[T4NG]

Lets be real, emotional support animals are a completely nonsensical burden for everyone on the flight that outweighs what the passenger bringing it gets. Its not justified to bring on a pet into a metal tin can that everyone now has to deal with. This action isnt fair to people with allergies and phobias and they cant get anything out of this aside from putting up with it.

[sp332]

1. If you need a support animal, you should leave.

2. If you're allergic to a support animal, you should leave.

Why is one of those more acceptable than the other?

[JumpCrisscross]

> If you need a support animal

People are contending the claim of "need". Nobody is seriously contesting the right to fly of service animals, as defined under the Americans with Disabilities Act [1].

[1] https://adata.org/factsheet/service-animals

[geofft]

In theory a system can be designed where the people in group 2 don't encounter animals when they fly. As a person with flight-relevant allergies, namely peanuts, I've been happy that many airlines are moving towards other snacks, and I don't need to insist that every single airlines does as long as I have reasonable options.

A system cannot be designed where people in group 1 don't encounter anxieties when they fly.

So, from a pure, amoral optimization standpoint, it's better to have a system where people in both groups can fly than one where people in only one group can fly.

(Which I think is the position you're advocating.)

[throwawaysecops]

Leave what? Leave a confined space that previously did not have animals in it? Leaving because you are allergic to support animal is irrational because it would have to happen first. Tube empty of animals already happened.

This argument requires holding support animal in tube is already foregone conclusion.

[sp332]

Leave a confined space that has an allergic person in it? I'm not sure what your example means because of course either one could be "first". Why should one's disability (allergy) exclude the other passenger from a space?

[JumpCrisscross]

> Why should one's disability (allergy) exclude the other passenger from a space?

Per my other comment [1], there is a muddling of terms going about. Service Animals [2] are "individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability." They are well-behaved and medically mandated. They are also legally protected by the ADA.

Emotional-support animals may have been medically prescribed but, critically, are not necessarily trained [3]. Heinously, some people claim their pets are emotional-support animals despite lacking the medical prescription. (They do this to skip the fee airlines charge for transporting an untrained pet.)

Nobody is assailing Service Animals. Some are upset about emotional-support animals. Most are upset about non-medically prescribed animals' owners misrepresenting them as emotional-support or Service animals.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16311646

[2] https://adata.org/factsheet/service-animals

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_support_animal

[sp332]

No, we're talking about allergies and annoyance to other passengers. Those aren't going to change based on how much the person needs them or what paperwork they have.

[JumpCrisscross]

> No, we're talking about allergies and annoyance to other passengers

We're talking about the relationship between two things. The rights of the allergy sufferer versus the rights of the animal owner. The weight of the latter varies with medical necessity and the risk the animal poses to others on the plane.

Allergies are a medical condition. Service animals are trained animals serving a medical need. Emotional-support animals also serve a medical need, but being untrained come with a greater safety and comfort risk. Pets don't serve a medical need; when represented as emotional-support animals, they're being transported by someone who made a false and willful misrepresentation to the airline for monetary gain.

[syrrim]

3. If you need a support animal, and want to bring it in confined spaces with other people, you should make sure it's hypoalergenic

[toomuchtodo]

How many people with allergies equates to one challenged person who requires a service pet?

[T4NG]

support animals are generally a joke and not used for their intended purpose anymore as the article articulates while being allergic is a much more real issue and unfair as a passenger.

[sp332]

The article argues for stricter checking. You're proposing a ban.

[notyourday]

Just auction it: offer $10 to everyone who thinks they are inconvenienced. Keep upping a price until either there is no one who is inconvenienced or until you decide the trip is not worth it for you.