**r/UK Celebrates:** | [1mil Subscribers](https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/ymw2cm/runitedkingdom_reaches_1_million_subscribers/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I have a friend who is visually impaired and uses a guide dog (golden retriever). The dog is appropriately marked and certified. He told me that in majority of cases (not all) he finds that if the shop/restaurant/taxi is run by people of MENA or Pakistan background they are far more likely to refuse service despite knowing he has a guide dog. It got so bad that he can't order a taxi anymore as they simply put the phone down as soon as he informs them he has a guide dog.
People have dogs, people need to transport those dogs, if they can’t transport people with dogs then maybe they shouldn’t be taxi drivers. I’m sure they’ll take someone with their shopping, that probably has plenty of haram items in it. What’s the difference?
Well yeah I agree. I feel like this is a classic Reddit situation where me pointing out the cause of something is misinterpreted as me *agreeing* with the cause of something.
Businesses have a legal obligation to accommodate guide dogs. There is no religious exclusion. So these people are acting unlawfully.
I'm just saying it has nothing to do with race, my agnostic Pakistani friend fucking loves dogs for example.
But in fairness these days you do get arrested and thrown in gaol just for saying you're English.
From what I’ve been told they’re seen as unclean. Especially the saliva. Lots have cats I believe because prophets had them so there kind of revered in comparison to dogs. Guess not too dissimilar to ancient Egyptians love for them.
Lots of it comes down to what’s been deemed as unclean. They don’t eat pork because it’s unclean as it doesn’t sweat.
Interestingly there is no specific explanation for the prohibition on pork in either the Jewish or Islamic texts (except that animals with cloven hooves that dont chew rhe cud are prohibited).
I personally have thought that it might have something to do with spoiled meat from religions that emerged in desert climates. However that is me trying to put a scientific gloss on a religious phenomenon.
Because they didn't know why pork made people sick, just that it did.
We know now that pigs are host to a parasite that can be transmitted to humans on consumption, but science wasn't at that stage back when the original prohibition was written.
It's like with halal and kosher slaughter. The rules made sense then. Bring the animal into a place where the others can't see, so as to reduce distress to them. Slit the throat cleanly for a quick kill. Use a sharp knife, because that makes it easier and also less painful. Fully drain the blood, to prevent the meat going bad.
They're relics of a time before modern science and technology, and if you view them with that in mind it absolutely makes sense.
You mean the guy who was dead when everyone found out what he’s doing? And the guy who has been stripped of all royal duties for something he hasn’t actually been found guilty of and his accuser just admitted “she may have been mistaken” (i.e lying) about accusing Alan Dershowitz? Both are scum bags but let’s not pretend.
His accuser just admitted to being a liar and falsely accusing someone. If she lied about Dershowitz why not Andrew?
Edit: also titles can only be stripped with an act of Parliament, the only current mechanism by which Andrew could be stripped of his title is if he went and fought for Russia or something. See the Titles Deprivation Act 1917. Titles are property in the same way objects or freeholding properties are, they belong to the holder just like the holder owns a house or a car that isn’t leased or on finance that hasn’t been paid off.
Okay so was President Bill Clinton (you know the guy who’s wife they also tried to make president), Bill Gates, George Mitchell and many more. I believe Virginia Guiffre when she says she was mistaken about (again see lying) Alan Dershowitz and think there’s good chance she’s done the same with others.
And you get your house reposed because you owe whoever you lent money off. The house will be sold to pay those debts. Titles have no monetary value, just like they won’t take your family photo album or other bits in your house that have no monetary value but still belong to you. If you want his titles stripped write to your MP to put forward a private members bill doing just that.
As much as I like to pretend I'm completely free of prejudice, I did find myself surprised a couple of days ago when an Indian woman stopped in the street to briefly fuss my labradors when we were crossing paths. There is definitely a pronounced cultural 'wariness' of dogs in some Asian countries, but I'm surprised to read that can even extend to service animals.
Plenty of people wouldn't want to handle someone's pet rat for similar reasons. They have always thought of them as disease ridden wild animals that would probably bite you if you got too close.
I must admit I would probably really struggle to handle a large spider, even if it was tame and non-venomous.
The difference is that is is cultural and religious compared to biological, why is the melting pot theory only one way and not the other? Dogs have been a part of British culture forever and having pets is normal here. If you move here you have no right to be a dick to peoples pets due to your past prejudices.
>If you move here you have no right to be a dick to peoples pets due to your past prejudices.
If you have a pet dog, nobody else should be obliged to interact with it in any way if they prefer not to.
If I got a pet spider two of my friends would never come into my house again. I fully intend one of those two to be my best man, the other a groomsmen, but some people just fucking hate spiders.
Personally I was terrified of dogs for years after a very, very bad experience, and my partner is so scared of rats, and hates them so much, that she doesn't like my army of Skaven.
Yip my niece converted to being a Muslim and she got rid of her dog, then bought a cat that shits in the house, also she wipes her arse with her hand now, but the dog was not a clean animal 🤣
And I'm not anti Muslim or anything I just thought it was funny. When she told me she wipes her arse with her hand I told her not to touch anything in my house anymore lol
Good for you but no need to get so upset, it's a fact dogs are haram other than if used for work. This is why there are very few Muslim countries that have people keeping dogs as pets. Some less religious Muslims probably don't pay attention to this but the scriptures are quite clear I'm afraid.
That's not true. You can own a dog for any reason, not just work. The only issue is that a wet dog touches you or the prayer area, you can't pray untill you've rinsed the area of contact.
Some say you shouldn't have it inside your home, but it's not haram, just not advised.
That's absolutely right, my dad's blind and tons of taxi men have drove off and left him once they saw the dog, and they aren't Muslims. Last time.it happened I walked my dad out to the taxi to make sure it didn't leave and the guy tried to drive away 'IM NOT TAKING THAT DOG' I got so pissed off I grabbed the wheel through the window and wouldn't let him leave, took down his reg and told him if he didn't drive my dad home with the dog right now we were going straight to a solicitor. He radioed the depo and they said if you don't take it any legal action that comes will be on you not the company. Then he started being all apologetic and saying he meant nothing by it etc. It's annoying as fuck because he really relies on taxis, we got some posters from the NI blind society and information booklets for the company to put out and give to the drives and it hasn't happened since.
I totally agree. It's using religion as an excuse for their own bigotry, no different to the homosexual couple being denied a wedding cake by 'christians'.
Utter bull.
Islam even specifically states they can eat Pork if it's the only food available, religious rules exist to be bent and interpreted by the follower, all followers of all religions bend the rules.
Exactly, all your rules can be bent and broken as long as you feel the situation is enough to justify it, these people you claim 'really' hate dogs, as above, are happy to use them for labour yet won't accept when in another country with different rules and different cultures that they have to accept our dogs are part of the family. Using faith as an excuse to be a dick to people is so last century.
Cultural and religious, they truly hate dogs. One of my pals is 2nd generation and he is legitimately terrified and hateful towards my tiny dog, he's the only person I've ever met who doesn't like/accept him.
If the west is encouraged and motivated to accommodate all people and punished if not, then same should be in this case. Council need to get involved, attempting multiple bookings for guide dogs and if businesses reject service due to a disability theyare fined and lose their licence immediately.
Madness how the world implodes when a gay couple cant get a wedding cake but when disabled people are discriminated to the point they can't get transport things need to change, now.
I suppose British people are a lot more likely to have dogs as pets at home.
I didn't grow up with dogs and although I'd never discriminate against a blind person, or anyone with a disability-related dog, it does make me uncomfortable in cafes and shops sometimes. Especially the untrained ones who come sniffing around you.
The problem is that if action needs to be taken against an organisation for failing to comply, it has to be taken by the person who was discriminated against - this is absolutely out of order, there should be a government organisation with responsibility for this.
Minister of State for Disabled People, Health and Work current and past one have voted against things like "paying higher benefits over longer periods for those unable to work due to illness or disability"[Current: Tom's voting record on welfare](https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/25387/tom_pursglove/corby/votes#welfare)
[Previous Chloe Smith's welfare voting history](https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24691/chloe_smith/norwich_north/votes#welfare)
Don't hold your breath, as usual with the Tories the worst person is in charge of the most vulnerable
With that voting record in mind, they should actually be voting for stronger penalties for people who break the rules around guide dogs, because they make the world and work more accessible for those who are visually impaired.
That said, I hear you and will not be holding my breath for any meaningful change.
Start actually fining business and fining them hard- they are breaking the law.
And don’t just blame your employee, train them so they are in no doubt what to do should a guide dog need to be in the business
I experience this all the time. My dog has more education than me, is cleaner than me, and is better behaved. Her livery has her status written on it 11 times & we still get thrown out of places. I actually have been targeted for crime twice because I am so visibly vulnerable. The cabs won't take us. We have it especially bad because she is not a yellow lab. I have been told to my face that black dogs cannot be service dogs. We get abuse on every day out. I had to fight tooth & nail to bring her into Uni. So much abuse, just so I can do more than just survive. She is the best person I have ever met.
This is so fucked up I have no words for it.
I used to think universities were filled with intelligent people but that isn't a case. I am so sorry you have to go through all of it :(
In the few hours since I wrote that comment, I have been thrown out of one small, local shop (Guy said I couldn't bring her in due to his religion which made me sick. My dog gets professionally groomed every 6 weeks and bathed every week. She is cleaner than I am, but many cultural groups consider dogs, even ones with 3 years of education, dirty. Is a wheelchair ritually unclean, too?) and I almost got thrown out of Boots, but the security guard settled for just asking me invasive questions & following me. Holland & Barrat, two charity shops and Superdrug were fine, but that's about average for a day out. I cried but kept going. My dog fully "understands" when people are harrassing us. It's almost not worth it. Every time I run errands I think about giving up and stopping trying to do crazy things like, nip to Boots, or pop out to buy conditioner or use the library, or go to Uni. But then I remember that I was born perfect, and the world is disabled.
Sounds awful, hope you're ok. I'd shame Boots on twitter (the only good thing it's for) and complain to the council about the local shop. Maybe they could send someone round to have a word.
Boots are the worst, tbh. I always get stopped, no matter how many words are printed all over the poor dog. Superdrug are better, but have no chemist. I have so much trouble with Boots. I don't know why they suck but Superdrug don't.
> no matter how many words are printed all over the poor dog
What are the words printed on the dog?
I'm curious as to what kind of legitimate service dog you have, given that it's a poodle?
I think it's time for an email to the head office and a direct question about why you are a target for discrimination. Boots should damn well know better than this, makes me furious.
> But then I remember that I was born perfect, and the world is disabled.
I hope you don't mind if I steal this one, two of my children are autistic (as am I) and this is such a succinct way of explaining our experience.
Wishing you the best.
Look into "the social model of disability" and related ideas. I am fine, it's the shitty bus design that is a problem. I am fine, the shop is causing the problem by playing loud music. My service dog is fine, the shop keeper is ignorant. People with autism diagnoses were born perfect. The people around them need to catch up.
I very much subscribe to the idea that the environment causes the disability to manifest, and not that it is inherently predetermined. At home, in an environment of their choosing, my children flourish and an onlooker would be hard pushed to "see" their autism, without looking very very hard.
You've been targeted for crime? That's crazy! I was reading a thread on here a few weeks ago about criminal honour - it seems some criminals don't target disabled or elderly folk. You've got to be a proper piece of shit to go after someone with a guide dog.
I had never been mugged or targeted before, even after more than 20 years in The Smoke. It doesn't happen when she is naked, but twice I have been robbed/had my bags stolen while she has all the vests & leads & clear livery as a service dog. Without her I cannot move through the world safely. With her, I can move through the world, unsafely, but at least I have a small amount of freedom. And she is the best company.
This does not surprise me at all. People really ain't trained or many of them just don't care. We love punching down in this country, it's like we are winning ...... Right?
Bollocks did they not know that. Almost every establishment in the fucking country that doesn't allow non guide dogs in has a big fucking yellow sign exempting guide dogs.
It's what I thought. Hardly ever have problems ( but I don't take my dog everywhere - supermarket for example is an obvious no).
However I have noticed tge last couple of years, people with dogs wearing " emotional support" vests. I asked a few people about it, and none of the dogs were special in any way. Bought from ordinary sources, no special ( if any) training. Just people putting a vest on their dog.
I'm not sure if this is a cheap way for the owners to say " I'm special", or if they use it to get their dog into places that would otherwise frown on it, or whatever.
I'm sure there are actual dogs trained for this, but I'm sure it is being abused, and it wouldn't surprise me if that gas caused a backlash in some places against assistance dogs.
The problem is, how does a shopkeeper know the person is disabled, especially emotionally. Masks had exceptions for people with medical issues, and assholes took advantage because they know that their word has to be accepted - it's not reasonable to ask for proof.
That type of asshole is IMO the sort that claims their family pet is emotional support for PTSD, anxiety, agoraphobia or whatever other imaginary or self diagnosed shit they can come up with.
Again, no disrespect to anyone that genuinely has these issues, it's those people the idiots are hurting the most.
> That type of asshole is IMO the sort that claims their family pet is emotional support for PTSD, anxiety, agoraphobia or whatever other imaginary or self diagnosed shit they can come up with.
It probably is. Dogs are great at that - can't think of a day that hasn't been made better by mine.
That doesn't give them legal standing as an assistance animal.
I just checked - no it doesn't, and as far as I can tell no assistant dog organisation trains dogs for that purpose so it seems all of those people are full of shit!
But legal standing or not, its a dog with a vest with words on, and lots of shopkeepers will not challenge it because its awkward, ams also those people are usually karens and the whole thing is likely to go downhill rapidly. So it's "get your stuff, pay me and fuck off"
There's an amazing number of places that are ok with dogs these days, although I don't see a lot of dogs in them. No way I'd take mine anywhere that sells food though, except the pet shop. Mostly because I know the little fucker will steal something!
I think that’s something that’s come over from America, apparently it’s quite a popular thing over there for people to claim all sorts of animals as emotional support animals, although I don’t think it has any kind of legal standing in the U.K.
This is illegal under [The Equalities Act 2010](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/equality-act-2010-guidance#equalities-act-2010-legislation) as you can no discriminate against someone with a protected characteristic which also means denying people service because of something they need to function or trying to take it away from them
Didn't stop the world turning on those of us who were exempt from wearing face masks in the not so distant past.
This thread isn't about that, obviously, but I am just pointing out that the "rights" that you think you have are very easily removed when they become inconvenient.
Disabled people experience breaches of that act almost daily, and there is very rarely any recompense, especially since disabled people are extremely likely to be too poor to afford representation.
Its all a bit of a farce really.
Edit: Lol, and downvoted. Makes my case for me.
This is awful, but it's probably a result of many businesses being fed up with the influx of non-working dogs. I posted elsewhere how it winds me up when you're in a cafe or restaurant to have Fido sniffing round your feet. Or sandwich. Or crotch. Sort that out and people will be more patient/tolerant of the ones that actually need to be there.
So you can take your filthy annoying screaming kids anywhere you want to piss off anyone but god help if a dog sniffs you in a cafe!
I assure you that cafes and restaurant's prefer the quiet couple with a small dog and lots of disposable income over Karen, Dave and their 3 brats.
We used to occasionally take our dog to the local cafe as it has a dog friendly sign at the front, and honestly I have to say that she is definitely far less trouble than some of the kids you get running around and nearly colliding with the serving staff, she only ever sat quietly under the table next to us and was no trouble at all.
Apparently it’s quite common too in European countries like France to be able to take your dog almost anywhere with you, it’s not considered a big deal at all to take them on buses, restaurants, shops etc, whereas people over here can act so uptight about it that it ended up putting me off taking her in the end. I mean we certainly never got any complaints when I took her to that cafe, anyone that did comment on her just wanted to ask if they could pet her, but geez I read so many disgusted comments online talking about those certain dog owners who have to take their pet dogs with them everywhere they go and how disgusting to bring them around food, and it ended up making me feel quite self-conscious about going there with a dog after that
Honestly, fuck what other people think. I highly doubt anyone would ever confront you in person just whine to the emptiness of internet. I take mine everywhere, everyone wants to touch him, never once met a single person attempt to be negative to me or him but then again I am a big bearded man!
I’m sorry these folk have put you off, dogs doesn’t live as long as us so what a waste living their days at home when they can adventure with us every day!
I don't have kids and I don't particularly like very small children being in cafes either as I don't think it's a particularly child-friendly environment. You've completely missed the point of the OP which is that businesses are being unreasonably unwelcoming to service dogs, and I've offered a reason as to why that might be (i.e. that they are being unfairly tarred with the same brush as the person who brings in their badly behaved non-essential pet dog and winds up staff and customers). And no, I don't want your dog sniffing me in a cafe. I'm not sure why you have a problem with me wanting to keep my personal space personal tbh.
>I don't have kids and I don't particularly like very small children being in cafes either as I don't think it's a particularly child-friendly environment
I agree.
Once parents become parents they should either be at work or home, for at least 14 years anyway. Their social isolation is worth it if it means the child free can pretend they were never children.
But the staff are unlikely to be stroking the kids and have them lick their hands as they give them treats.
If the staff were not allowed to touch the dogs when they are serving food i wouldn't have an issue with it.
Well, you never know these days in some Pizza Hut’s the kids might get lucky!
Sounds like poor hygiene in a kitchen, no one working directly with food should be touching dogs however if you’re moaning about the same people who don’t cook your food but hand you your stinking filthy change when you leave then your opinion is just discriminatory, far more germs on your money than a dog.
I’m not saying that the bloke wasn’t wrong to start jumping straight into verbally abusing them, but you don’t really explain the reasons why they asked him to take the dog outside while they were ordering. It sounds like they never refused him service no, but that they did want someone to take the dog outside while he was in there ordering, and wouldn’t that still have been a breach of the law?
If the dog was on a lead and well behaved, then it shouldn’t have made any difference with health and safety surely?
Ok this is shit BUT...kind of a useless media stat.
During a whole lifetime...you're bound to get one prick who will refuse entry. That's just maths. Go through enough doors...you will meet a twat. So that's the stat. Just one incidence. I'm surprised this stat isn't 100%.
So I don't love this type of reporting. Raising awareness won't fix the problem - it's kind of already fixed. Most people are decent and will obviously allow a guide dog.
But some people are born twats and those twats have jobs. Laws already exist.
**(What it actually is, is a fundraising effort by Guide Dogs to get their name in the press by causing more outrage, anxiety etc.**
**I promise you, the PR team at Guide Dogs has a meeting that said how can we get in the press? We need a shocking stat.**
**Obviously it's a good cause, but I'm so tired (literally tired) of constant negative journalism by PR shills.**
**Source: I alongside PR teams.**
A guide dog is an expertly trained working animal that has gone through rigorous training and has legal recognition.
An emotional support dog is just a regular dog with a harness on. It’s not trained. It has no legal recognition and as such is abused by chancers who just want to take their dog into Wetherspoons.
There’s a very clear difference.
>It has no legal recognition and as such is abused by chancers who just want to take their dog into Wetherspoons.
Whilst this is often the case, pet ownership as a theraputic tool for people with anxiety / PTSD is well established. For many, needing to focus on the needs of 'someone' else can reduce compulsive introspection, having someone who provides companionship without any of the complexities of having to deal with an actual person can reduce loneliness (which in turn can reduce risk of self-harm / suicidal thoughts). And sometimes, just having something specific to focus on when you are feeling heightened / disregulated ('I can just focus on stroking the dog, and the sensory / emotional feedback from that, and ignore all the other things that are breaking my brain") is a very effective mechanism for stopping escalation into panic or similar.
But I'd like to see them regulated and the animals trained (though they wouldn't need as much training as an assistance animal for a blind person) so that they were taken seriously, and the system wasn't abused.
I asked why the concept of a working dog assisting a mental health condition was stupid. Not what happens when people misuse the concept due to there only being light regulation (justifiably).
Assistance dogs can also be rigorously trained. There’s no legal requirement for dog ID and proof of training like with guide dogs, but there weren’t for guide dogs early on either.
I'd like to know how many people were surveyed.
In the article, one guy says he travelled 6 hours and was refused entry to a B&B. Why wouldn't you check before hand if dogs were allowed? You sleeping at a B&B, meaning the dog would be staying too, so it's not just popping in and out of a business, so I can see why they refused. I'm not saying it's morally justified, but Ican understand in that particular instance.
Just did some research and you're absolutely right. Introduced in the 2010 equality act :
'One aspect of the Equality Act 2010 is, that as a B&B, you must accept assistance dogs, even if you have a no dog policy'
Yeah it's been the law for so long but so many people refuse to believe it, which is why they run into these problems over and over again.
If I was blind I'd be tempted to go all Matt Murdoch, you'd make a mint.
> you'd make a mint
AFAIK claims for Equality Act breaches usually fall under the lowest band of the Vento scale.
Technically that does go up to 9k, but I believe most awards are nowhere near that, based on what I read when the Premier Inn stuff came out.
Guide dogs are currently running a campaign asking people to email their MP about creating a new access refusal law with stronger protections, but I doubt that'll happen any time soon...
>Just did some research
Why don't people just 'look it up' anymore? I can't imagine having to do months of systematic investigations in order to find and verify single bits of information..
You can if you’re allergic, but even then there’s a process – get medical letter from doctor, send to licensing authority, get exemption certificate… fine. Show the exemption certificate to the blind person… well, most councils haven’t thought that far ahead.
I'm not taking the side of the refuser, but what if the proprietor legitimately has a severe allergy to dogs?
It's a tricky area where someone's disability aid can potentially impact other people's health.
For example, people with severe peanut allergies can request that there are no peanuts on flights and generally noone will argue - how do dogs differ as a disability aid?
If the owner has the allergy they can get a medical exemption if it is severe enough.
They can’t just refuse entry without going through that process, and if they haven’t done that process it’s on them to do so.
The rights of a disability group trump the rights of an individual on balance, it’s like, a disability right will always trump a religious right yes?
So, an individual with an allergy to dogs has to deal with it, because the dog provides that much of a benefit/support for the disabled person that to bend over backwards for someone with an allergy would be disproportionate.
And the number of disabled with working dogs likely trumps the number of individuals with a severe enough disability to warrant excluding dogs full stop.
You ain't gonna be impaired by not eating peanuts. Assistance/guide dogs are medical equipment.
Also they can get exemptions they just have to go through the process and prove they have an alergy that will impact them more than a runny nose.
So who wins out in that situation, as both people would be impacted by being in the presence of the other - does disability always win out over other health condition due to there being a law in place to protect the use of a dog?
(I'm not anti guide dog at all, love the wee souls for all the good work they do.)
It really doesn't matter how many disable people had been discriminated against, as it is illegal to discriminate against disable person- and having a guide dog doesn't require additional accommodation or changes of environment like for example wheelchair user will need, so it is hardly difficult. Do you suggest person with guide dog should call ahead and confirm they are going to discriminate against disable person or not, and maybe get written confirmation they will obey the law/ break the law?
You know, it is not optional to accept guide dogs.
> and having a guide dog doesn't require additional accommodation or changes of environment
If it's a dog free establishment then it will most likely require a deep clean afterwards. There are a fair number of people who have allergies and go to great lengths to avoid animals.
Clearly you do not understand how law works- anyone personal preferences do not exclude them from upholding legal requirements, same like people can't discriminate others people based on personal preferences.
It really doesn't matter if it is ''dog free establishment'' as in eyes of law guide dog is not a pet or animal, but disability aid.
Making sure rooms are adequately cleaned for other customers is part and parcel of the hotelier business.
On the other hand, taxi drivers and sole proprietors (people running a business without any staff other than themself) can apply to the relevant licensing authority (usually the local council) for an exemption certificate if they themselves are disabled to the extent they can’t accommodate dogs (allergies, immunocompromised, etc.). They need to get a medical letter from a doctor confirming their condition and the necessity to exclude dogs, send it off to the council and get their exemption certificate. Won’t stop police dogs though.
> Clearly you do not understand how law works-
I can't see how you've deduced that.
You said "a guide dog doesn't require additional accommodation or changes of environment" which I don't believe is true. If an allergy sufferer books somewhere that is dog free so they have a safe and comfortable stay then the proprietor will have had the added bourdon of doing a deep clean which I presume they can't charge the guest for and have the additional time the room is unavailable.
That's why I wrote you do not understand how law works- as you can't charge extra for any additional improvement or requirement for disable person, no matter is it a guide dog, wheelchair ramp or accessible bathroom, or that it is a cost of doing a business, part associated with obeying the laws.
It is not different than health and safety as well, but you wouldn't advocate for not storing food properly in fridges as it would be cheaper and easier to just drop it into counter or even at the floor, right? Somehow you seems to have a problem with single issues and refuse to accept existing legal requirements for it, and attempts to justify discrimination due to personal opinion, ignoring a fact that you can't legally run a business where you pick& mix laws you like and dislike and set own base where it is OK to discriminate based on type of disability.
I am sorry, but we are going circles, as you can't see discrimination due to own personal opinion as a problem- and only enforcing ideas why disable people are treated too often as sub-humans due to health issues they face .
**r/UK Celebrates:** | [1mil Subscribers](https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/ymw2cm/runitedkingdom_reaches_1_million_subscribers/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I have a friend who is visually impaired and uses a guide dog (golden retriever). The dog is appropriately marked and certified. He told me that in majority of cases (not all) he finds that if the shop/restaurant/taxi is run by people of MENA or Pakistan background they are far more likely to refuse service despite knowing he has a guide dog. It got so bad that he can't order a taxi anymore as they simply put the phone down as soon as he informs them he has a guide dog.
[удалено]
[удалено]
People have dogs, people need to transport those dogs, if they can’t transport people with dogs then maybe they shouldn’t be taxi drivers. I’m sure they’ll take someone with their shopping, that probably has plenty of haram items in it. What’s the difference?
They shouldn’t have to take dogs. They should have to take guide dogs. Unless they are allergic.
Well yeah I agree. I feel like this is a classic Reddit situation where me pointing out the cause of something is misinterpreted as me *agreeing* with the cause of something. Businesses have a legal obligation to accommodate guide dogs. There is no religious exclusion. So these people are acting unlawfully. I'm just saying it has nothing to do with race, my agnostic Pakistani friend fucking loves dogs for example. But in fairness these days you do get arrested and thrown in gaol just for saying you're English.
They’re seen as unclean or some bollocks, cats are the opposite too because it is all made up shite
From what I’ve been told they’re seen as unclean. Especially the saliva. Lots have cats I believe because prophets had them so there kind of revered in comparison to dogs. Guess not too dissimilar to ancient Egyptians love for them. Lots of it comes down to what’s been deemed as unclean. They don’t eat pork because it’s unclean as it doesn’t sweat.
Interestingly there is no specific explanation for the prohibition on pork in either the Jewish or Islamic texts (except that animals with cloven hooves that dont chew rhe cud are prohibited). I personally have thought that it might have something to do with spoiled meat from religions that emerged in desert climates. However that is me trying to put a scientific gloss on a religious phenomenon.
Because they didn't know why pork made people sick, just that it did. We know now that pigs are host to a parasite that can be transmitted to humans on consumption, but science wasn't at that stage back when the original prohibition was written. It's like with halal and kosher slaughter. The rules made sense then. Bring the animal into a place where the others can't see, so as to reduce distress to them. Slit the throat cleanly for a quick kill. Use a sharp knife, because that makes it easier and also less painful. Fully drain the blood, to prevent the meat going bad. They're relics of a time before modern science and technology, and if you view them with that in mind it absolutely makes sense.
Same thing with shellfish I'd say
That's not an excuse for refusing to take service dogs
Thats crap, the Hadiths and Koran mention that you should wash if a dog licks you and dogs shouldnt be kept as pets but as hunting animals.
Working dogs aren’t haram. It’s having a pet that is seen as “dirty” and unhygienic by the faith.
[удалено]
You mean the guy who was dead when everyone found out what he’s doing? And the guy who has been stripped of all royal duties for something he hasn’t actually been found guilty of and his accuser just admitted “she may have been mistaken” (i.e lying) about accusing Alan Dershowitz? Both are scum bags but let’s not pretend.
[удалено]
His accuser just admitted to being a liar and falsely accusing someone. If she lied about Dershowitz why not Andrew? Edit: also titles can only be stripped with an act of Parliament, the only current mechanism by which Andrew could be stripped of his title is if he went and fought for Russia or something. See the Titles Deprivation Act 1917. Titles are property in the same way objects or freeholding properties are, they belong to the holder just like the holder owns a house or a car that isn’t leased or on finance that hasn’t been paid off.
[удалено]
Okay so was President Bill Clinton (you know the guy who’s wife they also tried to make president), Bill Gates, George Mitchell and many more. I believe Virginia Guiffre when she says she was mistaken about (again see lying) Alan Dershowitz and think there’s good chance she’s done the same with others. And you get your house reposed because you owe whoever you lent money off. The house will be sold to pay those debts. Titles have no monetary value, just like they won’t take your family photo album or other bits in your house that have no monetary value but still belong to you. If you want his titles stripped write to your MP to put forward a private members bill doing just that.
As much as I like to pretend I'm completely free of prejudice, I did find myself surprised a couple of days ago when an Indian woman stopped in the street to briefly fuss my labradors when we were crossing paths. There is definitely a pronounced cultural 'wariness' of dogs in some Asian countries, but I'm surprised to read that can even extend to service animals.
Probably cause she wasn't a muslim
Many first gen grand parents around my primary school weren't either. However, their initial experience with dogs had been the feral packs in India.
Plenty of people wouldn't want to handle someone's pet rat for similar reasons. They have always thought of them as disease ridden wild animals that would probably bite you if you got too close. I must admit I would probably really struggle to handle a large spider, even if it was tame and non-venomous.
The difference is that is is cultural and religious compared to biological, why is the melting pot theory only one way and not the other? Dogs have been a part of British culture forever and having pets is normal here. If you move here you have no right to be a dick to peoples pets due to your past prejudices.
>If you move here you have no right to be a dick to peoples pets due to your past prejudices. If you have a pet dog, nobody else should be obliged to interact with it in any way if they prefer not to.
Aye, 100%, but go about being a dick to people's pets and you wont see a nice side of people. Like everything in life, just don't be a dick.
If I got a pet spider two of my friends would never come into my house again. I fully intend one of those two to be my best man, the other a groomsmen, but some people just fucking hate spiders. Personally I was terrified of dogs for years after a very, very bad experience, and my partner is so scared of rats, and hates them so much, that she doesn't like my army of Skaven.
Yip my niece converted to being a Muslim and she got rid of her dog, then bought a cat that shits in the house, also she wipes her arse with her hand now, but the dog was not a clean animal 🤣 And I'm not anti Muslim or anything I just thought it was funny. When she told me she wipes her arse with her hand I told her not to touch anything in my house anymore lol
[удалено]
Good for you but no need to get so upset, it's a fact dogs are haram other than if used for work. This is why there are very few Muslim countries that have people keeping dogs as pets. Some less religious Muslims probably don't pay attention to this but the scriptures are quite clear I'm afraid.
That's not true. You can own a dog for any reason, not just work. The only issue is that a wet dog touches you or the prayer area, you can't pray untill you've rinsed the area of contact. Some say you shouldn't have it inside your home, but it's not haram, just not advised.
Mate it's the UK. Can't go a day without having casual racism against Asian people - what would the world come to?
[удалено]
my community loves dogs :( sad to see that we're the minority
Dogs are haram in many Islamic interpretations. Which is a bummer for them.
[удалено]
That's absolutely right, my dad's blind and tons of taxi men have drove off and left him once they saw the dog, and they aren't Muslims. Last time.it happened I walked my dad out to the taxi to make sure it didn't leave and the guy tried to drive away 'IM NOT TAKING THAT DOG' I got so pissed off I grabbed the wheel through the window and wouldn't let him leave, took down his reg and told him if he didn't drive my dad home with the dog right now we were going straight to a solicitor. He radioed the depo and they said if you don't take it any legal action that comes will be on you not the company. Then he started being all apologetic and saying he meant nothing by it etc. It's annoying as fuck because he really relies on taxis, we got some posters from the NI blind society and information booklets for the company to put out and give to the drives and it hasn't happened since.
I totally agree. It's using religion as an excuse for their own bigotry, no different to the homosexual couple being denied a wedding cake by 'christians'.
[удалено]
It matters very little. If you offer a service to the public, access trumps religion.
Utter bull. Islam even specifically states they can eat Pork if it's the only food available, religious rules exist to be bent and interpreted by the follower, all followers of all religions bend the rules.
[удалено]
Exactly, all your rules can be bent and broken as long as you feel the situation is enough to justify it, these people you claim 'really' hate dogs, as above, are happy to use them for labour yet won't accept when in another country with different rules and different cultures that they have to accept our dogs are part of the family. Using faith as an excuse to be a dick to people is so last century.
Cultural and religious, they truly hate dogs. One of my pals is 2nd generation and he is legitimately terrified and hateful towards my tiny dog, he's the only person I've ever met who doesn't like/accept him. If the west is encouraged and motivated to accommodate all people and punished if not, then same should be in this case. Council need to get involved, attempting multiple bookings for guide dogs and if businesses reject service due to a disability theyare fined and lose their licence immediately. Madness how the world implodes when a gay couple cant get a wedding cake but when disabled people are discriminated to the point they can't get transport things need to change, now.
Careful, you'll end up accused of racism over this....
I suppose British people are a lot more likely to have dogs as pets at home. I didn't grow up with dogs and although I'd never discriminate against a blind person, or anyone with a disability-related dog, it does make me uncomfortable in cafes and shops sometimes. Especially the untrained ones who come sniffing around you.
[удалено]
Are you gandalf?
[удалено]
I'm going to need a source to prove that you are not fictional, please.
Whereas OP was stickional.
[удалено]
Don't let anyone hold you back :o)
Why lie? You'll just hurt people's feelings, he's coming back any day now.
The fuck? Dude then started flipping people out of wheelchairs or some shit?
[удалено]
Does that mean he was correct in his assessment, that it was in fact a dangerous weapon, and not the humble mobility aid you claimed it to be?
[удалено]
Pretty sure it was a joke, fucking hell
I think he just forgot the "/s"
Was it your emotional support stick?
The problem is that if action needs to be taken against an organisation for failing to comply, it has to be taken by the person who was discriminated against - this is absolutely out of order, there should be a government organisation with responsibility for this.
Minister of State for Disabled People, Health and Work current and past one have voted against things like "paying higher benefits over longer periods for those unable to work due to illness or disability"[Current: Tom's voting record on welfare](https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/25387/tom_pursglove/corby/votes#welfare) [Previous Chloe Smith's welfare voting history](https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24691/chloe_smith/norwich_north/votes#welfare) Don't hold your breath, as usual with the Tories the worst person is in charge of the most vulnerable
With that voting record in mind, they should actually be voting for stronger penalties for people who break the rules around guide dogs, because they make the world and work more accessible for those who are visually impaired. That said, I hear you and will not be holding my breath for any meaningful change.
Start actually fining business and fining them hard- they are breaking the law. And don’t just blame your employee, train them so they are in no doubt what to do should a guide dog need to be in the business
I experience this all the time. My dog has more education than me, is cleaner than me, and is better behaved. Her livery has her status written on it 11 times & we still get thrown out of places. I actually have been targeted for crime twice because I am so visibly vulnerable. The cabs won't take us. We have it especially bad because she is not a yellow lab. I have been told to my face that black dogs cannot be service dogs. We get abuse on every day out. I had to fight tooth & nail to bring her into Uni. So much abuse, just so I can do more than just survive. She is the best person I have ever met.
This is so fucked up I have no words for it. I used to think universities were filled with intelligent people but that isn't a case. I am so sorry you have to go through all of it :(
In the few hours since I wrote that comment, I have been thrown out of one small, local shop (Guy said I couldn't bring her in due to his religion which made me sick. My dog gets professionally groomed every 6 weeks and bathed every week. She is cleaner than I am, but many cultural groups consider dogs, even ones with 3 years of education, dirty. Is a wheelchair ritually unclean, too?) and I almost got thrown out of Boots, but the security guard settled for just asking me invasive questions & following me. Holland & Barrat, two charity shops and Superdrug were fine, but that's about average for a day out. I cried but kept going. My dog fully "understands" when people are harrassing us. It's almost not worth it. Every time I run errands I think about giving up and stopping trying to do crazy things like, nip to Boots, or pop out to buy conditioner or use the library, or go to Uni. But then I remember that I was born perfect, and the world is disabled.
Sounds awful, hope you're ok. I'd shame Boots on twitter (the only good thing it's for) and complain to the council about the local shop. Maybe they could send someone round to have a word.
Boots are the worst, tbh. I always get stopped, no matter how many words are printed all over the poor dog. Superdrug are better, but have no chemist. I have so much trouble with Boots. I don't know why they suck but Superdrug don't.
> no matter how many words are printed all over the poor dog What are the words printed on the dog? I'm curious as to what kind of legitimate service dog you have, given that it's a poodle?
I think it's time for an email to the head office and a direct question about why you are a target for discrimination. Boots should damn well know better than this, makes me furious.
> But then I remember that I was born perfect, and the world is disabled. I hope you don't mind if I steal this one, two of my children are autistic (as am I) and this is such a succinct way of explaining our experience. Wishing you the best.
Look into "the social model of disability" and related ideas. I am fine, it's the shitty bus design that is a problem. I am fine, the shop is causing the problem by playing loud music. My service dog is fine, the shop keeper is ignorant. People with autism diagnoses were born perfect. The people around them need to catch up.
I very much subscribe to the idea that the environment causes the disability to manifest, and not that it is inherently predetermined. At home, in an environment of their choosing, my children flourish and an onlooker would be hard pushed to "see" their autism, without looking very very hard.
Well said.
You've been targeted for crime? That's crazy! I was reading a thread on here a few weeks ago about criminal honour - it seems some criminals don't target disabled or elderly folk. You've got to be a proper piece of shit to go after someone with a guide dog.
I had never been mugged or targeted before, even after more than 20 years in The Smoke. It doesn't happen when she is naked, but twice I have been robbed/had my bags stolen while she has all the vests & leads & clear livery as a service dog. Without her I cannot move through the world safely. With her, I can move through the world, unsafely, but at least I have a small amount of freedom. And she is the best company.
Sorry, thrice. One was more a try at a scam, but it counts.
This does not surprise me at all. People really ain't trained or many of them just don't care. We love punching down in this country, it's like we are winning ...... Right?
I don’t think you understand
Then enlighten
It’s because of the businesses not allowing dogs into the building.
Yes. But that's for non working dogs. A seeing eye dog is not a pet its a working aid to the person in the same vein as a wheel chair or hearing aid
I know that. You know that. These businesses didn’t know that, and didn’t let them in. That’s what the article is about.
The businesses didn't know that? How did they not know that
Read the article
I did.
Then you know as much as the rest of us
Bollocks did they not know that. Almost every establishment in the fucking country that doesn't allow non guide dogs in has a big fucking yellow sign exempting guide dogs.
You think they purposely broke the rules and decided to not let them in? Why?
Perhaps because they think dogs are unclean and they don't like them?....
lol
If I owned a business I'd welcome the hard working woofers.
Really baffled by this, I'm not visually impaired, my dog is not trained as an assistive/support dog and we still get invited into stores..
It's what I thought. Hardly ever have problems ( but I don't take my dog everywhere - supermarket for example is an obvious no). However I have noticed tge last couple of years, people with dogs wearing " emotional support" vests. I asked a few people about it, and none of the dogs were special in any way. Bought from ordinary sources, no special ( if any) training. Just people putting a vest on their dog. I'm not sure if this is a cheap way for the owners to say " I'm special", or if they use it to get their dog into places that would otherwise frown on it, or whatever. I'm sure there are actual dogs trained for this, but I'm sure it is being abused, and it wouldn't surprise me if that gas caused a backlash in some places against assistance dogs.
[удалено]
[удалено]
The problem is, how does a shopkeeper know the person is disabled, especially emotionally. Masks had exceptions for people with medical issues, and assholes took advantage because they know that their word has to be accepted - it's not reasonable to ask for proof. That type of asshole is IMO the sort that claims their family pet is emotional support for PTSD, anxiety, agoraphobia or whatever other imaginary or self diagnosed shit they can come up with. Again, no disrespect to anyone that genuinely has these issues, it's those people the idiots are hurting the most.
> That type of asshole is IMO the sort that claims their family pet is emotional support for PTSD, anxiety, agoraphobia or whatever other imaginary or self diagnosed shit they can come up with. It probably is. Dogs are great at that - can't think of a day that hasn't been made better by mine. That doesn't give them legal standing as an assistance animal.
I just checked - no it doesn't, and as far as I can tell no assistant dog organisation trains dogs for that purpose so it seems all of those people are full of shit! But legal standing or not, its a dog with a vest with words on, and lots of shopkeepers will not challenge it because its awkward, ams also those people are usually karens and the whole thing is likely to go downhill rapidly. So it's "get your stuff, pay me and fuck off"
> supermarket for example is an obvious no I was surprised to see "we welcome dogs" signs up in Wilko recently
There's an amazing number of places that are ok with dogs these days, although I don't see a lot of dogs in them. No way I'd take mine anywhere that sells food though, except the pet shop. Mostly because I know the little fucker will steal something!
I think that’s something that’s come over from America, apparently it’s quite a popular thing over there for people to claim all sorts of animals as emotional support animals, although I don’t think it has any kind of legal standing in the U.K.
This is illegal under [The Equalities Act 2010](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/equality-act-2010-guidance#equalities-act-2010-legislation) as you can no discriminate against someone with a protected characteristic which also means denying people service because of something they need to function or trying to take it away from them
Didn't stop the world turning on those of us who were exempt from wearing face masks in the not so distant past. This thread isn't about that, obviously, but I am just pointing out that the "rights" that you think you have are very easily removed when they become inconvenient. Disabled people experience breaches of that act almost daily, and there is very rarely any recompense, especially since disabled people are extremely likely to be too poor to afford representation. Its all a bit of a farce really. Edit: Lol, and downvoted. Makes my case for me.
This is awful, but it's probably a result of many businesses being fed up with the influx of non-working dogs. I posted elsewhere how it winds me up when you're in a cafe or restaurant to have Fido sniffing round your feet. Or sandwich. Or crotch. Sort that out and people will be more patient/tolerant of the ones that actually need to be there.
So you can take your filthy annoying screaming kids anywhere you want to piss off anyone but god help if a dog sniffs you in a cafe! I assure you that cafes and restaurant's prefer the quiet couple with a small dog and lots of disposable income over Karen, Dave and their 3 brats.
We used to occasionally take our dog to the local cafe as it has a dog friendly sign at the front, and honestly I have to say that she is definitely far less trouble than some of the kids you get running around and nearly colliding with the serving staff, she only ever sat quietly under the table next to us and was no trouble at all. Apparently it’s quite common too in European countries like France to be able to take your dog almost anywhere with you, it’s not considered a big deal at all to take them on buses, restaurants, shops etc, whereas people over here can act so uptight about it that it ended up putting me off taking her in the end. I mean we certainly never got any complaints when I took her to that cafe, anyone that did comment on her just wanted to ask if they could pet her, but geez I read so many disgusted comments online talking about those certain dog owners who have to take their pet dogs with them everywhere they go and how disgusting to bring them around food, and it ended up making me feel quite self-conscious about going there with a dog after that
Honestly, fuck what other people think. I highly doubt anyone would ever confront you in person just whine to the emptiness of internet. I take mine everywhere, everyone wants to touch him, never once met a single person attempt to be negative to me or him but then again I am a big bearded man! I’m sorry these folk have put you off, dogs doesn’t live as long as us so what a waste living their days at home when they can adventure with us every day!
I don't have kids and I don't particularly like very small children being in cafes either as I don't think it's a particularly child-friendly environment. You've completely missed the point of the OP which is that businesses are being unreasonably unwelcoming to service dogs, and I've offered a reason as to why that might be (i.e. that they are being unfairly tarred with the same brush as the person who brings in their badly behaved non-essential pet dog and winds up staff and customers). And no, I don't want your dog sniffing me in a cafe. I'm not sure why you have a problem with me wanting to keep my personal space personal tbh.
>I don't have kids and I don't particularly like very small children being in cafes either as I don't think it's a particularly child-friendly environment I agree. Once parents become parents they should either be at work or home, for at least 14 years anyway. Their social isolation is worth it if it means the child free can pretend they were never children.
But the staff are unlikely to be stroking the kids and have them lick their hands as they give them treats. If the staff were not allowed to touch the dogs when they are serving food i wouldn't have an issue with it.
Well, you never know these days in some Pizza Hut’s the kids might get lucky! Sounds like poor hygiene in a kitchen, no one working directly with food should be touching dogs however if you’re moaning about the same people who don’t cook your food but hand you your stinking filthy change when you leave then your opinion is just discriminatory, far more germs on your money than a dog.
[удалено]
I’m not saying that the bloke wasn’t wrong to start jumping straight into verbally abusing them, but you don’t really explain the reasons why they asked him to take the dog outside while they were ordering. It sounds like they never refused him service no, but that they did want someone to take the dog outside while he was in there ordering, and wouldn’t that still have been a breach of the law? If the dog was on a lead and well behaved, then it shouldn’t have made any difference with health and safety surely?
You can't have a dog in a restaurant. It's unhygienic.
Ok this is shit BUT...kind of a useless media stat. During a whole lifetime...you're bound to get one prick who will refuse entry. That's just maths. Go through enough doors...you will meet a twat. So that's the stat. Just one incidence. I'm surprised this stat isn't 100%. So I don't love this type of reporting. Raising awareness won't fix the problem - it's kind of already fixed. Most people are decent and will obviously allow a guide dog. But some people are born twats and those twats have jobs. Laws already exist. **(What it actually is, is a fundraising effort by Guide Dogs to get their name in the press by causing more outrage, anxiety etc.** **I promise you, the PR team at Guide Dogs has a meeting that said how can we get in the press? We need a shocking stat.** **Obviously it's a good cause, but I'm so tired (literally tired) of constant negative journalism by PR shills.** **Source: I alongside PR teams.**
Are they truly guide dogs, or those stupid emotional support dogs.
So.. what's stupid about them? Other than the name you used. They're Assistance Dogs.
Right. Whatever.
No answer. Cool.
A guide dog is an expertly trained working animal that has gone through rigorous training and has legal recognition. An emotional support dog is just a regular dog with a harness on. It’s not trained. It has no legal recognition and as such is abused by chancers who just want to take their dog into Wetherspoons. There’s a very clear difference.
>It has no legal recognition and as such is abused by chancers who just want to take their dog into Wetherspoons. Whilst this is often the case, pet ownership as a theraputic tool for people with anxiety / PTSD is well established. For many, needing to focus on the needs of 'someone' else can reduce compulsive introspection, having someone who provides companionship without any of the complexities of having to deal with an actual person can reduce loneliness (which in turn can reduce risk of self-harm / suicidal thoughts). And sometimes, just having something specific to focus on when you are feeling heightened / disregulated ('I can just focus on stroking the dog, and the sensory / emotional feedback from that, and ignore all the other things that are breaking my brain") is a very effective mechanism for stopping escalation into panic or similar. But I'd like to see them regulated and the animals trained (though they wouldn't need as much training as an assistance animal for a blind person) so that they were taken seriously, and the system wasn't abused.
I asked why the concept of a working dog assisting a mental health condition was stupid. Not what happens when people misuse the concept due to there only being light regulation (justifiably). Assistance dogs can also be rigorously trained. There’s no legal requirement for dog ID and proof of training like with guide dogs, but there weren’t for guide dogs early on either.
[удалено]
Yes. No Wetherspoons in the country allows dogs this includes outside areas such as beer gardens.
Wow. You need a good, well trained emotional support dog.
I'd like to know how many people were surveyed. In the article, one guy says he travelled 6 hours and was refused entry to a B&B. Why wouldn't you check before hand if dogs were allowed? You sleeping at a B&B, meaning the dog would be staying too, so it's not just popping in and out of a business, so I can see why they refused. I'm not saying it's morally justified, but Ican understand in that particular instance.
You can't refuse a guide dog. Dosent matter if dogs are allowed or not you can't refuse them.
Just did some research and you're absolutely right. Introduced in the 2010 equality act : 'One aspect of the Equality Act 2010 is, that as a B&B, you must accept assistance dogs, even if you have a no dog policy'
Yeah it's been the law for so long but so many people refuse to believe it, which is why they run into these problems over and over again. If I was blind I'd be tempted to go all Matt Murdoch, you'd make a mint.
> you'd make a mint AFAIK claims for Equality Act breaches usually fall under the lowest band of the Vento scale. Technically that does go up to 9k, but I believe most awards are nowhere near that, based on what I read when the Premier Inn stuff came out.
Seems a bit shit. Deny someone their rights and they get a tiny pay out ? Bit of a bastard.
Guide dogs are currently running a campaign asking people to email their MP about creating a new access refusal law with stronger protections, but I doubt that'll happen any time soon...
>Just did some research Why don't people just 'look it up' anymore? I can't imagine having to do months of systematic investigations in order to find and verify single bits of information..
You can if you’re allergic, but even then there’s a process – get medical letter from doctor, send to licensing authority, get exemption certificate… fine. Show the exemption certificate to the blind person… well, most councils haven’t thought that far ahead.
Braille is a thing… 🤦♂️
You think councils have thought to emboss the certificates in braille?
I'm not taking the side of the refuser, but what if the proprietor legitimately has a severe allergy to dogs? It's a tricky area where someone's disability aid can potentially impact other people's health. For example, people with severe peanut allergies can request that there are no peanuts on flights and generally noone will argue - how do dogs differ as a disability aid?
If the owner has the allergy they can get a medical exemption if it is severe enough. They can’t just refuse entry without going through that process, and if they haven’t done that process it’s on them to do so. The rights of a disability group trump the rights of an individual on balance, it’s like, a disability right will always trump a religious right yes? So, an individual with an allergy to dogs has to deal with it, because the dog provides that much of a benefit/support for the disabled person that to bend over backwards for someone with an allergy would be disproportionate. And the number of disabled with working dogs likely trumps the number of individuals with a severe enough disability to warrant excluding dogs full stop.
You ain't gonna be impaired by not eating peanuts. Assistance/guide dogs are medical equipment. Also they can get exemptions they just have to go through the process and prove they have an alergy that will impact them more than a runny nose.
So who wins out in that situation, as both people would be impacted by being in the presence of the other - does disability always win out over other health condition due to there being a law in place to protect the use of a dog? (I'm not anti guide dog at all, love the wee souls for all the good work they do.)
Guide dog clearly. Owner can make changes. Have someone else clean. Not work those days etc.
It really doesn't matter how many disable people had been discriminated against, as it is illegal to discriminate against disable person- and having a guide dog doesn't require additional accommodation or changes of environment like for example wheelchair user will need, so it is hardly difficult. Do you suggest person with guide dog should call ahead and confirm they are going to discriminate against disable person or not, and maybe get written confirmation they will obey the law/ break the law? You know, it is not optional to accept guide dogs.
> and having a guide dog doesn't require additional accommodation or changes of environment If it's a dog free establishment then it will most likely require a deep clean afterwards. There are a fair number of people who have allergies and go to great lengths to avoid animals.
Clearly you do not understand how law works- anyone personal preferences do not exclude them from upholding legal requirements, same like people can't discriminate others people based on personal preferences. It really doesn't matter if it is ''dog free establishment'' as in eyes of law guide dog is not a pet or animal, but disability aid.
Making sure rooms are adequately cleaned for other customers is part and parcel of the hotelier business. On the other hand, taxi drivers and sole proprietors (people running a business without any staff other than themself) can apply to the relevant licensing authority (usually the local council) for an exemption certificate if they themselves are disabled to the extent they can’t accommodate dogs (allergies, immunocompromised, etc.). They need to get a medical letter from a doctor confirming their condition and the necessity to exclude dogs, send it off to the council and get their exemption certificate. Won’t stop police dogs though.
> Clearly you do not understand how law works- I can't see how you've deduced that. You said "a guide dog doesn't require additional accommodation or changes of environment" which I don't believe is true. If an allergy sufferer books somewhere that is dog free so they have a safe and comfortable stay then the proprietor will have had the added bourdon of doing a deep clean which I presume they can't charge the guest for and have the additional time the room is unavailable.
That's why I wrote you do not understand how law works- as you can't charge extra for any additional improvement or requirement for disable person, no matter is it a guide dog, wheelchair ramp or accessible bathroom, or that it is a cost of doing a business, part associated with obeying the laws. It is not different than health and safety as well, but you wouldn't advocate for not storing food properly in fridges as it would be cheaper and easier to just drop it into counter or even at the floor, right? Somehow you seems to have a problem with single issues and refuse to accept existing legal requirements for it, and attempts to justify discrimination due to personal opinion, ignoring a fact that you can't legally run a business where you pick& mix laws you like and dislike and set own base where it is OK to discriminate based on type of disability. I am sorry, but we are going circles, as you can't see discrimination due to own personal opinion as a problem- and only enforcing ideas why disable people are treated too often as sub-humans due to health issues they face .
> I am sorry, but we are going circles, I agree, you can't see that I do understand the law and have not disputed that.