Talking Stick - March/April 2012 - 22

speCial FoCus

the ADA guidelines. Title II and III of the ADA directly state its application to state and local government entities, as well as any entity offering public accommodation or education courses, including public and nonprofit institutions. Higher education has worked to establish procedures to observe the disability policies and also adapt to changes. In March 2011, the ADA guidelines were changed to specifically define service animals as “any dog that is individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability including a physical, sensory, psychiatric, intellectual, or other mental disability.” Any other species is not considered a service animal, regardless of its training. These tasks must directly relate to the person’s disability, defined by the ADA as assisting visually impaired individuals with navigation, alerting hearing-impaired individuals to the presence of people or sounds, pulling a wheelchair, and assisting an individual during a seizure, among others. The FHA, on the other hand, describes a disability as any physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more activities. This definition is sufficiently broad to incorporate trained therapy animals that are sometimes viewed as “pets,” as in Hamilton’s case. Nebraska investigated the training of Hamilton’s service animal to ensure that the dog was qualified under the ADA; however, the university went too far in its inquiry. According to the ADA amendments, only two questions regarding requests for service animals should be asked: if the animal is required because of a disability and what tasks it has been trained to perform. As a result of going too far (asking unnecessary questions about Hamilton’s medical status), Nebraska has also been charged with discriminating against someone with
22
Talking STick

Though The issue of defining WhaT can be caTegorized as a serVice animal is noW looming large ThroughouT The higher educaTion communiTy in The uniTed sTaTes, The inTernaTional communiTy remains unaffecTed – for noW.
a disability by asking for unnecessary information. What does this case signify for higher education? Will college and university housing have to comply with the FHA in regards to emotional therapy animals? Where will the line be drawn, and will illegitimate requests bombard the system? What additional changes will institutions have to make in existing policies? Steve Waller, director of residential life at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge and chair of ACUHO-I’s Public Policy Advisory Committee, published a white paper (available in the ACUHO-I online library) identifying ADA and FHA regulations. He further details the current legislation as it applies to higher education, indicating that the FHA and ADA were created separately for private and public spaces, respectively.

However, the application to college- or university-owned student housing is still unclear, and Nebraska is planning to refute the lawsuit. The first step for schools to take regarding this issue is a simple one: “Get to know the Fair Housing laws and the ADA,” says Doug Hallenbeck, executive director of housing at Clemson University in South Carolina. He suggests working with students with disabilities and legal offices to avoid missteps. Housing officials may be hesitant to embrace the idea of emotional therapy animals because even students who have service animals under the allowed mental health section of ADA can cause problems. Katie Boone, director of residence life at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, says they have had to relocate students who have allergies to the service
Talking Stick - March/April 2012

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Talking Stick - March/April 2012
