Dog bite on board

[chengkp75]

2 hours ago, rugerdog said:

 

I understand this to a certain extent, but I'm confused.  If the dog bite laws under the flag state of the ship are the governing rules, then why are these ships subject to the American ADA rules with regard to service animals?

 

Again, I'm not trying to be argumentative nor disrespectful to anyone.  Just looking for some clarity since I've never seen this particular situation addressed.

The ADA applies because the ship provides public accommodation in a US port, so they cannot deny someone boarding because of a service dog as covered by the ADA.  At sea, in actual fact, they could ignore the ADA, but then they would have to train both passengers and crew in two sets of requirements, which would change when the ship gets 12 miles offshore. And, in fact, as I've stated before, the SCOTUS has ruled that only certain parts of the ADA apply to foreign flag cruise ships.

 

International jurisdiction is a tricky thing, and why there are admiralty lawyers who only specialize in its practice.  As stated, the flag state law generally has jurisdiction on the ship at all times, but when in another country's waters or port, that country has some overlapping jurisdiction in areas that are "external" to the ship, like taxes, commerce, environmental concerns, drugs, etc. But things like labor laws, which are "internal" to the ship are the flag state's sole jurisdiction.  Generally, the "port state" (the country the ship is in at the time) doesn't apply their laws to the ship unless the "safety or goodwill" of the port or country is threatened.  While in international waters, only the flag state has jurisdiction, unless a country claims "extra-territorial jurisdiction" in special cases.  An example is that the US claims extra-territorial jurisdiction over severe crimes (rape, assault, grand theft) against US citizens on foreign ships, provided the ship is in international waters, and not in the waters of another country.

Edited October 12, 2019 by chengkp75

[GUT2407]

But if you don’t know who owns the dog, it doesn’t matter who has jurisdiction.

 

And the cruise contract normally specifies the method of resolving any dispute between you and the line, usually specifying mediation as a first step.

[rugerdog]

Thank you, Chengkp, for that very detailed and informative explanation.  I appreciate you taking the time and effort to share your knowledge.

 

In the case of a service animal biting a passenger, who would be responsible for tracking that information?  If an animal bites someone, I wonder would it be denied boarding on a subsequent cruise.  How would the cruise line have access to that information?  I'm sure I've read about passengers being banned not just from one brand of cruise line, but from many across the industry, so there must be some system in place for sharing information.

[rugerdog]

6 minutes ago, GUT2407 said:

But if you don’t know who owns the dog, it doesn’t matter who has jurisdiction.

I'm not sure I understand your meaning.  There was an incident report created by the security department, as well as a medical report.  And the vaccination records of the animal were filed with the cruise line.

[calliopecruiser]

7 hours ago, rugerdog said:

In the case of a service animal biting a passenger, who would be responsible for tracking that information?  If an animal bites someone, I wonder would it be denied boarding on a subsequent cruise.  How would the cruise line have access to that information?  I

 

If it is a true service dog, the owner would be appalled and would be very forthcoming with all information.  And the dog would likely be retired or retrained for service, so boarding a ship again would be a moot question.  People with real service dogs take the physical and mental health of their dogs very seriously, and would never try to pretend a bite wasn't important. 

[chengkp75]

9 hours ago, rugerdog said:

Thank you, Chengkp, for that very detailed and informative explanation.  I appreciate you taking the time and effort to share your knowledge.

 

In the case of a service animal biting a passenger, who would be responsible for tracking that information?  If an animal bites someone, I wonder would it be denied boarding on a subsequent cruise.  How would the cruise line have access to that information?  I'm sure I've read about passengers being banned not just from one brand of cruise line, but from many across the industry, so there must be some system in place for sharing information.

As for "tracking" the information, I doubt that any flag state, including the US, would be interested in doing this, so it would fall on the cruise line.  Whether the dog would be banned on a future cruise would be strictly up to them, and their desire for good PR (bad PR if the dog owner complained, also bad PR if you complained at the time of the bite, but no PR if you didn't).  As for "banned passengers", this is typically just across the brands of a parent company, like all Carnival Corp brands, though they may share some info via CLIA, but again the sharing is voluntary, and the banning would be voluntary.

[CPT Trips]

On October 9, 2019 at 10:35 AM, DarrenM said:

Able bodied folk shouldnt really have an opinion on what disabled folk want or need.

 

Unless you know their circumstances our opinions arent valid.

 

This post was a pleasant surprise.

Are you familiar with the acronym "TAB" (temporarily able bodied)? Any off us might require assistance in our day to day activities in the blink of an eye.

[ldubs]

On 10/9/2019 at 4:17 AM, ilikeanswers said:

 

I don't understand how that would make cruising an act of cruelty towards animals. True they may not want to be on a cruise but as pets we make animals do a lot of things they may not want to do (does anyone ask their dog if they want to wear clothes?) that doesn't mean you are being cruel to them.

 

For the sake of discussion -- I think pet dogs are creatures of habit.  For most pet dogs I would think taking them on a crowded cruise ship would be stressful to the dog.  Those used to being among a lot of people would no doubt do better, but still I think it would be kind of uncomfortable for them.   Of course, set aside the special case of service animals.

[DarrenM]

Can I say say that I have never bitten a dog, on a cruise ship.

[davekathy]

9 hours ago, DarrenM said:

Can I say say that I have never bitten a dog, on a cruise ship.

Opposed to you biting a dog when not on a cruise ship. 🤣

Edited October 14, 2019 by davekathy

[ldubs]

I've bitten a couple of grouchy old people.  

[lifes-a-beach]

I wonder what would happen if an alleged service dog were to attack (bite) me or my wife and I killed it, as I would do if we were not on a ship. 

[DarrenM]

2 hours ago, davekathy said:

Opposed to you biting a dog when not on a cruise ship. 🤣

Well yes of course. Havent we all?

[davekathy]

1 hour ago, DarrenM said:

Well yes of course. Havent we all?

For the dogs safety and well-being I hope you've had all the required shots. 

[davekathy]

2 hours ago, ldubs said:

I've bitten a couple of grouchy old people.  

Babies do like to bite. 

[DarrenM]

17 minutes ago, davekathy said:

For the dogs safety and well-being I hope you've had all the required shots. 

Yes, I have just checked my vet card.

[davekathy]

19 minutes ago, DarrenM said:

Yes, I have just checked my vet card.

Doesn't Co Durham, UK where you roam have leash and muzzle laws. 

[DarrenM]

13 minutes ago, davekathy said:

Doesn't Co Durham, UK where you roam have leash and muzzle laws. 

Oh god no. How would the dogs catch the rabbits otherwise?

[ed01106]

On 9/30/2019 at 10:57 PM, Elaine5715 said:

 Now, you would never ask to pet someone's crutches or try out their wheelchair but

When my niece broke her leg many of her friends tried out her crutches for fun.

[davekathy]

26 minutes ago, DarrenM said:

Oh god no. How would the dogs catch the rabbits otherwise?

Obviously they should. Elmer Fudd will take care it for you. Now lay down. 

Edited October 14, 2019 by davekathy

[ed01106]

The ADA law is broken.  There needs to be a process that requires documentation that the person has a disability and the dog is individually trained to assist.  Also there needs to be criminal penalties for fraudulently claiming a pet is a service dog.

[chengkp75]

2 hours ago, ed01106 said:

The ADA law is broken.  There needs to be a process that requires documentation that the person has a disability and the dog is individually trained to assist.  Also there needs to be criminal penalties for fraudulently claiming a pet is a service dog.

Well, there are two groups you need to convince that the law is broken.  Congress, since they have not deemed it necessary to amend the law, and the lobbying groups for the disabled, who feel that documentation of disability would be demeaning and discriminatory (does anyone need to prove they need a wheelchair or an oxygen concentrator?), and that certified training of the dog would be discriminatory on the basis of cost.

[ducklite]

24 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Well, there are two groups you need to convince that the law is broken.  Congress, since they have not deemed it necessary to amend the law, and the lobbying groups for the disabled, who feel that documentation of disability would be demeaning and discriminatory (does anyone need to prove they need a wheelchair or an oxygen concentrator?), and that certified training of the dog would be discriminatory on the basis of cost.

 

I think there could be a compromise.  What if people became certified by a single granting organization (maybe Lighthouse or Special Olympics would take it on) to vet and certify these dogs.  Basically the owner would prove to the certify-er that the dog was trained to perform specific tasks related to the disability.  They could also require all dogs to possess the AKC Canine Good Citizen Certificate.  Any true "service dog" would be able to pass that test with flying colors and the cost is only $10 for the certificate.  Perhaps the AKC would be willing to waive that cost for actual service dogs that had been certified as such by a certified certify-er.

 

In other words, I think there are ways to easily weed out the fakes without undue cost or hardship to the disabled person.

[ldubs]

 

3 hours ago, davekathy said:

Obviously they should. Elmer Fudd will take care it for you. Now lay down. 

 

Kill the wabbit!

[NLH Arizona]

2 hours ago, ed01106 said:

The ADA law is broken.  There needs to be a process that requires documentation that the person has a disability and the dog is individually trained to assist.  Also there needs to be criminal penalties for fraudulently claiming a pet is a service dog.

I agree that their needs to be some kind of documentation for service dogs.  I think it should be similar to handicap license plates.  Unfortunantely many advocacy groups and those who train service dogs feel that by having some type of registration would be against the privacy rights of those with service dogs - meaning people would be able to see that they have some type of disability.  I disagree, because if someone has a service dog, it is pretty obvious that they have a disability otherwise they wouldn't have a service dog.

 

There are states that have laws about falsely claiming a dog is a service dog when they are not.  Problem is how do you root these fakers out.