I have an issue with Airbnb's policy declaring that an emotional support animal is to be treated the same as an ADA-protected animal, because as a licensed psychotherapist, I am aware that many people are able to easily convince a licensed mental health professional that they 'need' their pet to be documented / authorized as an 'emotional support animal' but the true intent is that they wish to travel anywhere with the animal and not be challenged on it. I know this first hand, as I am a licensed therapist. I have refused more than once such requests (even from a few friends and acquaintances who were not clients!) because they were not justified and it would be unethical for me to agree to such a request - but some therapists are not so diligent. Also, it is my understanding that the ADA does not recognize or protect under the law 'emotional support animals' . Here are the two 'policies' (Airbnb policy and ADA federal law):
Airbnb's Policies: "Emotional Support Animal: Airbnb defines assistance animals to include Emotional Support Animals. These are animals that are used as part of medical treatment and/or therapy to assist with an individual’s daily functional tasks, but are not limited to a specific type of animal and are not required to be trained to assist an individual in a particular task. These animals are sometimes referred to as comfort animals or therapy animals."
And this is from the ADA:
"If you're an individual with an emotional or psychological disability- emotional support animals can be an excellent companion. While emotional support animalsare used as part of some medical treatment plans, they are not considered service animals under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).Nov 11, 2016"
I therefore am concerned that Airbnb has it's own policy around this and has included emotional support animals in it's anti-discrimatory categories, even though the ADA does not. It would seem to put the host in an unfair position. I have seen some cavalier responses on other forums to hosts asking about this issue, such as, "So if the animal destroys something just take photos and collect money for it from the guest and kick them out", etc. Well, if you are booked pretty much full-time year-round like we are, with same day turnover, finding that a guest's supposed "support" animal has destroyed something in your rental a few hours before the next guest checks in, or having a guest checking in who understood your property to be a pet-free zone and they chose it in part for this reason due to allergies, etc, can put undue hardship on both the host and the guest that follows the support animal's 'visit'. I'd be curious to hear people's thoughts on this. It irks me, frankly, that Airbnb is seemingly not aligning it's policies with ADA definitions and laws. Your thoughts? By the way, please do not assume I do not enjoy animals. I in fact originally had my Cottage listed as pet-friendly, but my two large dogs and the guest dogs engaged in barking and territorial behavior despite a wall separating them and despite all dogs being relatively well behaved. The guest dogs tend to mark their 'new' territory in such cases, so this was an issue as well. As a therapist, I specialize in animal assisted therapy (horses and dogs). So this is not about my not wanting animals on my property. It is about hosts being put in an unfair position unnecessarily, given federal laws do not recognize emotional support animals as a protected animal but Airbnb does, as well as the fact that in some cases the 'emotional support' animal title and privilege is being misused / abused by both clients and licensed mental health professionals at times. Therapists whose incomes depend on accommodating their clients sometimes have trouble saying "No - that would not be ethical", particularly when they are new to the field and trying to build a clientele. There is also the matter of our not being allowed to have guests sign animal addendums or waivers, nor can we collect extra fees. In my dog addendum guests had to agree to de-flea dogs before visiting the Cottage and to pay for de-fleaing if I had to fumigate after their stay - which also would result in possible loss of income for me if guests following could not be accommodated by me.
