|
An emotional support animal (ESA) is a companion animal which provides therapeutic benefit, such as alleviating or mitigating some symptoms of the disability, to an individual with a mental or psychiatric disability. Emotional support animals are typically dogs and cats, but may include other animals. In order to be prescribed an emotional support animal by a physician or other medical professional, the person seeking such an animal must have a verifiable disability. To be afforded protection under United States federal law, a person must meet the federal definition of disability and must have a note from a physician or other medical professional stating that the person has that disability and that the emotional support animal provides a benefit for the individual with the disability. An animal does not need specific training to become an emotional support animal. In the U.S., federal protection against housing discrimination is afforded to mentally disabled persons under two federal statutes: Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Federal Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 (FHAA). These statutes, and the corresponding case law, create the general rule that a landlord cannot discriminate against disabled persons in housing, and if a reasonable accommodation will enable a disabled person to equally enjoy and use the rental unit, the landlord must provide the accommodation. Persons with disabilities may request a reasonable accommodation, such as a waiver of a "no pets policy," for any assistance animal, including an emotional support animal, under both the FHAA and Section 504. ==Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act== Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act was enacted in 1973 and made broad and sweeping statements that discrimination against the disabled in any program receiving federal financial assistance was illegal.〔 However, it was not until 1988 when the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) created regulations under the statute.〔 Section 504 states: In the context of housing discrimination, this statute creates the rule that public housing authorities cannot deny housing to a disabled person solely because of his or her disability, and that if a reasonable accommodation can be made to make housing available to a disabled person, the landlord is required to make the accommodation.〔 Even though the statute does not expressly use the phrase "reasonable accommodation", it has been read into the statute by case law and HUD regulations interpreting the statute.〔 To establish that a "no pets" waiver for an emotional support animal is a reasonable accommodation under Section 504, the tenant must: have a disability, be "otherwise qualified" to receive the benefit, be denied the benefit solely because of the disability, and the housing authority must receive federal financial assistance. Courts have held that "otherwise qualified" means that the tenant must be able to meet the requirements of the program in spite of the handicap. Also, the tenant must be able to meet the general rules of tenancy, such as cleaning up after the animal and walking the animal in designated areas.〔 The Majors and Whittier Terrace courts established the foundational principles that a tenant can be "otherwise qualified" under Section 504 despite an inability to comply with a "no pets" policy, and that a waiver of a "no pets" policy can be a reasonable accommodation under Section 504.〔 However, several courts have consistently held that a tenant requesting an emotional support animal as a reasonable accommodation must demonstrate a relationship between his or her ability to function and the companionship of the animal.〔See (''Majors v. Housing Authority of the County of Dekalb'' (5th Cir. 1981) ); (''Housing Authority of the City of New London v. Tarrant'', (Conn. Super. Ct. Jan. 14, 1997) ); (''Whittier Terrace v. Hampshire'' (Mass. App. Ct. 1989) ); (''Durkee v. Staszak'' (N.Y.App.Div. 1996) ); (''Crossroads Apartments v. LeBoo'' (City Court of Rochester, N.Y. 1991) )〕〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=Right to Emotional Support Animals in "No Pet" Housing: Fair Housing Information Sheet #6 )〕 This required nexus between the disability and the emotional support animal has been refined by several courts. For instance, in ''Janush v. Charities Housing Development Corp'' (N.D. Ca., 2000), the U.S. Northern District Court of California held the reasonable accommodation is a fact-based, and not species-based, issue.〔 In ''Nason v. Stone Hill Realty Association'' (1996), a Massachusetts trial court recognized that there were more reasonable accommodations to lessen the effects of a person's disability, other than keeping an emotional support animal, and therefore denied the tenant's motion for preliminary injunction.〔 Courts have held the emotional distress expected to occur if a person is forced to give up his or her emotional support animal will not support a reasonable accommodation claim.〔 Since a violation of Section 504 requires the housing authority to receive federal funding, this act did not cover private housing providers. This legislative gap existed until 1988 when Congress passed the Fair Housing Act Amendments. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Emotional support animal」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|