<p>Yes, this is my thought. The heating and ventilation system is going to spread the allergen around. It’s not just a matter of finding roommates with no allergies. And it can happen from floor to floor as well. I’ve lived in an apartment building where the heating system blew the cigarette smoke from my downstairs neighbor straight at my bed. I never once saw that tenant but I sure knew what his cigarettes smelled like.</p>
<p>That would drive me insane if my roomie had a hamster, rat, rabbit, guinea pig or the like . . . sanctioned or not. They keep you up all night tearing newspaper, drinking from those little ball activated water drippers and just generally scuffling around being nocturnal. To bring such an animal into a shared space is just rude. </p>
<p>I don’t get how a need for a “comfort animal” could take precedence over a need to not be exposed to allergy causing dander and/or a need for sleep. Do people with documented rodent phobias get a say as well?</p>
<p>Yes, this is just common sense to me. Students who feel they can’t live without pets should arrange off campus housing in a building that allows pets. If that’s against the usual school policy, I’m sure the school would be willing to grant permission to live off campus as an accommodation for someone with a medically documented need for a pet. Other students need to breathe.</p>
<p>At some point, if you have an allergy or phobia of certain common things, you have to appreciate that you may be exposed to them. You can’t forbid a whole dorm to not use peanut butter if one person is allergic to peanuts. You can’t make the whole school dining hall go kosher because you need to be.</p>
<p>The point of ADA and other anti-discrimination laws is both to protect disabled / special class people from wanton discrimination and to protect the employer from onerous accommodations that go above and beyond reasonable. </p>
<p>A company or university would have no liability if the allergy or phobia was not documented and the information shared with the university.</p>
<p>IMHO, this should have been hashed out before the student accepted a spot at the college. Sadly, a lot of animals end up dumped on parents or worse when their “owners” (I don’t agree that kids under 18 should “own” pets) go to college.</p>
<p>Psychiatric disabilities are as real as allergies and the student with such a disability has as much right to on campus housing as the student with allergies. So… now you are starting to see the issue of dueling disabilities. Whose wins? And no, it’s not as simple as saying breathing wins as not all allergies rise to the level of disability and many can be treated to nearly symptom free with medications and shots. Nor can one be dismissive of anyone’s disability. Not all conditions rise to the level of disabilities, so I doubt very much rodent phobia would factor in to housing decision. (We’re rural, and it’s fall–the mice are trying to get in everywhere right about now, but believe me, they’re nobody’s pets.)</p>
<p>And OP, I’m sorry we’ve strayed from your question. This situation is not at all the same as sneaking an animal into the dorms, which is done, more often than you’d think, but ill-advised.</p>
<p>Also consider liability if the pet bites or scratches someone, particularly an animal that may not be vaccinated.</p>
<p>Are colleges still required to provide smoking-allowed housing for smokers? They have an incredibly well documented need for those cigarettes, and I hear they find them very comforting. Comforting enough to die for.</p>
<p>cobrat, NYC housing regulations have nothing to do with this thread.</p>
<p>Well, it seems to me that a disability that could cause anaphylaxis and death would have a pretty high priority.</p>
<p>But it’s certainly true that colleges probably sometimes have to find ways to accommodate incompatible disabilities.</p>
<p>thank you oldmom</p>
<p>also, you run the risk of an irate mom kicking your butt. I certainly would, but my son is severely allergic.</p>
<p>But in any case, we have NO reason to believe the prospective dorm resident has any recognized disability, and needs an animal.
The wording from the OP only indicates some prospective resident may lack the integrity to follow the rules about pets and may be willing to put the pet and other people at risk; and only wants opinions on how likely they are to get caught. This hints the prospective resident merely wants a pet and makes no claim of having to have the pet to get through daily activities.</p>
<p>I’m glad this thread was posted btw - now I know to make sure my D lists ALL her allergies in her dorm room form.</p>
<p>The rules in place state that pets are not allowed and their are many good reasons for those rules. It’s the kid who wants a pet who is seeking special treatment. Sorry, but I think the ADA is being abused in so many ways. </p>
<p>Also their one pet probably will affect many other students. And what is this world coming to when kids are told they have to take expensive meds and undergo painful medical procedures because someone wants to violate school rules and keep a bunny. My kid has done all that, and it got her symptoms to a more tolerable level. Tolerable for visiting a friend or spending the night in a room–without the family pets present. It’s not a cure and it broke our hearts to get rid of the pets we had that she was allergic to. What about the kid who “needs” Fluffy getting a stuffed rabbit instead, or go to more counseling, or take more antidepressants? Why is that not ok, but it’s ok for an allergic student to be forced to undergo lots of treatments?</p>
<p>Wanting a bunny is a disability but an allergy is not a disability? My kid has been sent home from school quite a few times because teachers said she was unable to function due to serious allergies I’m so glad I saw this thread because I never would have dreamed that people who work in housing offices might think this way and so now I will know what questions to ask that I would not have thought were necessary when my allergic child goes off to college.</p>
<p>Will these pet dependent students be taking them to work, too? Just curious.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think the material cobrat cites is relevant. I know someone whose kid was anxious and who wanted to bring her dog to school as a comfort animal. The school said absolutely not because the dog was not a “service animal” under the ADA. The father threatened to sue the school based on a line of authority similar to what cobrat cites. I didn’t read cobrat’s links but there are apparently federal regs that say essentially the same thing. This girl had no history of psychiatric problems but they found a psychiatrist willing to write a a “prescription” for the dog. </p>
<p>The explosion of “comfort dogs” has already started to cause problems for airlines. I predict the same sort of problems will begin to arise in dorms. The quarters are too tight for big dogs, even putting aside the issues with allergies. </p>
<p>I think cobrat’s material is just as relevant as the points that others have made that are not exactly on point to the original post.</p>
<p>Those psychiatrists are the problem, then. Writing a prescription for a bunny is beyond crazy.imho. </p>
<p>Am having flashbacks of “Fatal Attraction”. </p>
<p>Dont sneak in a pet. Just don’t. If you really want a pet, live off campus.</p>
<p>Here’s the HUD notice saying that DOJ’s definition of “service animal” as excluding “comfort animals” does not apply (in HUD’s view) to accommodations that must be applied in housing.</p>
<p><a href=“http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=servanimals_ntcfheo2013-01.pdf”>http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=servanimals_ntcfheo2013-01.pdf</a></p>
<p>At least one court has ruled that dorms are “housing” for purposes of the Federal Housing Act.</p>
<p>And here’s an article that explains the ramifications of all of this:</p>
<p><a href=“http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/BL-LB-44917”>http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/BL-LB-44917</a></p>
<p>The anxiety of the girl I know was mild; she was not prescribed medication, for example. Just her dog (an Australian shepherd, who was her pet before it was re-purposed as an emotional support animal). The note from the physician did NOT include a diagnosis or any detail about her condition. </p>