Magic Kingdom and pit bulls

The problem is that under the pretext of being service animals and under the guise of helping people who need extra help, large numbers of non-service dogs are now being brought into the parks. Some guests do not feel safe being around so many other people's pets. As the OP noted, the situation is making some guests feel uncomfortable and unsafe. There is an assumption that all the animals are service dogs, even when some of them are clearly not. People with disabilities have rights, and the general public also has a right to a safe and non-threatening environment.
 
No one here is arguing that that doesn’t happen. No one here is arguing that it doesn’t create a problem. I will say that while you make it sound like the parks are flooded with random dogs, I think you’re exaggerating the issue. I will also reiterate that the basic human needs of people with disabilities are more important than you feeling comfortable at all times.
 
I’m going to step away from this conversation now. I’ve said my piece and I don’t expect to convince you of anything; I just wouldn’t have felt right letting what you said go by without comment. I don’t want to go in circles or risk getting angry enough that I might break the board’s code of conduct.
 


That basic "need" for therapy animals is a relatively new. How did the world survive before the advent of them? It has more to do in my OPINION with the growing sense in society that I am so special that therefore I am entitled to whatever I want and to heck with anyone else. Kind of like the tail wagging the dog so to speak.
 
My personal preference would be no real dogs in the theme parks. It's been a slippery slope that went from service dogs to emotional support dogs and even pets are not being screened out from entering the parks, although in theory they are not allowed, but there is a lack of enforcement. It's gotten to where many guests feel unsafe about having to encounter so many dogs in the parks.

I'm frankly disgusted by this suggestion. While I understand the frustration re: emotional support animals that may not meet reasonable standards of training for an animal that's to be brought into a public space, the idea that a blind person should be made to go without the dog that enables them to safely navigate chaotic spaces and enjoy a measure of independence, or that someone who suffers from seizures should be made to go without the dog that alerts them to oncoming seizures and protects them from the harm that could befall them if they were to fall during an episode just because you don't like being around dogs...no. Just no. People with disabilities have a right to enjoy public spaces, same as you, and they have a right to the tools that enable them to lead fuller, safer lives.

And I am frankly appalled by the disgust shown for the original assertion. I happen to agree with the general premise in the first quote above. The thought that anyone with a disability should automatically be provided with an accommodation above everyone else without regard for the impact of that accommodation is ridiculous. With regard to service dogs, the problem comes in when companies, such as Disney, are not allowed to verify the medical necessity for a service dog or don't do so for fear of being sued. Without such controls in place, we are left with a zero sum game...either let every dog in without question or none at all. When faced with that choice, I would fully agree and support that no dogs be allowed. Does that penalize the individuals with valid needs for a service dog? Unfortunately yes. No one wants to force blind people to navigate the park without their trained companion. But the alternative scenario to allow anyone with a pet in a vest into the park is absolutely not acceptable.

I would wager that anyone with a true need for a service dog would have no problem going through a screening process set up by Disney. It is sad that individuals who fraudulently assign an ESA designation to their pet feel entitled to abuse the system.
 


And I am frankly appalled by the disgust shown for the original assertion. I happen to agree with the general premise in the first quote above. The thought that anyone with a disability should automatically be provided with an accommodation above everyone else without regard for the impact of that accommodation is ridiculous. With regard to service dogs, the problem comes in when companies, such as Disney, are not allowed to verify the medical necessity for a service dog or don't do so for fear of being sued. Without such controls in place, we are left with a zero sum game...either let every dog in without question or none at all. When faced with that choice, I would fully agree and support that no dogs be allowed. Does that penalize the individuals with valid needs for a service dog? Unfortunately yes. No one wants to force blind people to navigate the park without their trained companion. But the alternative scenario to allow anyone with a pet in a vest into the park is absolutely not acceptable.

I would wager that anyone with a true need for a service dog would have no problem going through a screening process set up by Disney. It is sad that individuals who fraudulently assign an ESA designation to their pet feel entitled to abuse the system.
Have you thought, at all, about how people who use "ESA" and skirt the rules are REALLY hurting those with a valid need for service animals more than anyone else? Especially when you take into consideration your response and those who respond like you.

The "discomfort" of people otherwise pales in comparison to the invalidation of necessary and well trained service animals and the humans they serve caused by these ESAs.
 
Have you thought, at all, about how people who use "ESA" and skirt the rules are REALLY hurting those with a valid need for service animals more than anyone else? Especially when you take into consideration your response and those who respond like you.

The "discomfort" of people otherwise pales in comparison to the invalidation of necessary and well trained service animals and the humans they serve caused by these ESAs.

The thought that the non-disabled portion of the population should have to sustain any and every possible "discomfort" is unwarranted. I have a disability, but I don't demand that other guests compromise their experience to accommodate me. No one is saying that blind people shouldn't be able to have valid service dogs. My post said that if we are given the choice of allowing anyone who wants to bring in a pet with a vest without any standards or questions or not allowing any dogs at all, then it's a no-brainer. I'd vote no dogs in that event. My opinion stands.
 
That basic "need" for therapy animals is a relatively new. How did the world survive before the advent of them? It has more to do in my OPINION with the growing sense in society that I am so special that therefore I am entitled to whatever I want and to heck with anyone else. Kind of like the tail wagging the dog so to speak.
My guess is that people who need an emotional support animal stayed home instead. I, for one, would prefer for people to get out and enjoy life with their ESA rather than remain homebound. I consider every dog in a WDW park to be an ESA that is required by the handler. It is really more from a necessity for me to not have my vacation ruined by suspicion and judgment. My attitude was the same back in the day when there were cries of "FAKER!" about people in wheelchairs. Frankly, figuring out if someone requires an accommodation is above my pay grade.
 
My guess is that people who need an emotional support animal stayed home instead. I, for one, would prefer for people to get out and enjoy life with their ESA rather than remain homebound. I consider every dog in a WDW park to be an ESA that is required by the handler. It is really more from a necessity for me to not have my vacation ruined by suspicion and judgment. My attitude was the same back in the day when there were cries of "FAKER!" about people in wheelchairs. Frankly, figuring out if someone requires an accommodation is above my pay grade.

It's about more than just comfort. People are bringing into public spaces pets that are poorly trained and poorly socialized and claiming they are ESA animals. It's only matter of time before some poor child is mauled at WDW by a supposed ESA animal. I love my pup and find her calming but I don't take her to restaurants or shops because she's still quite young and wants to greet everyone by jumping on them and slobbering on them. Before I hurt my knee I was training her not to do that but the training went by the wayside after I got hurt since I could do leash control and the rest of my family is too permissive with her.
 
I love my dog, take him so many places, but Disney nope that’s a hard no for me.

I think the main issue with this whole trend is the people who are abusing this policy are going to ruin it for people who really need it. This is not just at Disney but everywhere. When someone gets a bite, or seriously injured (which I hope never happens) there is going to be a policy change and people who really do need these animals for so many real issues are going to have so much more red tape to be able to have their service animals with them. People who abuse policies like this make me so mad!

Again not just at Disney but everywhere.
 
I work in a public space (A public library) and this is becoming more and more prevalent and an issue.

The ADA states that

Only dogs are recognized as registered *service animals*
Entities must provide access for *service animals*

Service animals are defined as dogs that are individually trained to do work or perform tasks for people with disabilities. Examples of such work or tasks include guiding people who are blind, alerting people who are deaf, pulling a wheelchair, alerting and protecting a person who is having a seizure, reminding a person with mental illness to take prescribed medications, calming a person with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) during an anxiety attack, or performing other duties. Service animals are working animals, not pets. The work or task a dog has been trained to provide must be directly related to the person’s disability. Dogs whose sole function is to provide comfort or emotional support do not qualify as service animals under the ADA.

Some State and local laws also define service animal more broadly than the ADA does. Information about such laws can be obtained from the State attorney general’s office.


When it is not obvious what service an animal provides, only limited inquiries are allowed. Staff may ask two questions: (1) is the dog a service animal required because of a disability, and (2) what work or task has the dog been trained to perform. Staff cannot ask about the person’s disability, require medical documentation, require a special identification card or training documentation for the dog, or ask that the dog demonstrate its ability to perform the work or task.

Obviously this is being taken advantage of and I see it everyday. I've said no to cats, birds, and rabbits/cavies. However it is almost impossible and a slippery slope for a lawsuit to bring this up with someone with a dog, because if you do it to someone with an actual disability, you are toast.

These situations are also causing real harm to the people with actual service dogs, as they are being greeted with judgement based on the behavior of people who are taking advantage of them.



In addition to the provisions about service dogs, the Department’s revised ADA regulations have a new, separate provision about miniature horses that have been individually trained to do work or perform tasks for people with disabilities. (Miniature horses generally range in height from 24 inches to 34 inches measured to the shoulders and generally weigh between 70 and 100 pounds.) Entities covered by the ADA must modify their policies to permit miniature horses where reasonable. The regulations set out four assessment factors to assist entities in determining whether miniature horses can be accommodated in their facility. The assessment factors are (1) whether the miniature horse is housebroken; (2) whether the miniature horse is under the owner’s control; (3) whether the facility can accommodate the miniature horse’s type, size, and weight; and (4) whether the miniature horse’s presence will not compromise legitimate safety requirements necessary for safe operation of the facility.
 
Well yes, someone's NEEDS do come before someone else's COMFORT.

However, I'm not convinced that most of these "emotional support" animals are needed. I really wish they had some type of legit certification/verification process, that businesses actually followed through with.

Agreed. If it is a true need than it should come before general comfort of someone else. But I feel like some of the ones that are obviously not service animals should not be allowed. I also don't believe that therapy/support animals should be allowed int he parks either. not sure about Florida laws but most laws only require places to allow service animals like seeing eye dogs or ones that are there to detect illness/seizures. Usually emotional support animals are exempt from these so they do not have to be allowed in.

However, from the wording it sounds like the OP has a bigger issue with the fact that it was a pit bull and not just that there was a dog. This stereotype for pit bulls being vicious always frustrates me. They can honestly be some of the sweetest caring dogs out there but people just assume they are mean and vicious because of the stigma the breed has. I'd much rather see a pit bull around as a service animal than many other breeds that people usually don't think about much. These "bully" breeds like pits, doberman, rottweilers, etc. usually end up being some of the biggest babies. Honestly the little dogs are the ones that are usually mean.
 
Delta Airlines has just released details of their new policy for Service Animals vs Support Animals, and it's logical IMO. Service animals should always be allowed. Shots must be up to date and certified by a vet (I believe) that the animal is okay to fly and truly (emotionally) needed instead of just wanted; hopefully this will rule out those that are trying to game the system with a pet.
 
However, from the wording it sounds like the OP has a bigger issue with the fact that it was a pit bull and not just that there was a dog. This stereotype for pit bulls being vicious always frustrates me. They can honestly be some of the sweetest caring dogs out there but people just assume they are mean and vicious because of the stigma the breed has. I'd much rather see a pit bull around as a service animal than many other breeds that people usually don't think about much. These "bully" breeds like pits, doberman, rottweilers, etc. usually end up being some of the biggest babies. Honestly the little dogs are the ones that are usually mean.

Dogs, like people, are ideally not stereotyped. That said...people will and do so.:sad2:


As a dog lover and owner, I wouldn't take my dog to the parks most of the days of the year unless they had on protective booties...if we think it's hot in the parks, imagine what the heated concrete does to their paws:sad: Once it gets around March/April here (FL), my dogs are walked in the wee hours of the am or late at night to avoid burning their paws. If it's too hot for your bare feet, it's too hot for the dogs'.paw:
 
I love my dog, take him so many places, but Disney nope that’s a hard no for me.

I think the main issue with this whole trend is the people who are abusing this policy are going to ruin it for people who really need it. This is not just at Disney but everywhere. When someone gets a bite, or seriously injured (which I hope never happens) there is going to be a policy change and people who really do need these animals for so many real issues are going to have so much more red tape to be able to have their service animals with them. People who abuse policies like this make me so mad!

Again not just at Disney but everywhere.
I agree. I love my dogs. Unfortunately, I am acquainted by a few individuals who brag about obtaining their requisite Emotional Support paperwork for their pets so that they may fly with them at no charge or avoid boarding them when they travel. It's abuse of what could be a legitimate claim that hurts everyone.
 
This issue is not as much about dog breed, as it is about dogs that are not properly trained to be in crowded, public spaces and be able to contain themselves when kids come around to try to pet or show attention. Just this week, a girl was bitten by an emotional support dog on a Southwest flight. Recently, Delta and United have instituted guidelines about emotional support and service animals. Disney has to follow suit. It's only a matter of time before a guest gets mauled at the happiest place on earth. With all the lawyers WDW has, I'm surprised this has yet to be addressed.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-it-went-for-her-face/?utm_term=.19eaa42a5e0e

"Delta Air Lines said in January that it is requiring advance documentation, such as proof of health or vaccinations and signed paperwork confirming that the animals can behave. The new requirements are in response to an 84 percent increase in incidents since 2016, from urinating or defecating, to barking or growling, to mauling a passenger whose face needed 28 stitches. Delta said it carries nearly 250,000 service or support animals each year.

“The rise in serious incidents involving animals in flight leads us to believe that the lack of regulation in both health and training screening for these animals is creating unsafe conditions across U.S. air travel,” John Laughter, Delta’s senior vice president, said in a statement.

United Airlines announced similar changes earlier this month. The new policy also comes on the heels of dramatic increases in the number of passengers flying with comfort animals. About 76,000 flew last year, nearly double the 43,000 in 2016..."​
 
If the rule is that only service animals should be allowed, then that's what should be happening. All non service animals should be kept out - from German shepherds to chihuahuas. But I'm not sure why we're singling out pit bulls - the vast majority of pit bulls are sweet, gentle family dogs. Give me a pit bull over an Akita any day.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!











facebook twitter
Top