Gothamist: No Service Dog Allowed: Principal Defies Ruling

JacqueMehoff

Sat, 15 Mar 2008 13:56:34 -0500

Thank You DGSH. no, your post isn't long unlike the one after yours. all I see mentioned in his post is more concern about the service animal than the person. count how many times dog is mentioned.

MyRocky

Sat, 15 Mar 2008 10:17:17 -0500

It would appear there are many here that just don't get it. Having a disability and determining what kind of "appropriate" accommodate or tools one uses is not anyone's business but the person or parents of that person --- anymore than it is the business of selecting an appropriate cane, wheelchair or cochlear implants to be used. Service animals are considered durable medical equipment. It isn't the business of the schools to tell anyone what kind of accommodation can be used for a child (a minor) with a disability. The schools can be the absolute worst entity to decide this kind of life quality decision as they too often do NOT have the best interests of the child in mind. Service animals should not be part of any child's IEP except possibly to say a child uses one (like they would use a wheelchair). This is a quality of life issue covered under the Americans with Disabilities Act and also under New York State Civil Rights Laws. Under IDEA, Schools need to provide an appropriate education (not the best education) but an appropriate education. It isn't their job to provide the accommodation of a service animal to a child with a disability. Those life choices are left up to the parents. But it is up to the school to accommodate individuals with disabilities using certain types of equipment including those who decide to use a service animal. Does anyone really want the schools to decide that the particular kind of cochlear implant is not acceptable, or a certain kind of wheelchair is not acceptable in school. Maybe the school doesn't want power chairs there because they might collide with another student and after all they have to look out for the safety and welfare for all the other students (sarcasm). These are independent and personal choices that the school should have NO SAY in making. This is about independence and quality of life and about safety for the PWD (person with a disability). It's not up to anyone's individual opinion. What the school did is a violation of this youngster civil rights UNDER THE LAW. For those of you who don't get it.... a service animal can make a huge difference in the quality of life for any disabled person whether that be a hearing impairment, mobility issue, blind, medical issues like seizure disorder and more. It may not be your individual choice and that is OK. But if someone makes that choice the LAW supports it. These animals are considered "durable medical equipment" under the law, they are not pets. If a person with a disability covered under the ADA, decides that a service animal is a tool that will help them mitigate their disability there are a number of "hoops" they have to jump through to get one. These animals can always be removed "if" they cause a disruption or damage to the environment -- not even close to likely because service animals have to be "perfect" in public. This is why they cost so much to train and why just any dog can not become a service dog. There are long waits for service animals and life with one is full of responsibilities. It is not necessarily easy to use a service animal but it is extremely rewarding because of the independence they provide to a person with a disability. I am sure given the choice, that this young man and his parents would prefer no disability to the service animal. As for driving, I for one would prefer he take his service animal with him in the car to alert him, it makes him and everyone else on the road safer if a situation arises where Simba can alert to something he doesn't hear. And yes I know of cases where dogs have helped their service partners avoid accidents under this very scenario. Having a service dog in school is not a new concept and it is done in a variety of places all over the US. Once in school for a very brief period of time, the dog goes completely without notice from the others in the building. It is beneficial to not only the person with the disability but to others in the environment as well. These dogs go everywhere in public: planes, trains, taxis, restaurants, subways, museums, boats etc. I hope someone is able to punish the people who are violating the law. It would be a positive for PWD everywhere. The arrogance and ignorance of the schools in this case is atrocious and outrageous and they need to be put in their place. I for one want my rights protected and don't want a bureaucracy to be able to tell me what kind of equipment I can and can not use when in public.

DefGuySezHuh

Fri, 14 Mar 2008 22:35:36 -0500

ptwnbkr, I have to agree with you on some of what you brought up. I agree that we don't have enough information to really be able to take sides and I agree that deaf people have to put up with a lot of crap in life because of their disability. I am hard of hearing myself (although I just tell hearing people I'm deaf because many don't get that distinction), which as you put it is a whole "can o' worms" when one tries to define it... Eyekantspel, I agree with your last statement that the kid is using his disability to make people feel sorry for him and that a $150 million lawsuit (or, more likely, I'm thinking some greaseball lawyer and his parents) is just plain ridiculous, but I also think that it was stupid to compare a deaf person to someone walking around with a pair of earphones on. That being said, when it comes to providing accommodations to persons with disabilities: yes, a person with a disability using public facilities such as a school must be accommodated by federal law (the Americans with Disabilities Act for those who don't know what I'm talking about), the ADA doesn't say that public facilities are required to allow a service animal in, whether they are deaf or blind. The law states that these facilities, if they receive federal funding (in any way, shape, or form, and in any amount) and they employ more than 18 staff members, are required to provide "reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities." Believe it or not, the ADA also states that this is actually up to the person with the disability and not the agency, facility, or business in question. So, in the long run, the kid and his family could legally have the final say in what they consider to be a "reasonable accommodation." Now, my personal opinion: if the kid is already getting other accommodations (i.e., interpreters, note-takers, stenotype methods, etc.) then I truly don't see the point in bringing a dog to the school. My grandparents were completely deaf and had a hearing dog for themselves. The dog was trained to alert them to the phone or doorbell ringing, a fire alarm going off, or other potential noise/scent hazards. It's a great help for any deaf person, but completely unnecessary in a public setting. If I'm at the grocery store, I'm not bringing my dog in to tell me when there's an emergency; I'll follow the panicking crowd out through the nearest available exit! I was provided with note-takers and interpreters from elementary school all the way through college and I did just fine, as have many other deaf students in the schools I attended. Other than barking up a storm every time someone farts, I don't see the use in having a dog sitting in class for a deaf child. If the principal is willing to provide any of the other major accommodations, then I will side with him. If he is also refusing to provide any other accommodations (which I doubt because they already mentioned that they have interpreters at the school), then he's just an asshole. There you go, that's my two cents. Sorry it's so long though!

JacqueMehoff

Fri, 14 Mar 2008 00:20:54 -0500

So far we only had one poster who has first hand experience with a close deaf person and one hard of hearing though not "deaf". someone who's familiar in their long term day to day needs. it seems for some reason the hearing population is more outraged than the deaf population. why is that? shouldn't it be anti-deaf and not anti-dog? I know this site gets a lot of google hits.

Wordier

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 20:39:47 -0500

Wow, I'm not sure why people are attacking this kid so personally here. I haven't seen anything to suggest he is a jerkoff. I think that 150 million number is sticking in everyone's head. I think that number is just to attract attention to the case. eyekantspel, we are going to have to agree to disagree here. You have conceded that service animals for the deaf actually exist, and I can see your point, and only partially agree, about reasonably accommodating disabilities in a school. Anecdotal evidence aside, service animals are considered a great benefit for deaf people. Yes, even though you may have not seen/know deaf people who use them, there are numerous resources that suggest otherwise. In this case, I can see both sides, but in other life situations they are a help. zgori, your labored and dull joke aside, people that are mentally disabled actually often do require assistance. So, I am not sure what your point is... JacqueMeoff, I am not sure what you are smoking brother, but the first picture I saw on the Gallaudet University website had dogs--see Gallaudet moments. And in their own policy and FAQs, that website had numerous references to service animals for the hearing.

eyekantspel

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 19:47:57 -0500

When people are able to choose to have disabilities, I'll agree with the anti-dog people here. Until then, let the deaf kid use his helper dog. That's exactly the sentiment I disagree with. Having a disability sucks, but it doesn't give you carte blanche to do whatever you want. That isn't accomodation, that's just playing the guilt card. A hearing ear dog? I call b.s.

JacqueMehoff

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:04:16 -0500

another great post, roe. the dog isn't going to relay emergency instructions to the student unless he understands woof woof woof.

Jen S

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 15:11:49 -0500

When people are able to choose to have disabilities, I'll agree with the anti-dog people here. Until then, let the deaf kid use his helper dog.

zgori

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 14:51:05 -0500

I'm very stupid. I must be accompanied by my service camel at all times. He is trained to alert me to the presence of food; otherwise I can not tell the difference between things that are edible and things that are not, like plastic and human excrement. If he does not accompany me, I will become hungry and die or possibly ingest plastic or human excrement, which could be toxic or lead to an obstructed bowel. My camel is very well behaved. I demand that he be allowed unlimited access to my school. No other accommodation will be sufficient, as only when I am with my service camel can I overcome my serious disability.

roe

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 14:50:39 -0500

Just because this deaf kid chooses to use a service dog doesn't make it reasonably necessary, and the fact that most deaf people do not need or use dogs for this kind of thing, but instead use their eyes, does a pretty good job of proving it is not reasonably necessary. It's just using the disability as an excuse to bully others into doing things in his preferred way, not a necessary way. Exactly. My parent has never once even entertained the idea of having a dog. Nor is it something even remotely common among the deaf. The student hasn't provided a single reason the dog is necessary that can't be addressed by other means. I'd point out again this boy is attending a regular school and has an implant, which suggests he has enough residual hearing to be able to function in a mainstream class. There's nothing the dog is going to do for him at school. It can't interpret for him. He's not crossing the street, Hearing the bell--if he's able to hear his teacher, he can hear a bell. If not, he can surely see his classmates getting up and leaving. Fire drills? Assign him a buddy. The dog isn't going to be able to understand the emergency instructions given by the teacher and relay them to the student. If he's working with a sign interpreter in class, which has already been offered by the school, I'm sure that he or she would alert the student to any danger he might not hear.

eyekantspel

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 13:31:58 -0500

anyway, the $150 million lawsuit probably pisses me off more than anything. And yes, I know that those numbers are just picked out of the air by some plaintiff's attorney. But still.

eyekantspel

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 13:20:35 -0500

Service animals are not as commonly used with deaf people as with blind people or mobility-impaired people exactly. they aren't as commonly used because they aren't reasonably necessary. Just because this deaf kid chooses to use a service dog doesn't make it reasonably necessary, and the fact that most deaf people do not need or use dogs for this kind of thing, but instead use their eyes, does a pretty good job of proving it is not reasonably necessary. It's just using the disability as an excuse to bully others into doing things in his preferred way, not a necessary way.

iank

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:44:27 -0500

last i checked, federal law states that you can't refuse entry for service animals anywhere, not no way, not no how. and this being a public school, they should know better. not to mention that they can't refuse the student entry. the principal is wrong and ought to be ashamed of himself. (also, disclosure: my mom is blind and has had a guide dog for as long as i can remember.)

ptwnbkr

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:53:00 -0500

wordier is right on re. service dogs and the right to have one. i also want to point out that a cochlear implant in no effing way works like a regular hearing aid or any amplifier. the key thing to keep in mind is that acclimating oneself to an implant can take quite some time and can happen over and over when operating systems/platforms/programs change - yes, they are computers (the external part), and there are a number options out there to use (just read Rebuilt by Michael Chorost). as a result, a service dog can be a tremendous help to deaf/hard of hearing individuals, such as john, because, yes, technically they are still deaf/hard of hearing and may not be able to deal with many everyday situations as easily as regular hearing folks can. on another note, it seems that there is a lot of misinformaton out there or just a lack of it regarding the principal's stand and any possible arrangements that may have been made by john and his family to enable use of the service dog. i find it highly unlikely that, when this all started, john simply showed up one day with the dog without anyone being notified, but what do i know. i admit i have not read anything beyond the recent articles on this case. it really should not be so damn hard to make things work, but, yeah, that is the kind of shit disabled folks still have to deal with on a smaller scale daily - even now in the 21st century! $%^$&^$%#@!%^@&$%!!!!!!!!!! what is so damn hard about it? just get used to it, people! now is the part where i'd like to paraphrase the we're here, we're queer slogan of the LGBT community, but I'll leave you with... "say it loud, REAL loud,, i'm deaf, and i'm proud!" full disclosure, i am hard of hearing......... though not deaf per the definition of many in the deaf community (defining deafness is a whole 'nother can o'worms).

ANGRYGOD11

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:51:13 -0500

How much does anyone want to bet when young Master Cave of Long Island is old enough to drive, he's not going to give up on a driver's license because of his disability? Any takers?

JacqueMehoff

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:23:46 -0500

my quick look at the Gallaudet University website pictures, Not one single dog. why would this smug john daly lookalike need one?

Politburo

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:04:59 -0500

"This individual has 100% right to bring his helper dog in to the school. It's the school's responsibility to accomodate him and not precious snowflakes with allergies." The right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose, or something like that. Why does the child's right to bring a helper dog outweigh the allegic child's right to breathe clean air? I'm not talking about the ADA or other laws. I'm talking basic natural rights. This is a difficult question, and I don't think there is a "right" answer.

Wordier

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 10:52:50 -0500

eyekantspel: yes, I have heard of deaf people using dogs to assist them. Just because you haven't and are unable to Google it for some reason doesn't mean that the deaf don't use service animals. I would read a few articles before you start spouting off uninformed. Service animals are not as commonly used with deaf people as with blind people or mobility-impaired people, but they use them to alert them about sounds such as phone ringing, someone at the door, car horns, class bells, people trying to get their attention, etc. It's not some made up thing for this kid to bring his pet to school, "hearing" dogs are recognized and legally protected by the federal and state governments. Yes, the dogs are highly trained and selected for intelligence and temperament, that's why they are often certain breeds. They are not going to attack anyone as some have suggested or wreak havoc in a school. And yes, eyekantspel, believe it or not dogs have other ways of getting your attention than barking. Finally, a person walking with a frickin iPod is not the same as a deaf person. I won't even bother explaining this one.

Jen S

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 10:19:15 -0500

eyekantspel, the kid has a dog for a reason. Enlighten yourself and do a Google search.

eyekantspel

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:08:29 -0500

As for the comments about how this dog could be a threat, or cause reactions to allergic students... seems a bit of a stretch. That same argument could be made to keep blind people from having a dog, and I think that a blind kid bringing a dog to school would not be controversial (and that the reaction to a school barring that would be justified). What gets me is that there is really no reason a deaf kid needs a dog. This is just a kid with a pet who wants to bring his pet to school and is using his disability as an excuse. It's the difference between accomodation and special treatment. If you are deaf, you should be given whatever tools are required to level the playing field, when it is reasonable to do so. Not license to do whatever you want.

eyekantspel

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:35:48 -0500

I still get back to the main question. Who has ever heard of a DEAF person who needs a dog for a service animal? Anyone? Because this is the first time I've ever heard of that. Dogs don't sign language, and he can't hear the dog bark. So what does the dog do, exactly? Nudge him when there's a sound? Hard nudge for a fire alarm? This doesn't make much sense. People are acting like this dog is needed to cross the street or something. Seriously? because I see people do that all the time with their headphones on and music blaring, and they seem to get by the old fashioned way-- look both ways before you cross the street.

roe

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 00:33:06 -0500

For the child to get to school, it's already been suggested that an aide could accompany him. Or the school could provide bus service, as is normally done with special needs students. Some of the issues here: 1. There are other alternatives to the dog. The school has already offered to accommodate the student with a sign language interpreter. 2. The dog is not integral to the student's learning experience in school. It is not a necessary appliance, such as a wheelchair or cane. A vision impaired student might not be able to attend classes without braille books or a cane. However, this student can attend classes and fully participate without his dog. 3. The dog presents a direct threat to other students. While some might consider students with allergies and asthma to be "precious flowers," these conditions are in fact valid medical issues, and account for a significant number of deaths each year. I'd never say that, say, a school should ban field sports because a student is allergic to pollen. However, asking a student to sit in a classroom and be exposed to an allergen, simply to accommodate ONE student who DOES have other options, on a daily basis, is unreasonable.

MJG

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:53:18 -0500

Any chance Leon Campo knows ''Kristen''?

MC

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:18:33 -0500

Service animals are for uncontrolled environments, streets, shopping malls, public transit, places people visit. And they're great for that. They do not belong in schools and offices where the potential to be "alerted to danger" is low and the impact on others is high. Gee, but what do you propose for the person that needs the service animal to get to/from work/school/etc? Are they supposed to fold up their service animal and put it away? Or are blind, deaf, etc people not supposed to hold jobs, go to school or go to the doctor's office?

Goomba

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 21:16:54 -0500

This kid's parents must have some big stuggots. They got a good racket going. $150 mil.

Lesliepbg

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 20:11:23 -0500

As a parent of a child with profound allergies and asthma, I'd still want that person to have the ability to attend school. First of all--who is to say they would be in the same classes anyway. Second--the amount of dander that is shed--it builds up over time and if you pet the dog. I have allergies myself and can be in a room with a dog, but in someone's home that has a dog 24/7, then it might provoke a response. But I also know not to pet the dog there and most people who really clean up their home I can tolerate being in them. Third, perhaps he needs the dog to also get to/from school--as in living an independent live without restrictions which is the goal of disability acts that are necessary. Many "educators" seem never to want to think outside the box and make up silly obstacles like this.

JacqueMehoff

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 20:11:14 -0500

I'd like to hear what other deaf people say? and, we already had a parent of a deaf child chime in. I went to a HS with quite a few deaf students, sure it wasn't in 2008 but they seem to do quite well in a large HS without the help of a dog. And, from what I've gather the deaf are a proud group, see Gallaudet University. I have nothing but respect for them.

StrongerBad

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:44:14 -0500

I am going to have the last word on this. There is no refuting it. This individual has 100% right to bring his helper dog in to the school. It's the school's responsibility to accomodate him and not precious snowflakes with allergies. Just like installing wheelchair access, handicapped bathroom stalls and fucking braille on the room numbers. This school is not in compliance with the american's with disability act and as a public school it's outrageous and ludicrous. They should be made an example of, sued for every fucking penny and the town should vote out and fire the assholes that led to such a lawsuit. This is 2008 and with principals acting this way and government officials decreeing homosexuality you, America have gotten way off course. This is the future, you can't stop it.You can move out of the way or just fucking die because your old world thinking is becoming extinct. There is no such thing as an allergy to dogs that rivals cats, pollen, hay, or dust mites. That's a fact. anybody who says they are dangerously allergic is misinformed and has shitty doctors and parents. Dog dander isnt the same as other factors. And that's besides the point. Allergy sufferers are not accomodated rights like the disabled. Legally an Asthmatic or someone who goes in to shock from bee stings can't even carry their inhalers or epi-pens on their person while in school. The fucking nurse is supposed to handle it. As far as the safety issue goes I want that principal to bar any child or adult in a wheelchair, on crutches, amputee or kid hauling a 50lb bag of books from coming in the doors. Tresper Clarke Highschool has made a HUGE mistake and has insulted the disabled, it's students and the citizens of America. Wake the fuck up you assholes. it's 2008.

holyfrijole

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:31:06 -0500

The kid still has to get to and from school, and the dog is used to alert him to oncoming traffic. Is he supposed to tie the dog up outside of the school until the bell rings? Btw, cochlear implants don't restore hearing altogether. The kid is still deaf... it's not like a person who can see, but who wears glasses to improve their vision.

eyekantspel

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:22:06 -0500

I can imagine an argument that the school should be prepared to handle guide dogs; if a blind student needed a guide dog, I doubt this would be controversial. However -- and I'm just speaking from general life experience here-- I've never heard [sorry] of a DEAF person needing a dog. It isn't like the dog is going to translate into sign language, or help him manuever in the halls. In the occassional event of a fire drill, I don't get how a dog is going to make a difference. If the kid has his eyes open, he shouldn't have any trouble knowing what's going on. For clarification, a determination by the Division of Human Rights is not "the law", it's their opinion on the law. Granted, it carries more weight than a lay person's opinion, but they can and do make determinations that are stupid or wrong. It does seem odd to me that a school would argue that it can't handle a service dog based on allergies, since there are certainly cases (blind people) where a service dog might reasonably be needed. In this case, the question is whether there's a need for this deaf student to have a dog. It seems a real stretch to me. I admit it's not my area of expertise, but and also note that Roe claims to have a deaf parent and says this claim is nonsense. to EdEx: Having an opinion that doesn't blindly [ahem] support every handicapped person's entitlement to anything they want is not the same as being against handicapped people. Handicapped people are no different than the population at large, which means a percentage of them are lawsuit happy aholes just like non-handicapped people. This might be one of those times. If this deaf student was requesting an accomodation that logically was linked to the handicap, I doubt there would be an issue.

bklynd

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:16:29 -0500

Roe is right on. The school seems like a safe enough environment that the kid would not need a guide dog. We had a threat of a lawsuit in our building when some jerks on the coop board didn't want to build a ramp for two guys with scooters. I got the impression that "reasonable accomodation" is simply in the eyes of a judge. Here's some old stories about cases that went one way and the other.

perso

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:09:43 -0500

Good god. And I thought all the insensitive assholes were confined to the comment sections of Houston newspapers. There's obviously a reason why he has a service dog. They don't hand those things out with every Happy Meal. The dogs are very well trained and are unlikely to go berserk and attack someone. You're not going to find a, say, seeing eye dog in a Peruvian dog fight ring. Someone has severe allergies? Fine. Make sure they're not in the same class as the kid. Geez. Let's attack the disabled kid! How dare he be deaf! How dare his parents try to make life easier (and safer) for him by providing him with a service dog! The nerve! I mean, little Sally might see the dog and spend the day ogling it rather than her algebra equations. Then she'll fail out of school and be forced to spend the rest of her life cleaning toilets at Wendy's. Look what you've done, John! End of exasperation.

Toby von Meistersinger

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:42:54 -0500

I am still wondering why someone with a cochlear implant would need a service dog. It seems akin to someone with glasses having a guide dog. Plus the kid's parents seem like greedy profiteers making you root for anyone who stands up to them.

TKaisen

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:36:21 -0500

@tien: I'm not making that up: From the NY Times.

roe

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:21:34 -0500

As the daughter of someone with severe hearing loss, I think this is ridiculous and I side with the principal. There's NO reason this child would need a dog in school. The service animal is not going to be able to help the child with its lessons or provide interpretation. In addition, if the child is in the closed environment of a school building, he is not going to be crossing streets or needing the dog for navigation. The school could certainly provide an aide to escort him outside to his bus/etc. at the end of the day. Allergies can be life-threatening, and it's not fair to expect other students to have their health endangered, to have to spend every day on asthma and allergy drugs, or to have to change classes or schools, to accommodate this one student. Especially since the student already has an implant and there are other options, such as an aide or sign interpreter. "Reasonable accommodation" does not involve depriving other students of a safe learning environment.

tien mao

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:20:44 -0500

@TKaisen wtf?? kids can't bring PB sammies to school?? the terrorists really have won.

TKaisen

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:11:19 -0500

The issue of service dogs in school should not be controversial, and the school should probably be prepared to accomodate those for blind students. The principal is probably doing the right thing here. I know that the media wants to cover it as the principal is an asshole and the poor, disabled kid is a victim of the man... but we now live in a world where kids can't bring peanut butter sandwiches to school for fear of an allergic reaction. And, it's unlikely, but if the dog freaks out and attacks someone, the school can probably be sued for not protecting the students from the savage animal. Or if another student has a crazy fear of dogs who can't learn if he's in the same class room. Or if someone has a severe allergic reaction to the dog. The school is covering it's bases. It's saying: "See, we made every reasonable effort to keep this animal out of the school. We were forced to do something we were not prepared to handle." And no, not everyone who has an allergy to dogs can just "deal with it." There's a lot of selfish going on here.

babyhitler

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:02:13 -0500

my friend died from asthma from a allergic reaction to a dog. If only his family knew he could sue for that.

zgori

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:58:28 -0500

Allergies come in all different degrees of severity. It's quite possible that the dog would trigger asthma, for instance, in certain students, particularly with repeated exposure. Service animals are for uncontrolled environments, streets, shopping malls, public transit, places people visit. And they're great for that. They do not belong in schools and offices where the potential to be "alerted to danger" is low and the impact on others is high. This is a no-brainer to me. The school needs to accommodate his disability, they do not need to accommodate his dog. (BTW, I'm not against pets or animals. I have a dog I love dearly myself, but I would never assume I have a right to bring her someplace she's not welcome.)

Dave Hogarty

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:57:43 -0500

Cochlear implants aren't exactly like bionic ears that you slip into your ear canal. I believe they involve interfaces that you have to attach to your skull. Plus it's not just physical comfort; a cochlear implant can require regular calibration so its user isn't subjected to unpleasant auditory input.

cgee

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:55:55 -0500

Does anyone out there know what the "reasonable accommodation" standard entails? If so, can you determine whether the use of a service animal at school by a deaf person (who already uses a cochlear implant) is a reasonable accommodation? If not, then perhaps you should cut this principal a break, at least until the courts have spoken.

amandabee

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:53:53 -0500

Emergency lockdown drills? How many of these do they have to go through? And, isn't the kid better off with a trained dog during a drills that than a sign interpreter?

edEx

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:52:36 -0500

anyone speaking out against handicapped people need to be "dismissed" from life.

wowthatsucks

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:50:15 -0500

"Cave, a sophomore, has hearing implants but doesn't always wear them because he says they are uncomfortable." Wow, why can't have them refitted to make them more comfortable? That would seem the easiest solution.

Art Stewel

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:49:33 -0500

Looks like the principal didn't get the memo there is a new blind governor. Can't this kid go to a special needs school? If other students are allergic, or there are other valid reasons for the administration's position, then throw the kid on the short bus.

mattcarman

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:43:44 -0500

I graduated from here in 2002. Little did I know then that I was barely escaping the violation of my human rights. I am allergic. I can deal with it. Some people are deaf. They can not.

Outter Burrougher

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:42:22 -0500

I defense of people with severe allergies, if your allergies are severe enough no amount of air filtration will benefit you when you are in the same room/hallway as the dog. In defense of human decency, my Gd, at least let him bring the dog while you appeal the matter. Keep fighting, Principal Voels, if you really feel you must, but let this kid come to class. And you think it's going to be a distraction? The family of one of the students at my NJ high school back in the day helped train seeing eye dogs. Occasionally, the student would bring the dogs in for a few days, sort of as a test of the dogs progress. Both the students and the dog were extremely well behaved around one another.

maevemealone

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:40:57 -0500

People with allergies will never live in an allergen free world and eventually they might just sneeze. There's no avoiding that so deal with it. I think service dogs are great and provide an amazing service to the disabled. Here's where I'll turn into an old person: when I was a kid, we had a couple deaf students in school, they wore hearing aids and had their special needs met. That meant speech class, tutoring, sign language interpreters etc. If he has a cochlear implant, what is the profundity of his deafness? Is a service dog really called for in this situation when all it does is alert him to noises? Granted, cars and fires are to be avoided, but a student aid/para could do the same job. As for being a distraction or danger, kids adjust and will learn to not go all googie woogie over the dog all day long. Working dogs like this know they are working and won't really respond to attempts to play or distract it.

Jen S

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:29:59 -0500

I'm sure they don't think they'll actually get the $150 million. It's to make a point, make some headlines.

feral555

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:29:46 -0500

I don't really see why a deaf student would need the dog in school... but if Human Rights law says he is entitled does this principle really think that he can get away with denying him?

FrankMartin

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:24:11 -0500

Did the principle say why? Not that I can imagine a good reason, I just love to hear nuts rationalize. it works like speed or meth for me. Then I get drunk and sleep like a baby.

JacqueMehoff

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:23:54 -0500

God Bless You Principal Voels, we need more people like you in our school system. don't back down, stand your ground. This is a Deaf student with a cochlear implant, this tells me he and his family has an entitled attitude. let me speak to him in a language he understands: wrruuuu, wruuuu, ahhhhh, ahhhh, ahhhh, eepp, oppp uh oh.

section313

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:09:55 -0500

I'm curious - how did he go to school before Simba?

Kojak

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:09:00 -0500

I'd like to nominate the Principle of W. Tresper Clarke High School for the heartless asshole of the year award. No one can deny Simba's rightful place as the future King.

jeremyjoyce

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:07:44 -0500

150 million, seriously, are we sure this about human rights for the disabled

eyekantspel

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:06:42 -0500

The issue of service dogs in school should not be controversial, and the school should probably be prepared to accomodate those for blind students. But it's less clear that a deaf person needs a dog to assist in school. The parent's $150 million dollar lawsuit certainly isn't a "postive experience for all involved," just another example of how people try to use these stupid lawsuits as a way to get rich.

TimSPC

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:03:43 -0500

I HOPE THEY ENFORCE THE RULING AND THIS KID CAN ATTEND SCHOOL WITH HIS DOG.

eyekantspel

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:02:33 -0500

Kumiki Gibson was newly appointed to the Division of Human Rights, and a lot of people, including those who have worked in the Division, think she doesn't have a clue about what she's doing.

JacqueMehoff

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:52:24 -0500

good grief, dogs in school for so called disabled students.

Jen S

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:50:56 -0500

This is lame. Service dogs are used throughout society (see K9 Cop), so the kids at that high school will be getting an early introduction. If I were a parent in the district, I'd see this as a positive experience for everyone involved.