Emotional-Support Animals: Necessary or Nuisance?
Dogs, cats, and even birds are becoming a more common sight in the nation's airports due to an increase in the use of emotional-support animals (ESAs).
A recent article on Medscape stirred some debate in the comments section among physicians regarding the necessity of these animals. While many supported the use of legitimate service or therapy animals, whose owners say they rely on them for emotional or psychiatric support, other readers were more skeptical. Some cited questionable Internet-based certification allowing pets to accompany their owners on planes, calling it an abuse of the system.
Many commenters noted that they've had patients request a signed document, often required by airlines, to permit their support animal to board a plane with them (often free of charge). And many said they declined the request after discussion with their patients.
Doctors' Discretion Varies
From their perspective, some physicians questioned the need for ESAs—or at least long-distance travel—in the first place.
Said one anesthesiologist:
Could we please stop contributing to the insanity of some of our patients? If it's too stressful to fly, then stay home. I sure as hell do not want to be sitting next to somebody's peacock on a flight. What an unprofessional cop out to acquiesce to these people's demands.
