Controversy over therapy dogs....NY Times article

The cousuler at the school my mother teaches at has a Golden that is a therapy dog. He uses him during his cousuling sessions. Many people, especially kids, feel much more comfortable with the dog their to talk to and interact with. He is offering a service, although it is not physical.

I would rather see people abuse the privilage a bit than have everyone become service dog nazis.

I think a therapy dog is different than a service dog (service dogs can go anywhere).  Correct me if I'm wrong, which I could be!

There is a legitimate need for a psychiatric service dog.  For people who don't LOOK sick, but without that dog could never leave home without having a panic attack, they are real and deserve the same clout as other service dogs.  With that sad, you shouldn't be trying to sneak a therapy dog in and claim it's a service dog.  I am on several lists for people with PSD and these people would not be able to function without their dogs, who were temperament tested and trained to perform a service - prevent or at least lessen the severity of panic/anxiety disorder.

Here is another category, or at least another term, according to this piece, an 'assistance' dog' for an autistic child. Anyway, it's just a nice story:

[linkhttp://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/16/eveningnews/main1622372.shtml]Assistance dog[/link]

I've been thinking about this a lot and trying to figure out why it struck a chord with me. 

I think what bothers me is that I've seen some wonderful things happen because of service dogs.  I hear beautiful stories about how assistance or service dogs have helped children, given people with severe epilepsy or Parkinson's their lives back, and now a place in Israel is training dogs to assist people with Alzheimer's disease.  If I'm ever disabled mentally or physically, I'd hope that a service dog could help me take my life back.

On the other hand, a few weeks ago my dog was almost attacked by a service dog.  She's doing agility when she's off duty and does not listen to her handler (the person she's assisting) and is dog aggressive.  She's off leash because her handler can't manipulate a leash around the agility course and because of this dog, I had to stop bringing my baby to class, which she'd really enjoyed, because I had to be a human fence between the service dog and many of the other dogs in class.  I had another service dog almost bite me when she was in my obedience class.  I don't resent that these people need dogs or have dogs, and I'd never do anything to restrict their right to have a trained assistance dog .  What I do resent is people (with or without a debilitating condition) putting a mail-order vest on their family pet and calling it a service dog, which not only affects the good will for people with legitimate service dogs, but can also endanger the public.

I know that it is incredibly expensive to raise and train a service dog, which is why people with a true need may take short cuts.  I guess I'd like to see some kind of certification or test so that only dogs who are capable of doing the job are asked to. 

I think it would be cumbersome to test dogs for specific tasks, since even a well trained service animal could make an error if the handler was very nervous, and thus not pass muster.  But, I do agree that prospective service dogs, whether they are owner or trainer educated, need to be of stable temperament and not prone to aggression.  Anyone who has a therapy dog has had to prove that they can encounter a friendly dog and stranger and not react badly.  So, it would seem fine to require the same of a service dog, which is, presumably, trained to a higher level.