Comfort/Service animals in labs

[mythbuster]

Well this is something new. Apparently we have a student who is insisting on bringing their service animal to lab with them next semester. Now I don't know the purpose of said service animal, other than to say the student is not blind. I'm guessing this is more along the lines of a comfort animal, but it could be an epilepsy dog.
   The issue is that the student wants to bring the animal into the lab with them. I teach Microbiology lab, so we deal in a combination of chemical and bio hazardous agents. So I'm worried about this dog ingesting something, or otherwise becoming contaminated. We read students the riot act about not using their phones in lab because of just this concern. Students must wear appropriate PPE to be allowed into lab- not sure what that would be for the dog. Given past negotiations with Disability Services, I doubt we will be able to bar keep the dog in the hall.
    So has anyone here dealt with this type of issue yet? I promise to take pics if we decide the dog needs his own lab coat, booties and, and googles.

[Caracal]

A quick search seems to indicate that lots of Universities have policies that generally allow service animals into labs, although not ones with radioactive materials or level 2 biohazards?

I don't teach labs, but I wonder if it would work to meet with the student and possibly someone with disability services or a dean in the lab where you could go over your concern and you could work with the student to assess whether this can work.

[onthefringe]

Oof, that's going to be fun. Where I am, I would push back if it were a "companion". but woukd have to allw an actual service animal.

Here are some suggestions from U Washington, and Indiana University. And here's an article from The Scientist

They all suggest a dog in a lab should wear PPE.

The one from Indiana says only actual service dogs, and indicates they generally aren't allowed in BSL2 lab or labs with radioactive materials.

[pepsi_alum]

I just wanted to point out that a comfort/emotional support animal is different than a service animal. Both are governed by different sections of the Americans with Disabilities Act and have different legalities involved.

I have no idea how to handle the lab angle, but if it were me, I would probably reach out to your Disabilities Resource office and say that you want to make sure you understand the accommodation so that you can support the student, and ask about safety then.

[onthefringe]

I just wanted to point out that a comfort/emotional support animal is different than a service animal. Both are governed by different sections of the Americans with Disabilities Act and have different legalities involved.

My understanding is that comfort/emotional support animals are NOT covered by the ADA at all. There are some psychiatric SERVICE animals (ie dogs with actual training to sense and interfere with an impending anxiety attack) that are covered. Individual states or schools may have their own laws or regulations governing emmotional support/therapy animals, but they are not covered by the ADA. Popular conflation of "I can bring my therapy peacock on the plane" with trained service dogs is helping nobody.

See here for a relevant article on the differences.

[Caracal]

My understanding is that comfort/emotional support animals are NOT covered by the ADA at all. T

Yes, but there could be state laws or University policies that do cover them, so in terms of figuring out how to approach this just knowing that the dog might not be covered by the ADA doesn't help that much.

[onthefringe]

My understanding is that comfort/emotional support animals are NOT covered by the ADA at all. T

Yes, but there could be state laws or University policies that do cover them, so in terms of figuring out how to approach this just knowing that the dog might not be covered by the ADA doesn't help that much.

Which is why I followed that statement with

Individual states or schools may have their own laws or regulations governing emotional support/therapy animals.

Sometimes knowing the legalities does help. Depending on your state laws and school's regs, it is frequently easier to push back on demands about comfirt animals than other animals. The office where I am is much more willing to be flexible about proposed accommodations if I can push back and note that (for example) "comfort animals are not covered by the ADA, in our state law only dogs and mini horses can be classified as service animals, therefore another student's allergies might trump this student's desire to bring an emotional support cat to class". So even though they do broadly permit use of therapy animals, it's easier to make a case for "unreasonable accommodation in this situation" for a support animal than it is for a service animal.

[Aster]

Have the dog sign a waiver.

[mamselle]

I would also think things like animal dander and hair would potentially compromise the environment/air quality/sterility of a clean lab. Or the gathering of accurate data in an animal lab.

And a work setting down the road would be unlikely to accept them (I've worked in places where I KNOW the person in charge of the animal lab wouldn't have stood for it).

It's probably something that would need to be asked/disclosed in the hiring procedure. I can see at some levels the need for support and guide dogs/horses, etc., but the overall setting also has to be considered. If it would be an impediment to doing the work down the road, would it make sense even to train for such a position now?

There's a difference between discriminating for no cause, and having to make appropriate determinations because of the unsuitability of the situation overall.

M.

[Hegemony]

As I understand it, it's not a matter of hiring, but of a student in a class who wants to bring the dog in.

[Kron3007]

I would touch base with the appropriate unit at your school and proceed as they recommend.  If they say to allow it, go for it and just let the student know the risks, which are minimal IMO. I don't imagine you are using any particularly infectious microbes in an undergraduate lab and students are more likely to be exposed to hazards than a dog would be.  Most service animals are well trained, and it can likely just sit in the front or something.

Personally, I wouldn't really lose any sleep over it either way.

[mamselle]

As I understand it, it's not a matter of hiring, but of a student in a class who wants to bring the dog in.

No, not in this case....but down the road, I don't see the folks who work with sensitive biological materials in an actual pharma lab wanting to deal with the chance of cat/horse/dog hair or dander getting in the air vents or clogging up a safety hood.

So, down the road, if it's going to be an impediment to getting a job in that environment, doesn't it make sense to evaluate that part of the issue while the student is still deciding how to prepare themselves through their schooling for real-world eventualities?

I do not endorse the idea that higher ed is blanket voc-tech training, but the lab component of things does have that dimension to it.

So, given those givens, the student has decisions to be made up front, I think.

M.

[polly_mer]

The article from The Scientist (linked upthread) has a good discussion on problems related to training for a career where the service animal will not be allowed.

[Caracal]

I would also think things like animal dander and hair would potentially compromise the environment/air quality/sterility of a clean lab. Or the gathering of accurate data in an animal lab.

And a work setting down the road would be unlikely to accept them (I've worked in places where I KNOW the person in charge of the animal lab wouldn't have stood for it).

It's probably something that would need to be asked/disclosed in the hiring procedure. I can see at some levels the need for support and guide dogs/horses, etc., but the overall setting also has to be considered. If it would be an impediment to doing the work down the road, would it make sense even to train for such a position now?

There's a difference between discriminating for no cause, and having to make appropriate determinations because of the unsuitability of the situation overall.

M.

Yes, but I think the best way to approach this is to focus as narrowly as possible on the actual issues presented. It isn't your job to worry about this student's future career plans or how other employers or labs might handle this. The goal is to figure out whether there is a safe and non disruptive way that this student and the dog could be accommodated.

If I'm reading the OP right, they have very reasonable concerns, but aren't totally sure that this is absolutely a no, so that seems like a place to start. It seems like you could have the student, the dog and perhaps someone else come to the lab in question and then you could ask questions and assess the dog's level of training and calmness, as well as the student's exact needs.

[polly_mer]

If the lab is checking a gen ed box, then allowing a waiver is a logical choice.  If the lab is a step along a career path, then now is a good time to be realistic about what continuing along the path entails at this institution.   Seriously, The Scientist article has a great explanation for the small and big picture issues.  Case-by-case is not the way to go for issues that will keep coming up.