Emotional support animal


An emotional support animal is an animal that provides support to individuals with a mental health or psychiatric disability. Emotional support animals are not required to be trained. Any animal that provides support, comfort, or aid, to an individual through companionship, unconditional positive regard, and affection may be regarded as an emotional support animal.
In the United States, emotional support animals are not recognized as service animals under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Service animals are trained to perform specific tasks such as helping a blind person navigate. People with mental health disabilities who possess an emotional support animal may be exempt from certain federal housing and travel rules. To receive these exemptions, the handler must meet the federal definition of disabled, and the emotional support animal must help alleviate the symptoms or effects of the disability. The individual may need to present a letter from a certified healthcare provider, stating that the emotional support animal is needed for their mental health.

Requirements

Emotional support animals are typically household domesticated animals, but may also be members of other animal species. There is no requirement under US federal law that an emotional support animal wear any identifying tag, patch, harness, or other indication that it is an emotional support animal.
There are no training requirements for emotional support animals, which typically have no training beyond what would be expected for the same type of animal. There is no requirement that they be individually trained to do work or perform tasks.

Supporting evidence

Although most companion animals are pets as opposed to emotional support animals, research studies document a correlation between companion animals and the improvement of their owners' mental health.
In 2020, the Assistance Dog Center, an assistance dog training service, and CertaPet, a company that connects potential clients with providers of animal-assisted therapy, announced the result of an online international survey of the owners of emotional assistance animals, obtaining responses from 298 people in relation to 307 ESA dogs. All participants reported that their quality of life had improved as a result of having an ESA dog, and almost all reported that having an ESA dog increased their feelings of security, independence, and energy, and helped improve their sleep.
A 2020 study, conducted in the UK through an online survey of almost 6,000 people, similarly found that almost 90% of people who had at least one companion animal during the COVID-19 pandemic described their animals as a source of considerable support, with that result being unaffected by the species of companion animal. The authors concluded that having a companion animal seemed to mitigate some of the negative psychological effects of the COVID-19 lockdown. Poorer mental health before the lockdown was associated with a stronger reported human-animal bond, and animal ownership was associated with smaller reported decreases in mental health and smaller increases in loneliness.
A 2018 review of 17 studies relating to companion animal ownership found that pets provide benefits to those with mental health conditions and that pets can be a source of calming support and companionship, as well as providing distraction and disruption from upsetting symptoms and experiences, and helping their owners maintain a positive identity and sense of self. The review found potential negative aspects of pet ownership, such as the significant distress associated with the loss of a pet. The authors recommended further rigorous research to test the apparent positive relationship between ownership of a companion animal and mental health.
A 2019 law review article summarized some of the research into the benefits of companion and emotional support animals, for example noting that interactions with companion animals can decrease blood pressure and mitigate some of the symptoms associated with dementia and Alzheimer's disease, and that animal-assisted classroom activities had been shown to improve the social skills of children with autism spectrum disorders.

Worldwide

Canada

Emotional support animals are not considered service animals and are not protected under Canadian law.
Airlines operating in Canada may voluntarily allow passengers to bring emotional support animals on board, but without the legal protections extended to passengers with service animals. For example, before allowing an emotional support animal to board, an airline may require documentation from a licensed mental health professional stating that the animal is necessary for the individual's emotional support.

United States

To qualify for an emotional support animal in the US, its owner must have an emotional or mental disability that is certified by a mental health professional such as a psychiatrist, psychologist, or other licensed mental health care provider. These may be invisible disabilities.
The owner's mental health impairment must be substantial enough to produce disability, rather than discomfort or a desire to have a pet. Furthermore, for the provider to certify the animal non-fraudulently, the emotional support animal's presence must provide a significant benefit that makes the difference between the person functioning adequately and not.

Regulation

ESA letters
An emotional support animal letter, or an ESA letter, is a document that qualifies people to be accompanied by a support animal in contexts in which pets might not be permitted, such as in rental housing. The letter must be issued by a psychologist, psychiatrist, qualified mental health professional, or physician. The professional who issues an ESA letter need not be the recipient's primary care physician, and some doctors may refer patients who are seeking an ESA to psychologists or other professionals.
Air travel
As of January 2021, airlines are not required to allow passengers to travel with ESAs, and they may treat ESAs as pets. Under current DOT rules, most airlines have decided to treat ESAs as pets.
Prior to 2021, a person with a disability was permitted to travel with a prescribed emotional support animal, so long as they presented appropriate documentation and the animal both was not a danger to others and did not engage in disruptive behavior. "Unusual" animals, including all snakes and other reptiles, were legally allowed to be refused.
Multiple ESAs
Although the issue has not been addressed by the courts, a person's request for accommodation of multiple ESAs would follow the same legal framework as any other request. Thus, if a person with a disability claims a need for multiple emotional support animals, that person will need documentation supporting this claim from their psychologist or other licensed healthcare professional. The practitioner will need to provide documentation that each support animal alleviates some symptom of the disability.

Federal law

In the US, legal protection against housing discrimination is afforded to people with mental disabilities under two federal statutes: Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Federal Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988. These statutes, and the corresponding case law, create the general rule that a landlord cannot discriminate against people with mental disabilities in housing, and if a reasonable accommodation will enable a person living with a disability 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 Fair Housing Act 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 US Department of Housing and Urban Development 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 person with a disability solely because of his or her disability, and that if a reasonable accommodation can be made to make housing available to a person with a disability, 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 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. 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, the US 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, 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.