Emotional support dog bites child on Southwest flight

TODAY IN THE SKY

Dawn Gilbertson, The Republic | azcentral.com Published 10:49 a.m. ET Feb. 22, 2018 | Updated 11:05 a.m. ET Feb. 22, 2018

facebook sharetwitter shareemail shareemail share

After Delta Airlines cracked down on support animals on planes, we explain guidelines on when you can travel with one. Robert Lindeman

A child was bitten by an emotional support dog on a Southwest Airlines plane in Phoenix late Wednesday, adding to the debate about the risks of an increasing number of in-flight animals.

The teeth of the dog scraped the child's forehead as the passenger approached it after boarding a flight bound for Portland, Ore., according to Southwest.

The child, whom the airline says was 6 or 7 years old, was treated by paramedics for a minor injury, the airline says, and continued on the flight. Southwest did not disclose where the passenger lives.

The unidentified dog owner remained in Phoenix when the flight departed about 20 minutes late, the airline said.

MORE: An emotional support peacock? Comfort animal or not, some airlines saying no as rules are tightened

MORE: Delta tightens leash on comfort animals on flights, with rules for lack of federal regulation

"As always, the safety of our customers is our highest priority,'' Southwest said in a statement.

At least one passenger was bothered by the incident, posting about it on Twitter.

@SouthwestAir flight 1904 allows a support dog on the plane, bites kid, paramedics now on plane. Why are dogs on the plane?! Never again will I fly SWA. pic.twitter.com/mvfwQM4BaD

— Todd R. (@TR411) February 22, 2018

In a later tweet, he said, "When dogs are biting 6 year old kids on planes, it may be time to reconsider rewriting your 'safety' policy and procedure manual.''

Some Twitter users replied that the child should have not approached the medium-sized dog.

"When kids are touching service dogs, it may be time for parents to wise up,'' one post said.

MORE: Do's (and don'ts) of flying with an emotional support animal

EDITORIALS: Air travel has become a real zoo | More animals on airplanes are good

The incident comes as at least two major airlines are tightening their rules on emotional support animals, which are different than trained service animals. There is growing concern about fake online authorizations for emotional support animals, which are exempt from airlines' usual pet fees. Southwest, for example, charges $95 one way to bring a small animal that fits underneath the seat in a carrier.

Delta tightened its rules in January and United followed in February after a high-profile incident involving an emotional support peacock named Dexter that was denied boarding.

Southwest spokeswoman said there are no immediate plans to change its policy on emotional support animals but said the airline is continuing to study the issue.

Ray,

Crazy!

Maybe the parents should sue the dog owner and the airline for injury.

Back to the idea of buying some tickets and putting people on planes with weird animals...maybe those should be snarling pit bulls (trained to not actually bite!).

Interesting that you suggest that the parents should sue the airline for following the law to allow that animal on the plane.

Would you also suggest that if a tenant is bit by another tenant's ESA, that they should sue the landlord?

Seems like you're on the wrong side of this, Brad...

- John...

I appreciate John's appeal to logic, but I know Brad well enough (I think) to understand what he's going after.

The ESA laws are absurdly vague and prone to abuse. It will take some high profile cases and high profile push back to make any changes. It's a sad state of affairs we've come to in this country when common sense can't be used to make common law: everything seems like it has to come from statutue (via Congress) or case law (via lawsuits).

So what I see is if the parents sued the air carrier, the air carrier would push back and say, "Dudes, we were just following the law...stupid as it is." Maybe the judge would see that and say, "yeah, that law is kinda stupid, so what we'll do is either a) repeal/change it or b) make the air carrier immune from prosecution if they're just following the law." That, in turn, could possibly carry over and benefit land lords....

Notice, Brad didn't say he wanted the family to WIN the lawsuit....just sue them. That's the key: bringing more public attention to it. Force the courts to clarify what is/isn't acceptable, and hopefully the absurdity of being held legally liable for following the law would generate the reform we all desire.

Sid: I know -- but his reply didn't seem like "The should sue the airline to bring awareness to this problem." It seemed more like some of the Twitter users mentioned in the original response that blamed Southwest for taking the animal.

That's why I pointed it out.

NE: Yes, I'm fully aware of that.

- John...

AllyM: While I agree that the owner is to blame, I disagree that a dog that bites someone that approaches them is just "doing what dogs do." There is more to it than that.

- John...

Ray and I have been joking back and forth about this issue on other posts. In the legal world the term is REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF SAFETY.

The law gives my residents a reasonable expectation of safety because they see a lock on the front door.

I have a reasonable expectstion of safety when I buy an airline ticket and board their plane. We expect the airline to provide for our safety even in the cabin. Especially when it’s a known hazard like a dog with the ability to bite and has different perception of those around him. Dogs can perceive happy, noisy people moving close as a threat.

MY dog perceives every person walking on our street is a bad guy and she must bark to scare them away and defend her family.

In the world of laws and policies nothing will change until a decisionmaker is sued. Just look at schools blaming govt rather than building defenses.