School doesn't allow service dog to accompany hearing-impaired teen

Hi all,

http://tinyurl.com/ymxhpj

I'm really puzzled by this one. I've read several stories, and watched
an interview, and the mother at least, strikes me as being a bit
mother-bearish (and somewhat annoying). However, I can't figure out the
educators. I don't understand why they would ban the dog, unless it's
because they don't like the family for not necessarily going through
proper channels (at least that's what the school claims). But that
seems like a poor reason for a decision.

The dog isn't strictly necessary as an educational tool. He has some
hearing with the aid of cochlear implants, has an ASL interpeter in
school, plus uses an FM system where the teacher's words are
transmitted into speakers that sit on his desk. However, the dog is,
as the mother calls it, an "independent living tool." He alerts the
boy to sounds - alarms, cars, trains, etc.

Now that said - he's not likely to be hit by a car or train in school.
And he's not terribly likely to be alone when a fire alarm goes off.
For purposes of school, the dog's most important role is to provide a
more normal "access" to school - making it safer for the kid to get to
and from school alone.

So, I wonder the following:

1. What harm will be done by having the dog present?

I would guess that there'd be a few days of distractible students who
are fawning over the dog, but they'd get over it pretty quickly. And
besides, service dogs are a part of life - and school is a fine place
to expose them to the situation, and train *them* how to handle it.

Animal hair allergies? How common are dog hair/dander allergies? Are
they as problematic as cat allergies? And service animals are
protected at other venues - restaurants, theaters, public transit etc,
so I'm not sure if the allergy issue is valid given that?

2. Aren't service dogs protected? Isn't the school violating federal
law by banning the dog, despite the dog not being "strictly necessary"
to his education? If a blind kid had an assigned (human) guide who
took him or her from class to class, would the school be allowed to ban
the dog then?

3. The mother says the boy needs to be with his dog 24x7 in order for
proper bonding and training to occur - I don't know anything about
service animals - is this a valid concern?

I'd appreciate other's thoughts on the matter - particularly why the
school might choose to make the decision that it did.

Cathy Weeks

Cathy Weeks wrote:

The dog isn't strictly necessary as an educational tool. He has some
hearing with the aid of cochlear implants, has an ASL interpeter in

Er, the *boy* has some hearing, with the aid of the cochlear implants.
;-)

Sorry for the misplaced modifier.

Cathy Weeks

"Cathy Weeks" wrote in message
ps.com...
Hi all,

http://tinyurl.com/ymxhpj

I'm really puzzled by this one. I've read several stories, and watched
an interview, and the mother at least, strikes me as being a bit
mother-bearish (and somewhat annoying). However, I can't figure out the
educators. I don't understand why they would ban the dog, unless it's
because they don't like the family for not necessarily going through
proper channels (at least that's what the school claims). But that
seems like a poor reason for a decision.

The dog isn't strictly necessary as an educational tool. He has some
hearing with the aid of cochlear implants, has an ASL interpeter in
school, plus uses an FM system where the teacher's words are
transmitted into speakers that sit on his desk. However, the dog is,
as the mother calls it, an "independent living tool." He alerts the
boy to sounds - alarms, cars, trains, etc.

Now that said - he's not likely to be hit by a car or train in school.
And he's not terribly likely to be alone when a fire alarm goes off.
For purposes of school, the dog's most important role is to provide a
more normal "access" to school - making it safer for the kid to get to
and from school alone.

So, I wonder the following:

1. What harm will be done by having the dog present?

I would guess that there'd be a few days of distractible students who
are fawning over the dog, but they'd get over it pretty quickly. And
besides, service dogs are a part of life - and school is a fine place
to expose them to the situation, and train *them* how to handle it.

Animal hair allergies? How common are dog hair/dander allergies? Are
they as problematic as cat allergies? And service animals are
protected at other venues - restaurants, theaters, public transit etc,
so I'm not sure if the allergy issue is valid given that?

2. Aren't service dogs protected? Isn't the school violating federal
law by banning the dog, despite the dog not being "strictly necessary"
to his education? If a blind kid had an assigned (human) guide who
took him or her from class to class, would the school be allowed to ban
the dog then?

3. The mother says the boy needs to be with his dog 24x7 in order for
proper bonding and training to occur - I don't know anything about
service animals - is this a valid concern?

I'd appreciate other's thoughts on the matter - particularly why the
school might choose to make the decision that it did.

Cathy Weeks

Apparently, hearing and signal dogs are permitted in any public building,
including schools, just as dogs for the blind are.

http://www.k9web.com/dog-faqs/service.html

If this is the case, there aren't proper channels to go through. And it
doesn't matter if they don't like the kid or family.

I hope the family wins in court.

Allergies are a valid issue. However, I am sure if it is an issue, they can
work around it.

Jeff

One thing which troubles me on this-my experience is that before you have a
service dog, you have to go through a LOT of training and preparation. It
doesn't sound, based on the article like this is happening. There should be
no question about bonding with the dog when the dog is already out in public
because that has already happened in training. I also wonder what other
demands have been made-for example, has the school been told that the
student will have to take the dog outside every few hours and there's no
safe place to do it or something? I just have the feeling that there's got
to be a bit more to the story than we're seeing-because I honestly don't
know why a school would face the legal repurcussions that could come from
barring a trained, certified service dog unless there's something else going
on.

I'm on a "signing with children" board which has many Deaf adults and
parents of Deaf children, and I'll be very interested in seeing what is said
there about this.

--
Donna DeVore Metler
Orff Music Specialist/Kindermusik
Mother to Angel Brian Anthony 1/1/2002, 22 weeks, severe PE/HELLP
And Allison Joy, 11/25/04 (35 weeks, PIH, Pre-term labor)

Donna Metler wrote:
One thing which troubles me on this-my experience is that before you have a
service dog, you have to go through a LOT of training and preparation.

One of the articles that I read said that she's been fighting with the
school for a year or thereabouts on this issue - so I *think* there has
been prep work that's been happening for quite awhile.

safe place to do it or something? I just have the feeling that there's got
to be a bit more to the story than we're seeing-because I honestly don't
know why a school would face the legal repurcussions that could come from
barring a trained, certified service dog unless there's something else going
on.

That's been my feeling too - I just can't figue out *why* the school
would ban the dog, so I must assume there's more going on than has been
made public.

Cathy Weeks

"Cathy Weeks" wrote in message
oups.com...
Donna Metler wrote:
safe place to do it or something? I just have the feeling that
there's got
to be a bit more to the story than we're seeing-because I honestly
don't
know why a school would face the legal repurcussions that could
come from
barring a trained, certified service dog unless there's something
else going
on.

That's been my feeling too - I just can't figue out *why* the school
would ban the dog, so I must assume there's more going on than has
been
made public.

I tried to look up more about this, but it seems like every article I
find is the same one with slight editing changes. Here is what I can
glean:

1. The school has said that the family would have to follow proper
channels to get permission for the dog to be in school. This says to
me that either the family has not followed those channels, or they
tried to and were denied.

2. The school says they are keeping the dog out because of State and
Federal guidelines. Notice the wording there "because of...the
guidelines", not "because the guidelines allow it." This says to me
that the school feels they are required to keep the dog out, probably
because the proper permissions were not gained. This seems to be a
reasonable stance, because otherwise, anyone could show up and claim
they needed their animal, right? So they allow service animals, as
long as they have been properly registered.

3. The school maintains that the dog is not needed at school. The
family has not argued that, nor have they tried to argue that the dog
is needed for traveling to and from school. In fact, the only reason
the family wants the dog at the school is to maintain the "bond." I
know that they do encourage people and their service animals to be
together as much as possible, and even police dog trainers take their
dogs home with them to preserve this bond. So it does seem to me that
the family has a case that not allowing the dog at school would cause
harm, but I don't know enough about it to say for sure one way or the
other.

4. The law doesn't seem to be a slam-dunk in this area. I'm not sure
why not -- it seems to say very explicitly that "any blind person, or
deaf or hearing handicapped person, or other physically handicapped
person accompanied by a dog guide, shall be entitled to any and all
accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of all public
conveyances, public amusements and places of public accommodation,
within the commonwealth, to which persons not accompanied by dogs are
entitled." But perhaps it is because the dog is not expected to
perform a service in this setting, and because the teen has full
access to the facility without the dog.

Bizby

bizby40 wrote:
1. The school has said that the family would have to follow proper
channels to get permission for the dog to be in school. This says to
me that either the family has not followed those channels, or they
tried to and were denied.

According to the mother, there *are* no processes or proper chanels -
that there is nothing set up at the school to handle this. She made it
*sound* like they had tried. She also suggested that the ADA made it
clear that they should not have to go through such channels, either
way, and that they have been trying to get permission for over a year.
Not sure one way or another how I feel about this. But you are right -
we don't know all the details.

2. The school says they are keeping the dog out because of State and
Federal guidelines. Notice the wording there "because of...the
guidelines", not "because the guidelines allow it." This says to me
that the school feels they are required to keep the dog out, probably
because the proper permissions were not gained. This seems to be a
reasonable stance, because otherwise, anyone could show up and claim
they needed their animal, right? So they allow service animals, as
long as they have been properly registered.

I'm not sure I agree with this. A library or theater or college campus
or restaurant aren't entitled to bar someone with a service dog, until
they've grant permission for someone with a service dog to enter. I
really don't think there's going to be a worry about any non-disabled
kid showing up with a dog, and trying to make a case for bringing the
dog. It's pretty obvious which dogs are service dogs, and which
aren't. And the kid is profoundly deaf - and has a known, serious
disability. *IF* it becomes a problem, then all the school has to do,
is ask for proof that it's a service dog.

3. The school maintains that the dog is not needed at school. The
family has not argued that, nor have they tried to argue that the dog
is needed for traveling to and from school.

But I think this is a double standard. If a blind kid is provided with
a full-time human guide who takes them around the school, would the
school really be able to argue that he or she didn't need the
seeing-eye dog at school?

In fact, the only reason
the family wants the dog at the school is to maintain the "bond." I
know that they do encourage people and their service animals to be
together as much as possible, and even police dog trainers take their
dogs home with them to preserve this bond. So it does seem to me that
the family has a case that not allowing the dog at school would cause
harm, but I don't know enough about it to say for sure one way or the
other.

4. The law doesn't seem to be a slam-dunk in this area. I'm not sure
why not -- it seems to say very explicitly that "any blind person, or
deaf or hearing handicapped person, or other physically handicapped
person accompanied by a dog guide, shall be entitled to any and all
accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of all public
conveyances, public amusements and places of public accommodation,
within the commonwealth, to which persons not accompanied by dogs are
entitled." But perhaps it is because the dog is not expected to
perform a service in this setting, and because the teen has full
access to the facility without the dog.

From the quote above, I don't think that the school has the right to
ban the dog. Regardless of whether the dog is needed for his
education.

Cathy Weeks

Hi --

My questions would be:

1. Is it really a Service Dog, with certified training, etc.? If not,
the dog has not legal protections.
2. Dog allergies *can* be very serious. In addition to allergies,
there are children who are completely terrified of dogs, to the
extent that they will become incapable of functioning around one.
Both of these situations would require that the competing needs of
the boy and the other children be considered.
3. If the boy has some hearing with the cochlear implant, it isn't
clear why he actually *needs* the dog. It may be that he needs an
accomodation, but perhaps not that particular one in order to be
able to get around safely.

All of the above are questions, not answers.

My two cents,
--Beth Kevles

http://web.mit.edu/kevles/www/nomilk.html -- a page for the milk-allergic
Disclaimer: Nothing in this message should be construed as medical
advice. Please consult with your own medical practicioner.

NOTE: No email is read at my MIT address. Use the AOL one if you would
like me to reply.

In article om, Cathy Weeks
says...

Hi all,

http://tinyurl.com/ymxhpj

I'm really puzzled by this one. I've read several stories, and watched
an interview, and the mother at least, strikes me as being a bit
mother-bearish (and somewhat annoying). However, I can't figure out the
educators. I don't understand why they would ban the dog, unless it's
because they don't like the family for not necessarily going through
proper channels (at least that's what the school claims). But that
seems like a poor reason for a decision.

The dog isn't strictly necessary as an educational tool. He has some
hearing with the aid of cochlear implants, has an ASL interpeter in
school, plus uses an FM system where the teacher's words are
transmitted into speakers that sit on his desk. However, the dog is,
as the mother calls it, an "independent living tool." He alerts the
boy to sounds - alarms, cars, trains, etc.

Now that said - he's not likely to be hit by a car or train in school.
And he's not terribly likely to be alone when a fire alarm goes off.
For purposes of school, the dog's most important role is to provide a
more normal "access" to school - making it safer for the kid to get to
and from school alone.

So, I wonder the following:

1. What harm will be done by having the dog present?

I would guess that there'd be a few days of distractible students who
are fawning over the dog, but they'd get over it pretty quickly. And
besides, service dogs are a part of life - and school is a fine place
to expose them to the situation, and train *them* how to handle it.

Well, there's service dogs and there are service dogs. Seeing eye dogs are
fairly essential to just get around. That's a commonly recognized exception to
a no-dogs rule.

But the given reason here is to foster *bonding*. As if dogs and boys who go to
school don't bond. I don't know if I'd go in for that either as a school
administrator.

They are training dogs as companion and sevice dogs for all kinds of
disabilities now. It's a fair question what's really needed in a place like a
school, which is different from what's needed on the street. And this boy has
other supports, including an interpretor.


Animal hair allergies? How common are dog hair/dander allergies? Are
they as problematic as cat allergies? And service animals are
protected at other venues - restaurants, theaters, public transit etc,
so I'm not sure if the allergy issue is valid given that?

It's *extremely* common. I have problems around some dogs.


2. Aren't service dogs protected? Isn't the school violating federal
law by banning the dog, despite the dog not being "strictly necessary"
to his education? If a blind kid had an assigned (human) guide who
took him or her from class to class, would the school be allowed to ban
the dog then?

My bet would be - the seeing eye dog would be regarded as more essential and
allowed.


3. The mother says the boy needs to be with his dog 24x7 in order for
proper bonding and training to occur - I don't know anything about
service animals - is this a valid concern?

I find that far-fetched.

Banty

Beth Kevles wrote:
Hi --

My questions would be:

1. Is it really a Service Dog, with certified training, etc.? If not,
the dog has not legal protections.
2. Dog allergies *can* be very serious. In addition to allergies,
there are children who are completely terrified of dogs, to the
extent that they will become incapable of functioning around one.
Both of these situations would require that the competing needs of
the boy and the other children be considered.
3. If the boy has some hearing with the cochlear implant, it isn't
clear why he actually *needs* the dog. It may be that he needs an
accomodation, but perhaps not that particular one in order to be
able to get around safely.

All of the above are questions, not answers.

As I've read it, the dog is indeed a genuine service dog, trained to
help the deaf.

The rest of it is fuzzy. No one argues that the dog serves any
educational purpose whatsoever, or that the boy needs the dog in any
way, shape or form in school, where he has a full-time aid. Indeed, he
has apparently been attending local public schools his entire life
without a service animal. And, IIRC, there are no issues with his
travel to and from school.

But he will apparently need the service animal more and more as he
gains independence in the world. And the parents are taking the
position that in order to foster a bond between the boy and the dog,
the dog needs to be with him 24/7 -- meaning that the dog needs to be
in school with him solely for the purposes of bonding, not providing
any services.

I'd hazard a guess that what the school wants is for the family to
request modification of the IEP to permit the use of a service animal.
At the very least, the school would want a 504 plan in place. That's
what schools generally require for any educational accomodations, right
down to sitting in the front of the class. I'd also hazard a guess
that the parents really don't want to do that. Right now, the school
district is almost certainly paying for the full-time aid. The last
thing that the parents would want would be to go in to the Committee on
Special Education and suggest that the dog could provide some of the
services that the aid is now providing, and risk losing services. Just
a guess on my part, though.

I also have no way of knowing whether the parents are right about the
bonding. It would seem to me that they should have tried to obtain the
dog over the summer to allow for intensive training and bonding at that
time. Then, if 24/7 contact was needed thereafter, then, well, the
parents are right about bringing the animal to school.

I'm also not real clear how much hearing the boy has. He's been
described as profoundly deaf, with cochlear implants. But there is
also reference to use of an FM unit at school, of the type that has a
box on the desk (as opposed to sound field or ear unit). Now these I
DO know about, since we've long considered getting one for One, who has
auditory processing disorder. The FM unit lets you hear more clearly
as it cuts down on distortion and background noise. But, frankly, if
your hearing is so bad that you can't hear a fire alarm, the FM unit is
not going to work for you. So he has at least sufficient hearing to
allow him to get at least some of the lecture orally. But ... he is
also sufficiently disabled to require an aid.

No easy answers for me. I guess I err on the side of -- if this is
what he will need to gain independence as he becomes a teenager, and
eventually to lead a normal life, then what difference does it make if
it serves a purpose in the school. Let him have it.

Barbara