide). You’ll see how quick that will stop.
…sorry, I mean’t doctor’s NOTE.
In order for an MD to issue a note justifying the emotional need for an animal to travel with the patient, a mental health diagnosis from the published DSM-V would have to be selected as justification. Only psychiatrists, nurse practitioners and psychologists receive enough training to apply the definitions of each mental condition. It wouldn’t be much of a solution if the note is written by doctors in a hurry to evaluate a patient in the 15 minutes allotted by insurance companies.
I wouldn’t be the right person to determine who should write the note and perhaps an MD is neither qualified nor has the time to do so – but I’d like to avoid the “doctors” that issue only cannabis prescriptions and advertise such. Doing so calls into question a solution that may be helpful and necessary for some because of the blatant abuse of the system. I’m not opposed to cannabis use for medicinal nor recreational purposes if approved by law in that municipality (though I participate in neither) but I’m staunchly against writing prescriptions for unprovable ailments with the only outcome being cannabis.
Point of order: A psychologist cannot diagnose anything. Only a doctor of psychiatrist can do so.
To me it is actually unbelievably callous to feign disability to move to the front of the line, or obtain any advantage. As the father of a disabled child, I would gladly trade any special concession to have my child be able to get around like any other child.
The gray area of “emotional support animals” is an area where many people take advantage of the compassion and generosity that is standard in our society. And, again, to me , those who take advantage of our compassion and generosity are low lives.
Thank you, again, Kyle for a great, thought provoking piece.
This is because the general public are entitled idiots.
The professionally diagnosed disadvantaged among us, whether physically mentally or both, warrant our compassion, respect and accommodation. Those feigning disability represent the odious within the census, their sociopathy not only prompting unwarranted inconvenience generally but specifically compromising the largess reasonably expected by those with disability issues. That some individuals have no shame is, unfortunately, a circumstance that appears without redemption. I’ve observed that many respondents to this blog appear to be frequent forward cabin passengers most of whom, it seems to me, appear to be both concerned travelers and those who reasonably expect those amenities for which forward cabin service is or should be celebrated. However, it seems to me that, in part, first class is also a state of mind in which civility is a sine qua non, a concept that knows no physical separation of accommodation.
Hi, Kyle. Great article.
As a person awaiting a total knee replacement, I routinely ask for a wheelchair when booking a flight. I can walk about pretty well but I walk very slowly and cannot navigate many airports (think Beijing, Bangkok, etc.). Once you are down for a wheelchair, the airlines all seem to have their own rules. Some require me to sit in a window seat and many ask that I wait until everyone has left the plane. I am happy to do what is asked. I am so grateful for those extra minutes to get settled in my seat and especially for the assistance in getting my carry-on in the overhead bin. I absolutely cannot deplane with my bags from remote stands and I can’t ride in those horrid busses standing up. If you see me happily moving around the lounge or popping over to duty free, don’t think badly of me. Sometimes disabilities are not readily apparent.
My apologies Christine if I have offended you. As stated in my post, I am not concerned with those who are genuinely disadvantaged but rather those who manipulate a system created to help those who have challenges in order to gain a petty advantage. That’s not your case, but I am quite certain others do engage in this (someone once bragged to me about it).
No apology necessary, Kyle. I wasn’t offended. I see it all the time, too.
I had to severely chide a co-worker not long ago for obtaining a fake ESA letter because “the airlines make it too hard and expensive to travel with my dog.” Translation: as long as people suck and justify faking disabilities for flimsy reasons like that, abuse of the system will happen. Just look at some of the comments to Matthew’s original post and you’ll see what I mean. I don’t have a good solution to the problem, though. Any time rules are tightened to crack down on abuse, it unfortunately also makes things more difficult for those who really need the accommodation.
There was a good solution to the problem before ESAs became en vogue: pay more or leave them at home. It feels like a decade ago that dogs became part of the family for some on par with human children. I can understand that some passengers might not want to kennel them or leave them at home. But just like I have to pay for a seat for my daughter, since dogs are just part of the family and can’t be left at home then why not pay for a full seat? I think a case could be made far easier for a child being an emotional support being more so than a dog so maybe it should be the dogs that have to pay for a full seat once they exit the puppy stage and children are free if they are declared ESAs. And if the objection is that larger dogs, unlike humans, have to ride in the cargo hold I would remark that this is because they are not humans, they are dogs.
Great article Kyle, and agree 100 percent. I’ve had to sit next to people with large dogs in first class–and have no objection to well-behaved dogs at all–but ones that yap constantly or are aggressive? They shouldn’t be allowed aboard in the first place. A plane is not a venue for an owner-doggie kitsch.
Glad to hear I am not crazy, sometimes I wonder…