Dog in Royal Court Theatre on QM2

[chengkp75]

16 hours ago, RJChatsworth said:

All my encounters have been with ‘comfort’ dogs and not ‘service’ dogs, which I class as being for the blind. Have not seen the latter on board and that is a different matter and acceptable.  The QG dog was held in the arm all the time.

As someone who knows people with service dogs and who worked as an accessibility compliance officer for NCL, I will say that your "definition" of service dog is far too limited.  There are dogs that assist the wheelchair bound, as well as those that assist with other "invisible" disabilities like autism, diabetes, seizure disorders and PTSD.  None of these are "comfort" animals, which I agree have no place on a cruise ship, and which are not, at least in the US granted the same protections as service animals.

14 hours ago, RK-NC said:

It is my opinion that a true working service dog would not need to be carried by the human it is working and serving. We spoke with the Administrative Manager of QM2 today and were told that it was our responsibility to avoid the dog. We have decided to stay in our stateroom as much as possible for the rest of the voyage. 

The US ADA allows for service animals to be in one of two places, either on the floor, or in the owner's arms, as some service dogs need to be close to the owner's breath to detect the ketones of an imminent diabetic incident.

4 hours ago, S1971 said:

I do have a problem with so called "comfort dogs" for example alleged anxiety issues etc, if as I suspect it's boarded with some kind of online certificate it should be challenged by the cruiseline, not just accepted for fear of bad publicity, which is what they are doing

It is not just bad publicity, but legal action.  In the US, if the cruise line goes beyond the two allowable questions (Is this a service dog?)(What act does the dog provide to you?), and challenges the dog's right to be onboard, then they can be sued under the ADA.  And, as others have stated, in the US there is no legal requirement for documenting, certifying, or training of a service animal, so you can show up with a service animal without any "online certificate", and board the animal.

1 hour ago, S1971 said:

If that can't be adhered too, harsh as it sounds, owners shouldn't book cruises knowing the limited available space onboard for their animals.

This is just the kind of discrimination that the ADA seeks to prevent.  A service dog is a medical appliance, just as a wheelchair is.  Do you wish to bar wheelchair users from cruising?  There is also limited space for wheelchairs and scooters onboard.

1 hour ago, S1971 said:

It would also be interesting to know how all this fits in with the Evac chair allocation, how do they deal with working animals for those with them in the event if an emergency?

As above, a service animal is a medical appliance, and just like a wheelchair, it would not be brought into a lifeboat, if the ship had to abandon.

38 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

That is not quite true. For instance, cruise lines are expected to assess the validity of your passports and visas on check in, even though they are not part of the border force.

Two different cases.  In the first, regarding passports and visas, as a common carrier, they are responsible for your repatriation cost if they bring you to a country where you are not allowed (no proper documentation), so even if you were taken off the ship by some immigration authorities, the cruise line would still be liable to pay for any detention and housing cost as well as flights back home, so it is in their interest to ensure proper documentation and compliance with the law.

 

As for service animals, as I've noted, there are only two questions the cruise line is legally allowed to ask (in the US), and any questioning beyond that is non-compliance with the law.

 

As I said in an earlier post, the cruise lines have the ability to make rules for the governance of service animals onboard, but choose not to, feeling that the complaints of passengers about possibly fake service, or emotional support, animals is outweighed by the cost of litigation if they push the matter further, even if the litigation ends in the cruise lines' favor  It is a problem, for sure, but it is not the cruise lines' problem, it is society's problem, as this kind of abuse of a law is not only limited to cruise ships, but to businesses in general.

[exlondoner]

7 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

As someone who knows people with service dogs and who worked as an accessibility compliance officer for NCL, I will say that your "definition" of service dog is far too limited.  There are dogs that assist the wheelchair bound, as well as those that assist with other "invisible" disabilities like autism, diabetes, seizure disorders and PTSD.  None of these are "comfort" animals, which I agree have no place on a cruise ship, and which are not, at least in the US granted the same protections as service animals.

The US ADA allows for service animals to be in one of two places, either on the floor, or in the owner's arms, as some service dogs need to be close to the owner's breath to detect the ketones of an imminent diabetic incident.

It is not just bad publicity, but legal action.  In the US, if the cruise line goes beyond the two allowable questions (Is this a service dog?)(What act does the dog provide to you?), and challenges the dog's right to be onboard, then they can be sued under the ADA.  And, as others have stated, in the US there is no legal requirement for documenting, certifying, or training of a service animal, so you can show up with a service animal without any "online certificate", and board the animal.

This is just the kind of discrimination that the ADA seeks to prevent.  A service dog is a medical appliance, just as a wheelchair is.  Do you wish to bar wheelchair users from cruising?  There is also limited space for wheelchairs and scooters onboard.

As above, a service animal is a medical appliance, and just like a wheelchair, it would not be brought into a lifeboat, if the ship had to abandon.

Two different cases.  In the first, regarding passports and visas, as a common carrier, they are responsible for your repatriation cost if they bring you to a country where you are not allowed (no proper documentation), so even if you were taken off the ship by some immigration authorities, the cruise line would still be liable to pay for any detention and housing cost as well as flights back home, so it is in their interest to ensure proper documentation and compliance with the law.

 

As for service animals, as I've noted, there are only two questions the cruise line is legally allowed to ask (in the US), and any questioning beyond that is non-compliance with the law.

 

As I said in an earlier post, the cruise lines have the ability to make rules for the governance of service animals onboard, but choose not to, feeling that the complaints of passengers about possibly fake service, or emotional support, animals is outweighed by the cost of litigation if they push the matter further, even if the litigation ends in the cruise lines' favor  It is a problem, for sure, but it is not the cruise lines' problem, it is society's problem, as this kind of abuse of a law is not only limited to cruise ships, but to businesses in general.

I totally accept what you say about the shipping line’s liability if they carry illegal passengers, but in fact Cunard make up their own rules about passports too. They insist UK passengers have a passport for UK + Ireland cruises, which is like needing a passport to go on a train. They also insist UK passengers have six months validity in their passports, which is an EU requirement, but not relevant in many other jurisdictions.

 

They do seem to have quite strict rules about dogs, but perhaps don’t always enforce them. Now what does that remind me of?

[Cruisin'allovertheworld]

26 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

...As above, a service animal is a medical appliance, and just like a wheelchair, it would not be brought into a lifeboat, if the ship had to abandon...

This is so sad. Regardless of anything else a dog an animal and deserves more consideration than a wheelchair.

I'm all for genuine service dogs and question the level of selfishness it must take to fake something like that- pathetic!

[exlondoner]

27 minutes ago, Cruisin'allovertheworld said:

This is so sad. Regardless of anything else a dog an animal and deserves more consideration than a wheelchair.

I'm all for genuine service dogs and question the level of selfishness it must take to fake something like that- pathetic!

Heartless as it sounds, I am relieved, as I should not want to share a very crowded lifeboat with a possibly terrified dog. For heaven’s sake, I wouldn’t really want to share QM2 with one.

[ace2542]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

As above, a service animal is a medical appliance, and just like a wheelchair, it would not be brought into a lifeboat, if the ship had to abandon

So if a person needs any of those things and they cannot have them at the point of evacuation which without them they may not be able to do then does in fact an argument not exist for that person not be on that ship? Not that I am pushing that argument just asking a question.

[Victoria2]

7 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

So if a person needs any of those things and they cannot have them at the point of evacuation which without them they may not be able to do then does in fact an argument not exist for that person not be on that ship? Not that I am pushing that argument just asking a question.

The evacuation 'chair' will be the transportation. The wheelchair won't be used. No idea what will happen to an assistance dog but it too won't be required in an evacuation situation.

 

That does not preclude their use on the ship in normal circumstances.

[ace2542]

10 minutes ago, Victoria2 said:

The evacuation 'chair' will be the transportation. The wheelchair won't be used. No idea what will happen to an assistance dog but it too won't be required in an evacuation situation.

 

That does not preclude their use on the ship in normal circumstances.

Of course there is  zero chance of the QM2 ever being evacuated short of a serious navagation malfunction costa concordia style or a terrorist attack that breaches the hull neither of those are very likely to happen which renders any assisted evacuated moot. But the question still remains what if dog bits passenger big lawsuit perhaps?

Edited Tuesday at 11:40 AM by ace2542

[chengkp75]

13 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

Of course there is  zero chance of the QM2 ever being evacuated short of a serious navagation malfunction costa concordia style or a terrorist attack that breaches the hull neither of those are very likely to happen which renders any assisted evacuated moot.

What about a serious fire?  Not every abandoned ship sinks.  Far more likely scenario.

 

14 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

But the question still remains what if dog bits passenger big lawsuit perhaps?

No bigger than if your neighbor's pet bit you, and the cruise line would not be liable, though they may settle just to get rid of it.

[S1971]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

As above, a service animal is a medical appliance, and just like a wheelchair, it would not be brought into a lifeboat, if the ship had to abandon

 

So in an emergency situation there would potentially be stray animals running amok whilst people are chaotically trying to evacuate, doesn't exactly sound a good scenario to me, however unlikely it may be.

 

Given there appears to be more and more animals onboard, I think it's about time a full review of the policies are needed.

[chengkp75]

1 minute ago, S1971 said:

 

So in an emergency situation there would potentially be stray animals running amok whilst people are chaotically trying to evacuate, doesn't exactly sound a good scenario to me, however unlikely it may be.

 

Given there appears to be more and more animals onboard, I think it's about time a full review of the policies are needed.

No, the service animals, whether factual or not, would come to the muster station with their owners, and then if the Captain decides to abandon ship (remember, the passenger muster signal is not the abandon ship signal), the animals will be separated from their owners and placed in a secure location while the passengers board the lifeboats.  Also remember, when the Captain signals for the passengers to board the lifeboats and evacuate, this still isn't the abandon ship signal, and the crew will remain at their emergency stations with the exceptions of the 3-4 crew assigned to each lifeboat.  There could be an instance where the passengers evacuate, and then the crew get the emergency under control, and remain on the ship, so the animals could be saved.

 

I don't think there are more animals onboard these days, especially since Covid, as there have been complaints about this for decades now.

[S1971]

3 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

No, the service animals, whether factual or not, would come to the muster station with their owners

 

Who would bring those animals, Cunard have introduced new evacuation rules which requires anyone with a disability to be assigned an evac chair, staff are assigned to them in the event of an emergency not their animals one would assume.

 

I would also assume regardless of where Cunard ships sail from, the rules are the same for all.

[RK-NC]

Here is another report of dogs onboard from a couple of months ago:

 

IS CUNARD GOING TO THE DOGS? We were very surprised to see dogs out and about on the ship on 2 occasions. The first was in the Golden Lion Pub when a young lady brought in a small dog. She made no effort to conceal it. The dog was PERFECTLY behaved and sat quietly at her feet the whole time she had lunch. The waiters were aware of the dog but no one said anything. The second occurrence was on the Promenade Deck. A gentleman had a medium size dog on a leash. Unfortunately, it was not so well behaved. It did bark and try to take a nip at a few of the runners and fast walkers. I did not see the pair take a second lap. I’m not sure if passengers are now allowed to have animals in public spaces but didn’t bother to ask. Neither dog was a service animal. 

 

[RK-NC]

16 hours ago, Planning to cruise said:

No passenger should be disadvantaged like this because of the behaviour of another passenger whatever that is.  You have paid for the cruise.   

 

Thank you @Planning to cruise for your kind thoughts. 

[ace2542]

22 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

What about a serious fire?  Not every abandoned ship sinks.  Far more likely scenario

Another scenario that hasn't happened for 18 years at least (star princess 06) not sure of another serious fire since then. And besides that evacuation would be controlled and organised not the chaos the concordia or the titanic.

[ace2542]

4 minutes ago, RK-NC said:

A gentleman had a medium size dog on a leash. Unfortunately, it was not so well behaved. It did bark and try to take a nip at a few of the runners and fast walkers. I did not see the pair take a second lap. I’m not sure if passengers are now allowed to have animals in public spaces but didn’t bother to ask. Neither dog was a service animal. 

A medium size dog can inflict serious injuries to be fair.

[RK-NC]

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

the cruise lines have the ability to make rules for the governance of service animals onboard, but choose not to,

 

This is the heart of the matter. 

[RJChatsworth]

Now we are in the realms of ‘What if?’  What happens with helicopter evacuations? There were two on QM-2’s last voyage around GB.  Does the ‘comfort dog’ go too?!!

[S1971]

24 minutes ago, RJChatsworth said:

Now we are in the realms of ‘What if?’  What happens with helicopter evacuations? There were two on QM-2’s last voyage around GB.  Does the ‘comfort dog’ go too?!!

 

I agree, there are a lot of "what if's" however, it is not now beyond the realms of possibility that things like this will occur given the increasing amount of animals for whatever reason going onboard these days.

 

I guess Cunard and P&O need to start looking at this type of scenario, if they aren't already.

Edited Tuesday at 01:12 PM by S1971

[3rdGenCunarder]

12 hours ago, Germancruiser said:

Well I suppose the passenger I once met-- not on board a Cunarder- did it the safe way-  carried his teddybear - every evening differently dressed - all the time around - at the bar teddybear was put on an extra stool and got his own drink. I do NOT make that up. People stopped and wanted to get their picture taken with teddybear and owner- also chatted with the guy - which I found quite kind.

Remember Sebastian in Brideshead Revisited?

 

[ace2542]

25 minutes ago, S1971 said:

 

I agree, there are a lot of "what if's" however, it is not now beyond the realms of possibility that things like this will occur given the increasing amount of animals for whatever reason going onboard these days.

 

I guess Cunard and P&O need to start looking at this type of scenario, if they aren't already.

Another scenario to think about. What if the dog gets ill onboard? I am not sure if there is a trained vet onboard. I don't think the medical centre could do much?

[Jack E Dawson]

Here is the what Cunard says on their website about bringing dogs onboard. Note that it specifically says that "Emotional support dogs are not recognised as an assistance dog by the above organisations and are not permitted on board."

 

Jack

 

Assistance dogs 

Cunard accepts registered assistance dogs on board for the benefit of our guests, subject to compliance with international travel regulations.

Please note: we can only accept assistance dogs on Southampton to Southampton cruises, or on Queen Mary 2 Transatlantic Crossings between Southampton and New York.

Cunard accepts registered assistance dogs on board that have been specifically trained to assist a person with a disability and has been certified by an organisation that is a full member of Assistance Dogs International (ADI) or International Guide Dog Federation (IGDF), the accrediting bodies for assistance dog organisations worldwide. All assistance dogs are carried free of charge. You can notify us that you will be bringing an assistance dog in the on board needs questionnaire, available on My Cunard for you to complete before you sail.

Emotional support dogs are not recognised as an assistance dog by the above organisations and are not permitted on board. We can only accept assistance dogs that are fully trained.

Assistance dogs may not be permitted ashore in certain ports of call, in line with current Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) regulations which apply in the UK. If you indicate within your questionnaire that you will be taking an assistance dog on board, we will forward on the relevant paperwork for you to complete and return to us with any supplementary information that is required. Please refer to the DEFRA website for the most up to date information.

We would advise all owners to carry their dog's identification card, or similar, with them at all times in case local authorities require proof. Guests with an assistance dog are not required to travel with a companion provided they are able to undertake day to day tasks independently.

 

[3rdGenCunarder]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

What about a serious fire?  Not every abandoned ship sinks.  Far more likely scenario.

 

No bigger than if your neighbor's pet bit you, and the cruise line would not be liable, though they may settle just to get rid of it.

 

I wish I could hit the 'thank you' icon six times for all your helpful answers! 

 

On the subject of biting, I would be amazed if a real service dog bit anyone without extreme provocation. Aside from the fact that they are trained not to bite people--certainly not nip randomly at passersby--dogs that show an aggressive personality or other issues that make them a poor choice for a service dog "flunk out," and are not used as service dogs. Seeing Eye, which is headquartered near where I live, does sometimes have a dog that, for whatever reason, isn't suited to guiding. Sometimes it can be retrained for police work or some other service. Sometimes it's offered to the family that fostered it as a puppy. And VERY rarely, it is up for adoption--the waiting list is very long because few dogs fail to make the grade. 

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, S1971 said:

 

Who would bring those animals, Cunard have introduced new evacuation rules which requires anyone with a disability to be assigned an evac chair, staff are assigned to them in the event of an emergency not their animals one would assume.

 

I would also assume regardless of where Cunard ships sail from, the rules are the same for all.

I don't know Cunard's exact rules, but I would say that you mean "anyone with a mobility disability" would use an evac chair, but I don't think that that would apply to those with PTSD or seizure disorders, as they are perfectly capable of moving to the muster station under their own power.

 

And, while corporate policies may be universal, the laws in various nations differ, so those may play a part.  And, because of this, even if the UK has stricter rules about service animals, the US does not, and so Cunard sets their policy to the least restrictive.

[chengkp75]

20 minutes ago, 3rdGenCunarder said:

dogs that show an aggressive personality or other issues that make them a poor choice for a service dog "flunk out," and are not used as service dogs.

However, there is no national requirement for training of factual service dogs, some are trained at home by the disabled person or their family, some are even pets who are found to have developed a sense for things like diabetic incidents, and have learned to alert their owner, all on the dog's own initiative.  So, standards vary, and actually except for the DOJ "code of conduct", there are no standards.  And, yes, the DOJ document does allow for the removal of a service animal if it is disruptive or bites.

[exlondoner]

4 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

However, there is no national requirement for training of factual service dogs, some are trained at home by the disabled person or their family, some are even pets who are found to have developed a sense for things like diabetic incidents, and have learned to alert their owner, all on the dog's own initiative.  So, standards vary, and actually except for the DOJ "code of conduct", there are no standards.  And, yes, the DOJ document does allow for the removal of a service animal if it is disruptive or bites.

 

8 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

I don't know Cunard's exact rules, but I would say that you mean "anyone with a mobility disability" would use an evac chair, but I don't think that that would apply to those with PTSD or seizure disorders, as they are perfectly capable of moving to the muster station under their own power.

 

And, while corporate policies may be universal, the laws in various nations differ, so those may play a part.  And, because of this, even if the UK has stricter rules about service animals, the US does not, and so Cunard sets their policy to the least restrictive.

The conditions quoted seem quite strict, both about what constitutes as service dog - not an emotional support dog - and about dog behaviour on board.