Dear PAO,
I am a person who suffers from epilepsy. My doctor prescribed a service dog to assist me with my daily needs. However, I live in a condominium that bans pets. Fortunately, I am friends with our security guards, and they have allowed my dog because they know my condition. Earlier today, an incident occurred that has caused me significant worry. I took my dog for a brief walk outside the condominium premises to a nearby store (“tindahan”). Upon returning, a neighbor — an old woman who does not live in my building but in one farther away — saw me. She subsequently complained to the guard stationed at my building. The guard then came up to my unit to inform me. He told me this woman said I should not be allowed to walk my dog. Is the woman’s action considered discrimination against my disability? If it is, what legal steps should I take?
Evangeline N.Y.
Dear Ms. Evangeline,
Admittedly, the use of a service dog or assistance animal is not explicitly specified under the Magna Carta for Disabled Persons or Republic Act (RA) 7277 (as amended by RA 9442). Nevertheless, the intent of the law may cover such circumstance considering that it ensures accessibility, equal opportunity, and non-discrimination in public places, work, education, and services for disabled and differently abled persons. Section 2 (e) of RA 7277, as amended, declares the policy of the State “[t]o facilitate integration of disabled persons into the mainstream of society, the State shall advocate for and encourage respect for disabled persons. The State shall exert all efforts to remove all social, cultural, economic, environmental and attitudinal barriers that are prejudicial to disabled persons.”
To this end, Section 36 (e) of the law prohibits and considers as a discriminatory act, the “failure to make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or procedures, when such modifications are necessary to afford such goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages or accommodations to individuals with disabilities, unless the entity can demonstrate that making such modification would fundamentally alter the nature of the goods, facilities, services, privileges, advantages, or accommodations.”
Based on the foregoing, your medically prescribed service dog may fall under the protective mantle of the Magna Carta for Disabled Persons. It may be considered as auxiliary aid or service to manage your epilepsy — a neurological disease that could lead to disability if it substantially limits a person’s psychological, physiological or anatomical function or activities. (Sec. (4), Id.) In such a case, your service dog will not be considered as simply a pet, but also a working animal trained to help or assist you in dealing with or managing your disability. Hence, it would not be covered by the “No pet” policy of your condominium.
Key provisions imply that discrimination includes denying a PWD the use of a service animal, and that “auxiliary aids and services” must be provided to facilitate daily living. A neighbor’s complaint based on a general “no pets” rule does not override this legal mandate. If the lady persists in denying you the use of your service dog as a necessary auxiliary aid, there may be discrimination based on disability, which is a violation of the Magna Carta for Disabled Persons.
We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice was based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.
Thank you for your continued trust and support.
Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to dearpao@manilatimes.net
