{"id":10468,"date":"2009-01-11T16:08:32","date_gmt":"2009-01-11T21:08:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/?p=10468"},"modified":"2011-08-05T14:53:12","modified_gmt":"2011-08-05T18:53:12","slug":"can-grimmy-be-my-service-dog","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/2009\/01\/11\/can-grimmy-be-my-service-dog\/","title":{"rendered":"can Grimmy be my Service Dog?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Grimmy . . . <\/em><\/strong> \"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

holidays over\u00a0 –
\nthe dog puts a halo
\non my snow angel<\/p>\n

… by dagosan<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

.. f\/k\/a<\/strong><\/em> is going to the dogs today, inspired by a few stories in the news (about Colombian coffee, assistance creatures and Pavlovian partisan politics, which are discussed below), plus a haiku or two.<\/p>\n

distant thunder
\nthe neighbor\u2019s dog
\nscratches the door<\/p>\n

in the park
\nmy dog fetches
\na better stick<\/p>\n

… by w.f. owen — from haiku notebook<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

tripping over the dog
\nagain\u2026
\nnight of winter rain<\/p>\n

… by Kobayashi Issa<\/a>, translated by David G. Lanoue<\/p>\n

\n

\n

<\/strong><\/em>\"\"<\/a><\/strong><\/em> [full cartoon<\/a>; Mother Goose & Grimm<\/em><\/a>, Jan. 2, 2009]<\/p>\n

Canned Canine? <\/strong><\/em> W<\/em>e reported last year that drinking <\/em>coffee enhances<\/a> your mood and makes you more sociable.\u00a0 Apparently, the same cannot<\/em> be said for growing coffe<\/em>e. <\/strong><\/em>Grimmy’s cartoon sidekick Attila brought the wrath of the Colombian coffee cartel down on his master Mike Peters, this week.\u00a0 Attila made a crack in the Mother Goose & Grimm<\/em><\/a> comic strip of January 2, 2009 [detail above; full cartoon<\/a>] about the nation’s crime syndicates and finding “a little bit of Juan Valdez,” the fictitious symbol of Colombian coffee growers, in every can. See “Colombian coffee growers sue U.S. cartoonist,” Columbia Reports<\/em><\/a> (Jan. 6, 2009); more coverage at Robot 6<\/em><\/a> (Jan. 7, 2009); The Associated Press<\/em><\/a>, Jan. 8, 2009; and the SSFeral Children<\/em><\/a> weblog (Jan. 7); via Overlawyered.<\/em>com<\/a> (Jan. 9).<\/p>\n

Sun-scorched slope\u2013\u00a0 \"\"<\/a>
\nan old donkey rubs his rump
\nagainst a mud-crusted post<\/p>\n

\u2026\u2026 by Rebecca Lilly – Shadwell Hills<\/em> (Birch Press, 2002)<\/p>\n

Feeling its national dignity, and that of the 300,000 small, independent coffee growers that it represents, was insulted, The Federation of Colombian Coffee Growers<\/a> announced a multi-million dollar lawsuit against Mike Peters because his cartoon linked Colombia’s coffee with its crime syndicates.<\/p>\n

The Juan Valdez strip, which is not one of Peters’ funniest, was part of a week-long series based on the fact that the inventor of the Pringles potato chip can had his ashes buried in one.<\/p>\n

\n

Going a bit over the top, federation director Gabriel Silva said last Tuesday that the guild seeks:<\/p>\n

\"\" “not just an economic compensation for something that damages the intellectual heritage. We also want moral compensation. A public manifestation.”<\/p>\n

Mike Peters is also a well-known editorial cartoonist<\/a>. It’s a bit surprising (unless you take into account the $20 million request for damages) that he held back his tongue in responding:<\/p>\n

\u201cI had no more thought to insult Colombia and Juan Valdez than I did Pringles, Betty Crocker, Col. Sanders, Dr. Pepper and Bartles & Jaymes. . .<\/p>\n

\u201cI thought this was a humorous subject and all of my Mother Goose & Grimm cartoons are meant to make people laugh. I truly intended no insult.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

We’re pleased to see that some of Colombia’s most respected cartoonists are scoffing<\/a> at the law suit and calling it a waste of time. Although the f\/k\/a<\/em> Gang will continue to drink Colombian coffee every day, Grimmy and I are symbolically raising our legs, not our mugs, to salute the litigiously-over-caffeinated Cafateros Cartel and their New York lawyers.<\/p>\n

the taste
\nof coffee –
\nthe aftertaste<\/p>\n

<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\"\"<\/a> Park Closed ’til Spring<\/em> —
\nyellow snow
\nbehind the Rest Rooms<\/p>\n

<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

\n

… by dagosan<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

\n

\"\" .. Look Who’s Coming to Dinner:<\/em><\/strong> An article in last Sunday’s New York Times<\/em> Magazine, “Creature Comforts<\/a>” (January 4, 2009) by Rebecca Skloot, has left me more knowledgeable and open-minded than I was when I started the article.\u00a0 But, I’m still not sure where I would draw my bottom line about how to define “service animal” for the purposes of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which says<\/a> businesses must allow people with disabilities to bring their service animals into all areas of the business where customers are normally allowed to go. Only if a service animal is out of control and presents a direct threat to others, may you ask the customer to remove it from the premises.<\/p>\n

For me, the whole topic of Service Animals and Therapy Animals (a\/k\/a<\/em> Creatures) was, frankly, colored by my dislike of people who drive with dogs in their laps (see prior post<\/a>) and other pet-lovers who insist upon bringing their much-loved “family members” everywhere they go — even into places like restaurants and drug stores, where pets are not normally allowed.<\/p>\n

The NYT<\/em> piece taught me one important point: To distinguish between Service Animals and Therapy\/Comfort Animals, which are treated differently under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).<\/p>\n