Comfort Peacock

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think she did it to make a point or get a picture.

+1 the airline released a statement that they'd told the passenger three times before she arrived at the airport that the bird wouldn't be allowed.

It’s a good point to make. People are completely abusing the policy. I met someone at a party who said she got aN emotional support letter online because she didn’t want to pay the fees to transport her dog.

Agreed. Thankfully, I think we'll see the other airlines follow Delta's lead and start to crack down. It seems like they were all just waiting for someone else to be the first to say No More.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Humans with severe allergies should ALWAYS come first.
When a human passenger dies of anaphylactic shock after a dog or cat (most commonly, but perhaps another animal) is allowed to enter the cabin, that's when the airlines will REALLY sit up and notice.

And I have a sweet dog whom I would love to bring with me in the cabin. But I will never do so. Humans come first.

Very few people have reactions that strong to fur/dander. Mostly people just get an itchy nose/eyes. Let's not be absurd, please. The risk of someone dying because he or she is in the same room as an animal is incredibly small.

I won't die (well, I mean I've had to go to the hospital a few times for a nebulizer treatment), but I can't be around cats without having a severe asthma attack. And I have, on two occasions, had to ask to be reseated on a plane because my seat mate had a cat in a carrier under the seat. Which is permitted, though it might have an associated cost whereas claiming you have a support animal carries no additional cost?

That’s terrible. They’ll make allergic passengers pay to get a seat away from an animal if the only available seats have a higher cost? That’s not right.

[Anonymous]

It's ridiculous. There are real emotional support animals, often for people with severe anxiety or PTSD, but people are clearly abusing it. Real service and support animals are extremely well-trained, and their owners are likely to have legitimate certifications.

And airlines also have obligations to passengers with allergies. It's clearly time for the regulators to sit down and hammer out some reasonable rules.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's ridiculous. There are real emotional support animals, often for people with severe anxiety or PTSD, but people are clearly abusing it. Real service and support animals are extremely well-trained, and their owners are likely to have legitimate certifications.

And airlines also have obligations to passengers with allergies. It's clearly time for the regulators to sit down and hammer out some reasonable rules.

The law already allows air carriers to deny service to these fake support animals, they've just been gun shy about doing so. I think we've hit critical mass now, though, and Delta's move is going to trigger other carriers to act as well and crack down.

[Anonymous]

I understand people not wanting to put their pet in cargo—I would never put our cat under the plane. I’ve seen how baggage handlers throw things around. But that is why I follow airline procedure and pay $150 for her to go in a special little carrier under the seat. She’s not a support cat.

But everything about the phrase “emotional support peacock” is hilarious.

[Anonymous]

I hope they did it to prove a point against all the obnoxious "emotional support dog" people.

Leave your dog at home and get a pet sitter for your travels.

Or if you're moving, get ground transportation if you don't want to put your animal in cargo.

The abuse of rules and people bringing their dogs (and it's mainly dogs) everywhere has gotten totally out of control.

[Anonymous]

How is this not abuse of the animal? A peacock? Wtf. I know three people over my lifetime (I’m old) who lived on farms who had peacocks, all said they were kind of mean and are meant to be left alone. Logistically, how was this person supposed to have it in the plane given its size, even if it had a seat? Where is PETA? This seems so wrong to parade this animal around like this, how stressful for it.

[Anonymous]

https://esadoctors.com/airline-requirements-for-traveling-with-an-emotional-support-dog/

You can get your doctors note online thanks to this company! You don't even need a doctor's visit. What a load of crap.

[Anonymous]

She’s a performance artist — obviously this was one of her works. If she ends the sham of emotional support pets let’s applaud her.

[Anonymous]

I blasted laughing reading the news. Made my day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think she did it to make a point or get a picture.

+1 the airline released a statement that they'd told the passenger three times before she arrived at the airport that the bird wouldn't be allowed.

It’s a good point to make. People are completely abusing the policy. I met someone at a party who said she got aN emotional support letter online because she didn’t want to pay the fees to transport her dog.

Agreed. Thankfully, I think we'll see the other airlines follow Delta's lead and start to crack down. It seems like they were all just waiting for someone else to be the first to say No More.

It was United, not Delta.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think she did it to make a point or get a picture.

+1 the airline released a statement that they'd told the passenger three times before she arrived at the airport that the bird wouldn't be allowed.

It’s a good point to make. People are completely abusing the policy. I met someone at a party who said she got aN emotional support letter online because she didn’t want to pay the fees to transport her dog.

Agreed. Thankfully, I think we'll see the other airlines follow Delta's lead and start to crack down. It seems like they were all just waiting for someone else to be the first to say No More.

It was United, not Delta.

Not the PP, but Delta had already announced a crackdown on sham emotional suppport animals before the United peacock incident.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think she did it to make a point or get a picture.

+1 the airline released a statement that they'd told the passenger three times before she arrived at the airport that the bird wouldn't be allowed.

It’s a good point to make. People are completely abusing the policy. I met someone at a party who said she got aN emotional support letter online because she didn’t want to pay the fees to transport her dog.

Agreed. Thankfully, I think we'll see the other airlines follow Delta's lead and start to crack down. It seems like they were all just waiting for someone else to be the first to say No More.

It was United, not Delta.

Not the PP, but Delta had already announced a crackdown on sham emotional suppport animals before the United peacock incident.

I think crackdown overstates the additional Delta regulation. I believe it is just an additional letter certifying that the animal will behave, and the animal’s vaccine record, and all docs have to be uploaded 48 hrs before the flight. I think anyone who has an ESA — truly needed or for the fun of it — could meet the requirements,

[Anonymous]

The New Yorker had a hilarious article about trying to bring all sorts of wacky emotional support animals on planes, trains, and automobiles. Happy reading!
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/10/20/pets-allowed

[Anonymous]

A woman in the mall (I don't live in DC) had her pit bull on a leash with a fake service dog vest. The dog was out of control and it was pretty obvious the vest was fake. found it for $20 on Amazon. Infuriating it must be for people who need legit service animals.