Despite ruling, deaf LI teen's dog again blocked from school

doh

New Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Messages
313
Reaction score
0
Despite ruling, deaf LI teen's dog again blocked from school -- Newsday.com

GARDEN CITY, N.Y. (AP) _ A public high school has turned away a deaf student's service dog despite a state ruling saying the animal should be allowed.

W. Tresper Clarke High School's principal intercepted 15-year-old John Cave outside the Westbury school's entrance Tuesday, a day after the state Human Rights Division told the school to let in the dog. Commissioner Kumiki Gibson wrote that state law "prohibits educational institutions from denying access to their facilities to people with disabilities."

Cave left and did not go to classes Tuesday.


East Meadow School District Superintendent Leon Campo said Tuesday the school would admit the dog if a court ordered it. For now, "we'll continue to make the arguments that we're not only acting in the best interest of John Cave ... but all the 8,000 students that we are responsible for," he said.

The Human Rights Commission has not sought a court order. Gibson has said the commission's directives are usually followed without a court's input.

Cave and his family say the teen, who uses cochlear implants, needs the service dog to help with his studies. School officials say they're concerned for other students' and staffers' health and safety.

The Caves turned to the state Division of Human Rights after their $150 million federal lawsuit against the school district was dismissed last year.
 
Ugh, these folks and their son need to get a life! If the kid has 2 CI's why does he need a dog in the classroom? It's just attention-getting behavior and it looks like the boy's parents are getting off on it too!
 
cochlear implants, needs the service dog to help with his studies

What???? !! :roll:
 
Despite popular belief, children with CIs still need some kind of accodomations.
 
Despite popular belief, children with CIs still need some kind of accodomations.

**Nodding** I don't see how a service dog can be perceived as a threat to staff, faculty, and students.
 
**Nodding** I don't see how a service dog can be perceived as a threat to staff, faculty, and students.

U know it is with most public schools..they are ignorant big time when it comes to educating deaf children!
 
Despite popular belief, children with CIs still need some kind of accodomations.
Read this...

Cave and his family say the teen, who uses cochlear implants, needs the service dog to help with his studies.

Do you really need a dog to help you do your homework... to help you study for a test... to eat lunch... etc? Seriously, what sole purpose does a hearing dog have in a high school like this?

If there's a fire alarm/drill, what happens... everyone stands up and leaves the room in an orderly fashion. He would have to be stupid to sit there going, "Why is everyone standing up and leaving the room?" (If he is really that worried, the school could simply install strobe lights.)

Also, what about the rights of those who are allergic to dogs? If they didn't have rights, then that school would be losing more students simply because one deaf student has a right to bring a dog to school.

I think it's just for attention or that the deaf student has become too dependent on the dog.

Can you give me a long list of things that this deaf student could actually benefit from having a hearing dog?
 
**Nodding** I don't see how a service dog can be perceived as a threat to staff, faculty, and students.
Allergies are considered a threat.

I have a friend who is so sensitive to pet hair that he breaks out in hives and rashes moments after walking into a house occupied by a hairy pet.

Even if I pet a cat or a dog before going to visit him. If he shakes my hand, he develops a rash on his hands. That's why I always wash my hands after petting animals at people's houses or anywhere else... to reduce the risk of spreading allergies with my friends with pet allergies.
 
Read this...



Do you really need a dog to help you do your homework... to help you study for a test... to eat lunch... etc? Seriously, what sole purpose does a hearing dog have in a high school like this?

If there's a fire alarm/drill, what happens... everyone stands up and leaves the room in an orderly fashion. He would have to be stupid to sit there going, "Why is everyone standing up and leaving the room?" (If he is really that worried, the school could simply install strobe lights.)

Also, what about the rights of those who are allergic to dogs? If they didn't have rights, then that school would be losing more students simply because one deaf student has a right to bring a dog to school.

I think it's just for attention or that the deaf student has become too dependent on the dog.

Can you give me a long list of things that this deaf student could actually benefit from having a hearing dog?


My point of making my post was people's reactions to why this kid needs the dog when he has two CIs...It doesnt mean that I agree to this situation. Just saying that even with CIs children still need some kind of accodomations but in this case, I think having the dog to help with studies is kinda extreme.
 
The law says that he has a right to be taking his service dog anywhere and everywhere for any reason as long as it continues to serve some mitigating factor in his disability, however small it might be.

The fact is, if this was a blind teen working with a guide dog, everyone would be kicking up a fuss about his rights being denied. Why can't a deaf teen working with a service dog get -those same exact rights he is entitled to-?

Allergies are not a factor in the law. As I stated in another topic, one school I went to had planted flowers and trees ALL OVER the campus- so I was miserably tired and drugged up on diphenhydramine all the time. Yet, I'm pretty sure nobody would agree with me if I had demanded they remove all the flowers and trees from campus.
 
Can you give me a long list of things that this deaf student could actually benefit from having a hearing dog?

One major factor to consider is the alerting of threats as he walks to and from school. Also, a service dog doesn't stay in training unless it's working- he/she is missing out on valuable training.

There doesn't need to be a long list. If the dog serves ONE task, however small or insigificant, to mitigate disability, the kid has every right to take him everywhere.
 
The law says that he has a right to be taking his service dog anywhere and everywhere for any reason as long as it continues to serve some mitigating factor in his disability, however small it might be.

The fact is, if this was a blind teen working with a guide dog, everyone would be kicking up a fuss about his rights being denied. Why can't a deaf teen working with a service dog get -those same exact rights he is entitled to-?

Allergies are not a factor in the law. As I stated in another topic, one school I went to had planted flowers and trees ALL OVER the campus- so I was miserably tired and drugged up on diphenhydramine all the time. Yet, I'm pretty sure nobody would agree with me if I had demanded they remove all the flowers and trees from campus.

You raised some good points there, Aleser.
 
One major factor to consider is the alerting of threats as he walks to and from school. Also, a service dog doesn't stay in training unless it's working- he/she is missing out on valuable training.

There doesn't need to be a long list. If the dog serves ONE task, however small or insigificant, to mitigate disability, the kid has every right to take him everywhere.

That's pretty good point there.

You never know the situation that might arise. It would be wise to bring something that help you with your surrounding. What if you had to stay after school and it become dark outside by time you have to go home? Dog can alert you when someone or something have happened such as if you had to walk home alone. That one moment...one moment alone can make all those big difference.

Assurance is a dangerous thing to do regardless of how insignificant it is.

Leave him alone. If they could stop the deaf boy, then maybe they can stop the blind people because some of them can function without a dog by using a cane.
 
The law says that he has a right to be taking his service dog anywhere and everywhere for any reason as long as it continues to serve some mitigating factor in his disability, however small it might be.

The fact is, if this was a blind teen working with a guide dog, everyone would be kicking up a fuss about his rights being denied. Why can't a deaf teen working with a service dog get -those same exact rights he is entitled to-?

Allergies are not a factor in the law. As I stated in another topic, one school I went to had planted flowers and trees ALL OVER the campus- so I was miserably tired and drugged up on diphenhydramine all the time. Yet, I'm pretty sure nobody would agree with me if I had demanded they remove all the flowers and trees from campus.
You're right. He does have a right, but could he actually be abusing the right?

While we have rights, it doesn't mean we can snobbishly take advantage of it in every single situation. Remember, it works both ways... not one way.

For instance, if I get pulled over by a police car... I have a right to request an interpreter. However, wouldn't it be easier and less time-consuming if the driver would allow the police officer to use the pen-&-paper method? If a deaf drivers decides to be snobby and refuse to read what the officer wrote, but keep demanding an interpreter... that's like saying "I refuse to read. I must have an interpreter! Now, get me an interpreter!" Seriously, it's annoying to do that.
 
One major factor to consider is the alerting of threats as he walks to and from school. Also, a service dog doesn't stay in training unless it's working- he/she is missing out on valuable training.

There doesn't need to be a long list. If the dog serves ONE task, however small or insigificant, to mitigate disability, the kid has every right to take him everywhere.
If he is actually walking to school and that's his reason, then they can establish a holding room for the dog so that it's out of everyone's way during the day. When he's done with school, he can pick up the dog and walk back home "safely".
 
If he is actually walking to school and that's his reason, then they can establish a holding room for the dog so that it's out of everyone's way during the day. When he's done with school, he can pick up the dog and walk back home "safely".

They -could-, but that's illegal.
 
You're right. He does have a right, but could he actually be abusing the right?

While we have rights, it doesn't mean we can snobbishly take advantage of it in every single situation. Remember, it works both ways... not one way.

For instance, if I get pulled over by a police car... I have a right to request an interpreter. However, wouldn't it be easier and less time-consuming if the driver would allow the police officer to use the pen-&-paper method? If a deaf drivers decides to be snobby and refuse to read what the officer wrote, but keep demanding an interpreter... that's like saying "I refuse to read. I must have an interpreter! Now, get me an interpreter!" Seriously, it's annoying to do that.

The "can function without" excuse is not an excuse, by the law. As a blind person, I can function 100% without a service dog- I rarely get lost, I have very good cane skills, ect. There's absolutely no reason I cannot go the option that's easier for everyone- using a cane. But again... if I had been denied the right to take a guide dog to school, the whole country would be jumping down their throats, using the same law HE is protected under but apparently not 'disabled enough' for.

How is it any different? Most people with disabilities CAN function equally or near-equally without a service dog. Should we all deny them, using the cheap excuse that they 'don't really need it'?
 
Allergies are considered a threat.

I have a friend who is so sensitive to pet hair that he breaks out in hives and rashes moments after walking into a house occupied by a hairy pet.

Even if I pet a cat or a dog before going to visit him. If he shakes my hand, he develops a rash on his hands. That's why I always wash my hands after petting animals at people's houses or anywhere else... to reduce the risk of spreading allergies with my friends with pet allergies.

If allergies are the case, then a service dog for a blind person would not be allowed either. If you get a rash from petting dogs, then it would be my suggestion that you not pet them. Once again, a service dog is not considered a pet, but an accommodation.

A service dog is considered, under the law, to be an extension of the person, not a separate entity.

Likewise with perfumes. Can we outlaw the use of perfumes simply because some (me included) experience allergic reactions to the scent?
I amsorry that your friend experiences such allergies, but we are talking about public accommodation, not a private home.
 
I agree.

I think he should be allowed to take his dog to school with him if he feels he needs it.

I suffer from hayfever yet I would never dream of asking anyone to cut down all the grass for my benifit. MY HAYFEVER IS MY PROBLEM.
 
Back
Top