Be the Judge: Banning Service Dogs
July 2, 2010 by Kathy McManus
Emily Kysel has a potentially fatal allergy to paprika. The 24-year-old Indianapolis city worker nearly died five years ago from eating chili, and since then, The New York Times reports, “her allergy has sent her to the emergency room five times and caused her to jab herself with an anti-allergy injection 11 times, sometimes from just inhaling paprika nearby.”
Kysel’s boss banned co-workers from eating any foods containing paprika—like buffalo wings-- at their desks. Her family helped her buy a $10,000 allergy-detection service dog that alerts her to the presence of paprika by jumping on her. But the first day she took the golden retriever to work, a co-worker with an allergy to dogs suffered an asthma attack. Kysel’s boss then banned the dog.
Kysel contends that the city of Indianapolis has treated her unfairly by barring her service dog while allowing blind employees to use theirs. She has filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in a case The Times says “raises tough questions about how to balance the sometimes clashing interests of co-workers with disabilities.”
You be the judge: what’s the most ethical way to settle this case? Should one person’s allergy outweigh another’s?
Find More ///
- in Workplace, Pets & Animals
- in Blog
- about disabilities, dogs
Related ///
Questions for: Jim Loehr
The sports psychologist talks about how “full engagement”—bringing energy, focus, and discipline to every moment—is a responsible act that leads to better performance, and better lives.
Europe Deems 2014 the Year Against Food Waste
Should we take waste stats more seriously?
TED Talk: Gary Lauder
The venture capitalist’s brilliant idea for reducing traffic accidents: a new sign.
A Champion for Homeless Pets
The founder of The Best Friends Animal Society explains the origins of the “no kill movement” and his continued efforts to help homeless animals.
Second Line
Directed by Danny Glover, one man’s journey from indifference to understanding.
Is Yoga Bad for You?
A new debate has taken hold over yoga’s health benefits, or lack thereof.
236 Comments
What do you think? Leave a comment
July 4, 2010 by gloria
Ms Kysel's allergy could cost her life, a blind person may not die, but will be extremely disabled without a dog, the person suffering the allergy to dogs could always take medicine to avoid the effects of having a dog nearby or find an alternative arrangement between them to suit each others needs..?.
It is a matter of working things out like civilised human beings, it is about compromise for the sake of helping others, it is about caring, about being compassionate.
Once this is made clear, the parties involved may find a solution.
Reply
August 13, 2010 by Mary
I agree there is always some kind of solution to every problem.
Reply
October 7, 2011 by ronald vanderberg
It looks like a simple solution would be to seperate the two employees far enough to not have an allergy problem, surely there is enough room to sit these apart so that there is no reaction from either.
February 11, 2011 by LEP
Separate the people! Put them in separate rooms!
Reply
September 23, 2011 by Dee
absolutely, separate them! unless it's a tiny office with only a few people in total working there, they should be able to move somebody to an area where they will not be affected by the other person's legitimate(!) need.
And if the office is that tiny there are other options including changing the work hours of the two employees (which may or may not be feasible depending on the type of business, when it's open, and the work the employees perform) so that they don't overlap, or permitting one or both of them to telecommute part of the time (which also may or may not be feasible depending on the work they perform and their work style, their access to an offsite computer - at home or in another agreed upon location).
There are many possibilities if you open your mind and think about it. Not all them apply to every situation, and some situations may not have a solution due management inflexibility or the inability to negotiate a solution that meets everyone's needs.
But there are solutions, and a lot of them if you just look for them.
October 29, 2011 by philip di russo
work them at different hours that way no accidents
November 3, 2011 by Charlene
Had this same problem in school with my daughter's service dog. The faculty simply made sure that the dog and the allergic child never met. And no rooms were shared by the dog and the allergic child. Also Poodle versions of service dogs are available. Labradoodles and Goldendoodles have a decent hyperallergenic coat to them. That is what we have. You can't ban a service dog!! They are allowed!!
November 12, 2011 by Ann
November 3, 2011 by Charlene
Had this same problem in school with my daughter's service dog. The faculty simply made sure that the dog and the allergic child never met. And no rooms were shared by the dog and the allergic child. Also Poodle versions of service dogs are available. Labradoodles and Goldendoodles have a decent hyperallergenic coat to them. That is what we have. You can't ban a service dog!! They are allowed!!
___
You are an idiot! One does not 'order' a Service Dog in a certain breed or color.
And btw, those Doodle DOgs ARE NOT BREEDS! They are mutts that someone in their backyard bred to make money. No REPUTABLE BREEDER would ever breed a mutt.
And coming from backyard money-grubbing nitwits means that the parents have NOT been screened for hereditary health problems which can run as high as $3000 per dog before breeding. As screening can not be done util the dog is 2 years old, no one training or needing a Service Dog would acquire a mutt like that since (a) the parents were not screened and (b) the pup can not be screened until long after it is time to start training.
November 18, 2011 by Claire
Actually Anne, Australian Labradoodles are a recognized breed in Australia that were originally bred specifically for this purpose - to create service dogs for people with dog allergies. They are highly regulated, have full pedigrees and bloodlines that are tested for health conditions, and are highly consistent in their temperament and non-shedding coat. My mom has one as a service dog and it has been fantastic.
This is an important distinction from the "backyard" labradoodles and goldendoodles that may make wonderful pets or service animals, but yes, are just designer mutts with little consistency in what you get - many do actually shed, and some can be quite big or have hereditary health issues that haven't been screened for.
August 9, 2011 by mark
very sensible comment.
Reply
August 14, 2011 by Free American
Dogs have no place in work places or in restaurant...period!
Reply
August 24, 2011 by Edward
Hope you nrver get in a position to need one you never know
August 27, 2011 by lulu
I find these kinds of uncompromising comments counter productive in any discussion. This attitude about dogs in public places is a matter of personal opinion not of fact. It is quite narrow minded and shows quite a lot of disdain for the needs of the disabled and handicapped. Frankly, I would rather eat with the dog than have lunch with such an opinionated and close-minded human.
August 28, 2011 by Sam
Agreed no dogs. So now the woman with dog allergies has less value than a dog. Uneceptable. There is a growing problem with people getting service dog credentials for their pets. Perscribing an animal absurd. We have devolved into a dog worship society where they now have more rights,protections and resourcres than humans. Dont believe me then check out the alarming number of dog spas,clothes,birthday party services and day care that has been popping up.
September 3, 2011 by PR
You don't have any place in a work environment. Period.
September 3, 2011 by Argle Bargle
Sure they do. But if you don't like it, don't work there or eat there. I'm sure most people would be willing to let you go your merry way.
September 5, 2011 by Bill
So, if you're blind you should not be allowed to have a job? It's easy to make sweeping statements, but it's usually a product of a lack of patience in dealing with complicated issues. If you don't have the tolerance to think it through then, perhaps it's best to leave it to those who can and will. Otherwise, you come across as bitter and narrow-minded. But, then, do you care?
September 7, 2011 by glenn hamilton
Federal and StateLaw does not allow for this. Anyone interferring with a service dog or their owner can be criminally charged with Federal and State crimes. Civil action is allowed also with attorney's fees being paid by the offender in a Federal court.
September 8, 2011 by Lacey
"There is a growing problem with people getting service dog credentials for their pets. Perscribing an animal absurd." You're an idiot, simple as that. It's not like people take the dogs they have and go get credentials. They BUY these animals who have been TRAINED to help humans with disabilities or situations like with this woman. It says in the ARTICLE that her family paid $10,000 for the dog. It's no ordinary pet, like you seem to think. So both of you negative, counter productive people don't want to meet in the middle with the issue, instead just be extremely narrow-minded and biased. The person with the food allergy shouldn't go out in public for fear she might come into contact with her allergen? Or constantly pay the medical bills and whatnot? The blind person shouldn't get a job? Come on! That's just utter bullcrap. People like you two are not helping anyone's situation, honestly. The person with the dog allergy can take some freaking OTC or prescription allergy medicine to combat their allergy. Much simpler and easy to fix that problem that way. And if you go in a restaurant where they allow service dogs, and you don't agree, take your business elsewhere. Quit being so dang negative. We don't need more people like that in the world, thanks.
September 11, 2011 by Marjorie Hartley
Oh, c'mon!! There is nothing more essential in a disabled person's life than his service dog! The employer needs to solve the problem without banning the dog.
October 6, 2011 by Lora
I see both sides of this story. The laws regarding service dogs, was originally designed for "Seeing Eye Dogs" which allowed otherwise healthy blind people, to live life independently, hold jobs, and be productive members of society. But the law designed for a small group of people, has now extended to cover a variety of "Companion Dogs", dogs that detect impending seizures, diabetic incidents, dogs that will pull wheelchairs, open doors, fetch keys, and even act as stabilizers for people who have balance problems. One can now train and certify their own dog as a "Companion dog", eligible to wear a vest that classifies them as an allowed animal. The law is being abused. Allergies to food, should not qualify a person to take a food detecting dog to work with them. Pack your own meals, so you know what's in your food, ask you employer to ban eating in the work space, and exercise your due diligence in keeping an Epi-pen on your person, in case of accidental exposure. Service dogs are not the answer to every small problem in life!
October 6, 2011 by wornwinger
my dog acts better than some humans I have seen in restaurants.and he is cleaner.also.there are dogs that shed less ,wiemerind, something like that.
October 15, 2011 by Kyle
The person has a right to live as normal a lifestyle as anyone else and if it takes a service animal to help acomplish this AND it is back up by law then, they should NOT be hindered in any way. If the person with alergies were alergic to say.. extreme light... would the employer have to darken the office at the expense of the other employees to satisfy them ? The service dog is the answer to this problem.
October 22, 2011 by randyfordyce
service animals provide a vital function and do not cause any problems. People cause problems with service animals by taking a hostile attitude toward them or trying to treat them like a pet. They are not pets they are working animals with a job to do.
November 8, 2011 by Jim
I would never call your comment stupid, even if I do think it is
November 8, 2011 by pele
i have a service dog as well. when i go plcs where someone has allergies we stay on the other side of the room and the allergic person takes allergy meds. a service dog is like anything else that helps a person, eg glasses, wheel chair, cane, etc. to not allow them is to not allow me to go the american disablity act was passed to make my life 'normal'.
November 8, 2011 by Judie
The ADA, American's with Disabilites Act has given those who need the right to have Service Dogs with them at all times even if they are not needed at the time like with friends who could help them do what the SD does for them. My SD helps me pick up items I drop as bending from my wheelchair is painful, will bring me the phone or my hand held radio if I were to fall as Cell phones do not work in my area and this allows me to live independently. It has been proven that a SD and their owner should never be separated unless necessary. The bond between the two is very important. That is why the ADA has made this law that they are allowed anywhere with their owner.I can undersand a problem with allergies, I have allergies to perfumes but can't expect others not to wear them but when it's just for a selfish reason, just not wanting to be bothered with having a dog around, the person wanting to deny someone who needs a SD to have them any place, needs an eye opening to the needs of others and we can only pray that they never have to find out the hard way, why it's so important.
September 7, 2011 by glenn hamilton
I am basing this answer on Federal law. {Americans with Disability Act}. Accomendations for both workers can easily be obtained. The employer MUST work with both disabled people without violating anyone's rights. A simple solution is too seperate both workers. The employer can not ban the dog or deney the allergic worker with their disability. This is not rocket science.
Reply
October 27, 2011 by Gary
Your solution seems so easy, unless the employer is in a four room, 1000 square foot office with 5 employees. What if the person with the dog allergy is the assistant to the person with the paprika allergy? Will accommodation require the employer to relocate, rent more space, etc. MUST would be a pretty harsh reality if it puts the employer out of business.
September 8, 2011 by FRANK
A dog is a dog, keep them away from where food is served, children may be. I understand that they help a certain group of people but the majority of us dont want a dog around while dining. Groups of people smoke medical pot, they cant smoke indoors, or even outdoors. STAY OUT PERIOD!
Reply
October 11, 2011 by DJ
Some people don't want children around when they are dining. I would rather have a well-behaved dog at the table next to me than an ill-behaved, loud or crying child while I am trying to enjoy a meal and conversation with adults.
November 29, 2011 by Mikki
Most people are totally unaware that my service dog is in a restaurant....She is under the table and totally silent. Unlike the many bratty kids running around sneezing on other people's tables, poking their fingers into food etc. My service dog allows me the chance to get out and live as normal a life as possible. Just because there are those who don't like dogs does not mean I should sit at home because she offends you. She is very well trained, in fact much better trained than 90%+ of the kids out there today. She does not blow her nose on clothing, pull things off shelves, tear open packages and throw temper tantrums. She does not inconvenience you at all. She is welcomed in every store and restaurant we go to because they know her behavior and trust her. People who buys service dog vests for their pets are a big problem though and it would help if they were reported more. But as those are mainly "arm candy" dogs, they are rarely reported because too many think they are too cute to report!
December 17, 2011 by Toni
Ignorant, mis/mal-informed, bigoted (for/against any subject) people are not able to construct a well informed opinion, and should SHUT THEIR TRAPS. Thou speaketh therefore about that which thou knowest nothing.
October 10, 2011 by Ronbo
You want to be caring and compassionate, then say that the person with allergies can just take medicine every day. Uh, ever take allergy meds? They do have side effects, and don't completely wipe out the symptoms. If I take a job in an office, I don't expect to have dogs around. And since I'm allergic, I don't want itchy red irritated eyes all day at work, and no pill will solve that.
Reply
October 29, 2011 by phlip di russo
my dogs are medicial type dogs and let me know if some thing is happening to me and if i snore or shallow breathe they will sniff at my mouth or nose and will jump on me to wake me up due to sleep apnea if i am asleep and start to snore they will wake me up or get my spouse to wake me. even when i 'm awake they will come near me to see if i am ok if there is hell to pay and theywi'll bark, scratch the bed room door to get my wife to look see what is going on . these dogs are chihuahuas good watch dogs and very alert if they like you you can come near me if not they will growel and if one insists to try and touch they WILL BITE!!
October 15, 2011 by Jason
I just want to note that those with animal allergies, just like those with food allergies, might not just be able to "Take a pill" and get over it. I have to take extremely high doses of medication in order to remove allergy symptoms... but at levels that are dangerous, and make it impossible for me to function and work. Forget operating something like a car.
And if I don't take the medication, I can also end up in the hospital unable to breath as I deal with the dander.
It is a hard ethical question for an employer, and a compromise must be found. If one can work from home, they should be allowed to do so (and let's be honest, with today's technology, they should be MORE then able to set that up depending on the job).
However, to tell someone "Just take a pill and get over it" is insensitive. The person had a full blown asthma attack, they do not have a mild allergy.
Reply
October 27, 2011 by Anita
Please understand that not everyone can just take a pill and get over it. I have severe allergies to cat and dog dander. I get allergy shots weekly, take 5 pills every single day, carry an epi-pen and 2 inhalers at all times. Your service dog for your food allergy can kill me. I cant even work beside anyone who has a cat or dog in their house. I cant have friends who have cats or dogs inside or out because I cant visit them and they certainly cant come into my home. I cant even buy a used car for fear that a previous owner had a cat or dog. Why is it fair for someone to bring a service dog for an allergy along to work when that same dog because of my allergy can kill me. Why cant that person take a pill and get over it.
December 5, 2011 by Tula
I agree. As someone with a dog allergy, my condition is no less valid than a person with a different allergy. I absolutely hate going to restaurants where dogs are present, since it makes it impossible forme to enjoy a meal. I understand that some people need these animals, but where do we draw the lines? How do we handle when one person's disability encroaches upon the rights of another person? I once had to fight to keep unemployment benefits after turning down a job where they had a canine "mascot" roaming the offices. The people at that company even took offense when I told them I couldn't work there because of the dog. I've found that "dog people" can be quite prickly and defensive when they encounter people who do not share their enjoyment of dogs. I personally don't get the appeal of dogs, but being allergic, I couldn't enjoy them even if I wanted to. Cats on the otheer hand... :-)
I've seen similar "wars" erupt between handicapped people in wheelchairs and those without (of which I am one) when it comes to handicapped parking. Some wheelchair folks think their needs trump those who don't use wheelchairs, but both have valid, yet different, needs. For example, traveling a greater distance from car to entrance door can be a bigger problem for the "walking wounded" vs. those on wheels. And both have need of the wider HC parking to open door fully for access and access ramps to avoid steps/stairs.
It's frustrating because it's difficult enough for those with disabilities to manage without us fighting amongst ourselves.
October 19, 2011 by Dau Tieng 59
rikaThe problem here is that there are two disabled people here. One has a dog to warn her of the presents of paprika and the other perso has a allergy to dogs. So the situation is one person needsthe dog and the other person needs the dog to go away. Both people are covered by the ADA, both are at risk for death from Anaphylaxis shock. The difficulty comes in helping both people without injuring the other. She sued the local government, so it would be reasonable to assume that is the employer here. People could be moved to another department or stay in the same department but their location moved to another location. This is one of the "unforseen consequences" of legislation. Two people with equal rights that require one or the other to yield.
Reply
November 6, 2011 by Gerry
Leave the dog in the back yard. Why should anyone have to put up with a dog at work. A service dog for the blind is another story. Gerry
Reply
November 12, 2011 by Ann
Stuff it up your ****.
A person who can not walk and ned shelp is just as disabled as someone who is blind.
You have no right to judge whether the person in the wheelchair is 'deiabled' enough to suit you.
December 6, 2011 by Jay
I think Emily Kysel is full of crap and seeks attention. Look at me, I'm special. Office workers don't carry paprika around with them. Ms. Kysel needs to pack her lunch. I do not believe that she has had that many "allergic reactions" but I'm convinced she really lays down the drama when the opportunity arises. Just my opinion...I have seen and heard people who were allergic to anything and everything to suit their need for attention, or to be dramatic about something they just plain do not like or enjoy. The potential for LEGITIMATE allergies to dogs far outreaches her "allergy" to paprika. Sorry, the dog has to stay at home.
Reply
December 15, 2011 by kbm
I disagree. . . the woman with the dog allergy should supersede this woman who can bring her own food from home and buy her own food. She needs a dog to help her decide to eat something at workplace? Absurd. She can buy her own food or bring it from home and the problem's solved. Is she such a glutton that she can't hold off when someone brings spice cookies to the kitchen?
She is a mature adult capable of deciding what and what not to eat. If she's ended up in the emergency room time and time again for accidentally ingesting paprika, that's because she's not being prudent. All she has to do is say no to unknown foods just as any diabetic has to say no to certain foods or anyone with Crohn's disease has to say no to certain foods or anyone cutting carbs or on any sort of restricted diet. She does not need her dog.
Reply
December 28, 2011 by Lee
I feel for both of the people in this situation; however, the person with the paprika allergy can't just bring their own food and not eat what is brought in. Merely sniffing the airborne particles from other sources can trigger a reaction.
July 6, 2010 by Kimm
Legally both people with disabilities must be accomadated. If the person with asthma can be treated using anti-histamines and asthma control medications, in addition to having both employees as seperated as the job allows, then that would be a solution. As asthma can itself be life threatening, it must be considered a disability, if the worker has a history of it, and a proven by allergy testing, allergy to dogs.
Since many prepared foods are not fully labelled, then another approach would be NO FOOD in the work environment at all. If no food is allowed then that risk is taken away. It would also be relevant to know how many of the emergency treatments needed for the woman with the paprika allergies occured in the work environment. Need versus cause.
Difficult all around as so many factors.
Reply
August 24, 2011 by John Larson
I have allergies and allergy induced asthma. It is better to avoid the allergen than take antihistamines. Personally if I was the person that was allergic to dogs I would get another job or work from home if possible.
Reply
September 1, 2011 by Eric
No. No, they don't. Companies must make reasonable accomodations. If it is too onerous, they are not obliged to accomodate a disability. If the company can accomodate both, they are obliged to. If the costs are too high, they are not. It is a fuzzy line, but there is a line.
The only thing complicating this case is two separate ADA claims that must be considered as a whole.
Reply
September 3, 2011 by PR
No food at work? 8 hours is a long time to go without lunch.
Reply
October 7, 2011 by karmine
The company could ban food except in specified areas -- like cafeteria or break rooms -- absolutely no food or uncovered beverages. The company setting this rule can do this in the best interests of the computer equipment the employees are working around. Then the person with sensitivy to paprika is covered without the need of a dog. Then the one allergic to dogs is covered.
October 8, 2011 by Rod C. Venger
There's no inherent right to feed ones face at their desk or other workstation. It seems like the employer covered himself by banning paprika from such dishes as hot wings. He can go further by just disallowing food in the work-space. Asthma is only a disability when a doctor says it is. The occasional allergic reaction is not by nature a disability. There's a difference between anaphalaxis and getting the hives or wheezing. One kills, the other does not. Clearly the one most at risk has to take precedence but if the risk is so great that the world has to stop in order for that worker to pass, then perhaps she should be declared disabled, take her SSDI money and cut her hours. If she's so worried about her safety then she should be worried about the safety and well-being of others too. I'm disabled and have been for over a decade. I ask no one for anything, not even a parking placard. It's not all about me.
October 10, 2011 by gphx
As soon as a workplace goes no food it has compromised the ability of diabetics to manage their blood glucose. If they go no beverages then they've screwed people such as those with Sjogrens who suffer from a debilitating level of dry eye and dry mouth and whom typically require constant fluids.
It's great this employer, up til now, has been accommodative. It sucks it's become so complicated for them. Ultimately a court will sort it out. Not sure what the answer is. Perhaps if more positions were of a telecommute nature there'd be less conflicts. In their own living room people can do whatever they need to.
Reply
October 11, 2011 by Willow
There is a such a thing as glucose tabs, and they are medicine, not food.
http://www.relion.com/diabetes/glucose-products/glucose-tablets
October 25, 2011 by Colleen
I have diabetes... glucose tabs are wonderful for initial treatment of low blood sugar but you generally need to follow it up with something more substantial. I also use other food items to prevent low blood sugar from happening. Banning all food from a work environment would undoubtedly be a major problem for me.
July 9, 2010 by Judy Denton
I just posted my comment on FaceBook. I indicated that each allergy is just as life threatening as the other in this instance, and the person with the allergy to the dog could just stay away from the dog. And this is coming from someone who owns (or I should say is owned by) 11 animals. All of which are rescues and yes, they are all spayed and neutered.
Reply
November 29, 2011 by Mikki
The one thing that absolutely no one has mentioned is Allerpet D or Allerpet C. The D is for dogs and C is for cats. Yes, it will take a few moments of time for the person who owns the pet to apply it but it is highly effective. It is a liquid that is wiped on the dog or cat that suppresses the animal's dander which then does not cause allergies. Between that and having the allergic person moved elsewhere in the office, things should be easily managed. That is assuming the allergic person is willing to compromise. Considering she is the one who rushed to file a lawsuit, something tells me she is not. From all things written and said about her, she is more a disgruntled employee who was angry as she was no longer the person who got the most sympathy in the "disabled" game in the office. After all, not much trumps a service animal. Just in case you had no idea, service animals are not only dogs, they are also cats, ferrets and miniature horses. Just because it isn't something you like does not mean your likes and dislikes control everyone else. They are not a lifestyle choice but a medical necessity.
Reply
December 5, 2011 by Tula
Wow, judgemental much? Sorry, but one person's disability is no less valid than another's. The law is clear that both must be accommodated. I find it disturbing that all thes dog lovers are so willing to dismiss an allergy because it affects animals that they like (and some seem to obsess over).
July 20, 2010 by Jillian
If no one is allowed to bring Paprika to work because someone is allergic to it, no one should be able to bring a dog to work because many people are allergic to dogs.
Someone's suggestion of "no food" in the work areas seems to be a great suggestion. It would suck for employees who normally eat at their desk (I was one of those), but the employer could justify it that employees are usually more productive when they take a quick break away from their desk and also the crumbs are no good for the keyboard.
The service dog to sniff out paprika just seems stupid. A friend's son has a lot of food allergies, but the solution certainly wouldn't be bring something to school that other kids are allergic to. He packs his own lunch and if his allergy was severe enough that just inhaling an irritant could be a problem I assume he'd avoid the cafeteria and would be the only one allowed to eat anything in the classroom.
Having environmental, seasonal, dog and cat allergies myself, I sympathize with the woman with allergies and especially with the severity of hers, but her expectations seem to be extreme and just a way to get easy money or attention. If that's not the case, then the only other expectation is that she has coworkers who hate her guts and are dragging in things like tea with paprika just to harass her. Maybe she wants her dog to catch the culprit if they really suspect something like this. But again this is all sounding a little too dramatic to be real.
As someone mentioned, a more reasonable expectation would be to have no food eaten at any employee's desks and she could avoid the cafeteria. If foul play is suspected, any innocent person with dog allergies could be asked to be temporarily understanding (given an enclosed area with an air filter, etc) while they get to the bottom of it. There has to be more to this story.
Reply
February 11, 2011 by LEP
I wish people wouldn't wear strong smelling perfumes as I am very allergic to them, thus cannot work in an office environment!
Reply
August 27, 2011 by David
Ever been to a high school lately. People just spray ax up and down the halls to inflict their chemical toxins on everyone else, and get very self-rightous if confronted about it.
October 10, 2011 by Asif Alkuri
The woman's paprika allergy is FATAL To my knowledge, dog allergies can't kill
Reply
October 12, 2011 by Lee
You are incorrect in your assertion that a dog allergy is not fatal. The person who is allergic to the dog is asthmatic--it's not just a case of getting the sniffles. I have lost a loved one to an asthma attack that could not be stopped with medication.
November 12, 2011 by Ann
July 20, 2010 by Jillian
If no one is allowed to bring Paprika to work because someone is allergic to it, no one should be able to bring a dog to work because many people are allergic to dogs.
__
TOugh. Those who need their Service Dog to 'see' or move' (wheelchair or balance) have no choices.
ANd less than 5% of people are truly allergic - most jsut imagine it.
And they can TAKE injections and fix the problem. They may not like the side-effects of the drug but they can still funcion.
Reply
December 5, 2011 by Tula
Not everyone can just take injections or a pill for allergies. Some of us have other conditions that contraindicate such things. For example, may people with autoimmune diseases are not able to take medications or vaccinations that relate to immune function (like allergies) due to conflicts with the condition or medications used to treat it. Must be nice to be so dismissive of other people's health problems. I hope you don't ever have to walk in their shoes.
August 13, 2010 by Mary
After reading about this and saw where there is a person that has allergies to dogs that works there, what does the person with the allergies do about them since there is already a dog there???? Ms Kysel's Allergy almost kills her when she has a reaction. I would allow her to have her dog as long as it doesn't bark or growl or attempt to bite etc. to disturb other people. I would not want her life on my head if some employee decides to sneaks something in anyway as there is usually one that would probably try anyway. A human's nose is not sensitive enough to sniff it out, where as the dog is trained and has very sensitive smell. I have never seen any of these service dogs be agressive or unruly. They are highly trained to serve not to be agressive. Most go through one to 2 years of training depending on what type of services they are needed for.
Reply
August 22, 2010 by Chris R.
These allergies are completely out of hand.
What happened to natural selection? We can't baby someone at the expense of everyone else, either allow no dogs, or allow ALL dogs.
Reply
March 14, 2011 by Amber
100% Agreed.
Reply
March 18, 2011 by living
Allergies are occurring because of the misuse of insecticides, solvents and toxins. Did you know that people with allergies are less likely to get or die from cancer???? When there are a large number of people getting sick, something is really wrong, it is a symptom. If you let the people with allergies die, you will find yourself dying too. People who get cancer feel great, they don't sneeze, wheeze and feel sick.
When I was a kid, only a few people had allergies. I now have allergies, my kids were born with allergies, many of their friends have allergies or diabetes. This is not NORMAL, but it is becoming the norm.
August 10, 2011 by JBarnes
Allergies are an auto-immune disorder. It's an exaggerated mis-reaction by the immune system to harmless "invaders". There is quite a bit of evidence indicating that it's the prevalent and increasing use of immunizations that is leading to the marked increases of auto-immune disorders including common allergies. There is not evidence that increasing toxins or pesticides are the culprit. Nor is it logical, unlike the link with immunizations.
October 6, 2011 by Ruy
To the fellow that said that there is no link to increasing exposure to toxins causing allergies: that is simply not true, there are a number of studies that do directly link not only allergies, but asthma (a form of allergic response) as well to atmospheric pollutants and toxins. A simple example: Poison ivy/poison oak are both plants that release a TOXIN, your body's response to that toxin is a rash, or to be more general, an ALLERGIC REACTION.
August 25, 2010 by Peggy
I don't think paprika is a commonly used item. And I've never seen anyone sprinkling paprika as they eat (hence no chance of "airborn"). Since the person getting asthma/respiratory problems due to dog allergy can't get away from the dog, and food can be banned from work area, I think the service dog should stay home. I agree that something doesn't quite ring true to this story.
Reply
August 13, 2011 by ryan
What if one of the woman's coworkers eats Indian food at lunch and then breaths on the woman accidentally? We just let her die since it was done on the coworkers lunch hour, that seems pretty lame don't you think?
Reply
August 13, 2011 by Ryan
Not true it is one of the main spices used in all of these indian restaurants around town and also in potatoe salad that is served in deli's.
Reply
September 14, 2010 by Breyer
I use paprika daily, and based upon your comment, I believe that it is far more common than you may think. Perhaps this misconception is part of the problem. You can't see it, don't know whether it is present, can't smell it or taste it? Then how could the girl? The dog on the other hand, can smell it and is trained to alert the girl to the presence of the paprika.
The girl's allergy is life threatening, the dog allergy is at worst inconvenient. There has to be some balance here, and it has to be tilted in the girl's favor. Likely, the dog allergy, (if it was indeed an allergy and not just a dislike for dogs which is more common) could be dealt with by simply moving one person to a different area. It seems highly likely that this person deals with people who own pets daily, and would therefore have the pet dander on their person, clothes and personal effects, yet doesn't end up in the hospital as a result.
Sure, banning all food may solve the problem, but it will cause many to hate the girl for trying to stay alive. It is a way to handle it perhaps, but it is not the least drastic.
Worried about liability? Try defending a wrongful death action for illegally withholding the one thing that could have saved a girl's life because it was inconvenient to do so.
Reply
August 6, 2011 by Joe Smith
Just fire the lying trouble-making ho and walk away. She just wants attention.
Reply
September 3, 2011 by PR
I like this answer.
October 2, 2011 by Karine
How very rude of you .. It helps to put your brain in gear before typing ...
August 9, 2011 by Michelle
Apparently you know nothing about allergies. Your comment is just ignorant. In your opinion an asthma exacerbation triggered by animal dander is just an inconvenience.
Reply
August 21, 2011 by For_real
For some people allergies to animals are no more than an inconvenience on the same level as "hay fever." But for a great majority of us, including those of us with allergen-induced asthma, animal allergies are life-threatening & cause anaphylactic reactions just as the woman with the paprika experiences (or as those who have peanut allergies.) While food allergens can be limited by keeping food out of the office, an animal's dander is spread throughout the ventilation system. This means that the solution should be: no dogs allowed & no food allowed either.
Reply
August 28, 2011 by Cbtu77
Americans with Disabilities Act states that a service animal is permitted anywhere that the public is allowed, work included. This is a federal law and supersedes any local and state law.
September 8, 2011 by jennifer
Asthmatic reaction to dog allergies are not merely inconvenient. It's just as severe as the food allergy. If you've had pet allergies you understand this but for those who don't- Once an animal has been somewhere dander, oil, fur... is left behind. The allergens are present long after the animal has gone. I rented an apartment years ago and while unpacking I started to itch and wheeze as though there was an animal there. I called the manager who said the former occupant had a dog but the carpets had been cleaned. The manager had been been on site when the cleaners were there. I looked at the carpet and could still see dog hair. Apparently the cleaners didn't think to vacuum first. The point is- this dog hair had been carpet cleaned yet was still causing a bad reaction. And yes- I take daily antihistamines and use a daily inhaler. Just because there are drugs out there doesn't mean they are enough. The company in this story either needs to accommodate both or neither since they both have the same issue.
Reply
September 27, 2011 by JESSIE PERRYMAN
I WOULD NT BE A LIVE TODAY WITHOUT MY SERVICE DOG HE IS MY LIFE LINE TO BREATH I HAVE HAD ASTHMA MY WHOLE LIFE AND THOUGHT IT WAS UNDER CONTROL FOR OVER TEN YRS AND THEN I WAS EXPSOED TO MOLD AND WAS TOLD DO NOT WORRY WILL NOT HARM YOU ,WRONG AFTER MONTH S OF DIFFERENT THINGS GOING WRONG I WENT TO BED AND WOKE UP WEEKS LATER ,TO FIND OUT I WAS IN A COMA,JUST STOP BREATHING AND COME TO FINE OUT IT WAS MY DOG THAT GOT ME TO THE FRONT DOOR OUT ON THE FRONT STEPS,HE SAVED MY LIFE AND SINCE THEN WHEN EVER HE JUMPS ON ME OR STARTS ACTING WRIED,LIKE SHAKING, ROLLING OVER STANDING ON HIS HEAD,CHOCKING, ECT I KNOW TO STOP WHAT EVER IT IS I AM DOING CAUSE I AM ABOUT TO HAVE A BAD ATTACK AND MY BREATHING STATS ARE LESS THEN 60 % .AND NOW YRS HAVE PASSED AND I AM ALIVE AND I OWED ALL TO MY LOYAL FRIEND AND COMPANION.. AND I CAN LIVE ALONE AND FUNCTION WITHOUT COSTING THE STATE ALL OF COST FOR NURSING HOME ,ECT EVERYONE SHOULD WORK TOGETHER TO MAKE WORK FOR ONE NEVER KNOWS WHAT WILL KNOCK THEIR WORLD OUT FROM UNDER THEM AND IF AND WHEN IT DOES I ONLY CAN HOPE AND PRAY THAT YOU ARE LUCKY ENOUGH TO GET A DOG THANK YOU
October 8, 2010 by Julie Wilcox
I feel that service dogs should be allowed everywhere. If someone has allergys, they should take the proper precautions. I have allergies and I feel it is my responsibity to look after myself.
Reply
December 20, 2011 by david5300
I agree, and futher more it is not the dog that is the problem! My daughter has a severe peanut allergy and I was not even aware that a dog could detect foods that cause alergic reactions.
Reply
November 7, 2010 by Piper
I believe that the rights of service dogs and their owners should almost always be put FIRST. The average person has no idea how important (& life saving) a service animal can be.
I feel the Americans with Disabilities Act should completely protect the rights of all those who are disabled and make sure they get their special needs met.
In the above story, it makes me think of the many annoying things that go on in a work-place environment.
I am in the process of looking for a service dog. I happen to live in a state that does not "recognize" psychiatric service dogs (which is what I need.) Thankfully, from the research I've done, the Federal ADA law should protect me but I have been advised to simply expect to be treated with insensitivity whenever I try to take my dog into publix places.
How does one weigh the rights of two individuals, as the women in the story above? Without the service dog, the Owner could (& already almost has before) die. How serious was the asthma attack for the other woman?
Reply
August 14, 2011 by Free American
Dogs have no business in the work place or restaurants EVER! If you can't survive without your dog STAY HOME!
Being blind, etc doesn't give you the right to walk on the rights of others.
Reply
August 21, 2011 by TBone
What right are you talking about? This is one of the the most pet-loving countries in the world, putting you in a minority. Just like people that need service dogs. Makes you think, doesn't it?
October 13, 2011 by James
Yes. These service dogs do NOT bother anyone. They have a job to do and thats all they know. They do not run around or bark. Should we not allow people in wheelchairs to come into the work place or restraunt because they need extra admenties just to get into the building. And special bathrooms to poop and pee. How can you eliminate someone from living there life to the fullest because they have a life threating issue. What if your little girl was blind and needed a dog. I'm sure you wouldn't be saying the same if the world told you, you had to lock her in the house and not let her ever enjoy life. SUCK ON THAT DOG HATERS!!!
August 21, 2011 by For_real
Asthma kills people everyday. An asthmatic cannot predict how BAD an attack might be.
Reply
December 24, 2010 by Joyce Embleton
I do not believe that Service Dogs should be allowed anywhere the person who needs a service dog goes. My husbad has a service dog and we have had diffierent answers on places we go. For instance, same chain supermarket one manager says no - the other manager says yes (same store) I understand that there are people allergic to dogs. Maybe there should be a sign on the door of an establishment that indicates whether service dogs are accepted or not so we can take our business elsewhere.
Reply
December 28, 2010 by Liz
Hire the service dog, fire the allergic co-worker, the dog is probably the smarter employee of the staff.
Reply
March 14, 2011 by Amber
That's just stupid. Why should the person with a relatively common allergy (a person who has a reasonable expectation that dogs not live in her workplace) who has been at the company longer be fired because some ridiculously defective person needs her dog?
Seriously, this is getting ridiculous.
March 18, 2011 by living
There are dogs that are less allergy provoking than others. Some dogs give me welts, others, no problem. Sometimes it is just the food they are eating makes them more allergenic.
August 9, 2011 by Alex
Your husband's service dog MUST be allowed into stores, as long as it is clearly wearing the service animal "coat" and the papers stating it as such are clearly available. I would imagine that grocery chain would be in for a HUGE lawsuit for violating the ADA.
Reply
December 22, 2011 by Cathy
Please re-read the ADA of 1999. The Dog does not need identification, the person only needs to say the dog is a service dog. They cannot ask about the disability, they cannot refuse the dog. Most people put a vest on the dog to identify the dog because not doing so makes life more difficult.
August 13, 2011 by ryan
Your husband just needs to cite the American disabilities act of 1994 when they refuse him, and say I never thought I would end up owning this type of business but ok and watch them change their tune. I do it all the time with my dog and she is a golden retriever.
Reply
November 12, 2011 by Ann
Well you are WRONG! A Service Dog does need tog o everywhere their partneer needs them to heklp.
And any store that refuses a bona fide Service Dog entry has jsut violated Federal Law.
BTW, neither therapy dogs or pysicatric support dogs are SERVICE Dogs as they are not trained to perfrom a task for a person with a disability.
Reply
January 3, 2011 by Hope Lorditch
I don't think any service dogs should be banned from anywhere. Especially when the dog can save the life of it's owner. If the dog caused another employee a problem like the one mentioned, than one or the other of the employees should be offered an equal transfer to another department.
Reply
1 2 3 4 5 … 13 »
Tell us what you think.
Let the world know what you think, but please do so responsibly. Comments are moderated and we will not post personal attacks, obscene language or inappropriate material, comments with links, or comments from people under the age of 18. If you have a question, check out our Comment Submission Guidelines.