PTSD

Waving The BS Flag

Every day I see dog stories that are…well, frankly, bull.

Nowhere do I see this problem more than with the almost constant daily barrage now of feelgood stories about dogs doing wonderful things for military people, both active duty and veterans, particularly those who are suffering with post-traumatic stress as their primary issue.  Problem is, when you look closer and you know what to look for, there’s a lotta bull in those stories.  Well-meaning bull, but bull nonetheless.

And it’s not simple true or false stuff you can just punch into Snopes and it’ll tell you which it is, either – there’s more to it than that and you’ve gotta learn what to look for.  That’s been my intent all along on this site – educate people and correct a lot of the misinformation that floats around.  I don’t care so much whether you agree with me (although that’d be great) or not – you make your own decisions – I just want you to be smart, know what to look for, and have the facts when you make them.

My constant dilemma is what do I just let go, what’s worth bringing up, and if I’m going to do that, how do I do it in an effective way that doesn’t just come across as one big continuous whine or “it’s all about me” arrogant.  Because of that, I’ve sat on most all of these stories, countless times where I’ve written something and then said, “Nah, why bother? People just wanna hear feelgood stuff. Leave it alone.”  Well, I’m at a point now where I don’t know if I can do that any longer, and I want to set the tone for that.

Some of that is due to the cumulative effect of all those stories on me over time, but mostly it’s because things are getting worse, with more and more people pushing the same shaky concepts day after day as if they were accepted fact and already working as advertised.  Or maybe they just don’t know any better.  My fear is the more that stuff sits out there unchallenged, the more it gets accepted, maybe even unconsciously, as “well, everybody knows THAT” fact (I already see that happening) with potentially disastrous results for both people and dogs.

Feeling good or wanting to do good are simply not enough.  We need to be absolutely sure that what we do is really helping and not actually making things worse and placing people or dogs at risk.

My plan is to start writing much shorter posts more often, stop sitting on stuff and just get it out there. The trick will be to not turn this into one big rant site (we have more than enough of those already) without going the other way and “chugging on over to namby-pamby land” like R. Lee Ermey says in that hilarious Geico commercial, either.

Guess I shouldn’t worry, though.  Never fails that every time I wrestle with something like this and then give in and say something, I’ll hear from at least one of my friends with a service dog who will tell me they’ve seen exactly the same thing and thank me for saying it.  That means the world to me – they live it 24/7/365,  I don’t, and they are ultimately why all of us involved in this world do what we do.

We’ll see how it goes.

Every Veteran With A Disability Doesn’t Need A Service Dog, And This Is A Great Alternative

Just read about this great program for veterans recovering at Walter Reed that teaches them to train dogs at the Washington Humane Society. I’ve heard of other programs like this before, but not this specific one, and I think they’re tremendous.  Note particularly what the people involved say about the program:

Army Capt. Lawrence Minnis sits with his two adopted pit bulls at the Washington Humane Society’s Behavior and Learning Center, Nov. 12, 2009.Army Capt. Lawrence Minnis sits with his two adopted pit bulls at the Washington Humane Society’s Behavior and Learning Center.

“Homeless Dogs Help Healing Troops”

The reality is a service dog isn’t necessary or appropriate for every wounded veteran (or anyone with a disability, for that matter) – not the popular thing to say, but the truth. So much of the popular public opinion I see now comes off as “Hey, let’s just give every wounded veteran a service dog and that’ll fix things”, especially when we’re talking about mental health issues like post-traumatic stress as opposed to physical injuries.  Well-intentioned, no doubt, but misguided, nonetheless – it’s just not that simple nor necessarily the way to go.

There are a myriad of factors involved in providing someone with a no-joke, for-real, fully functioning service dog, and, done right, it’s a time-consuming, extremely thorough, and usually expensive process that requires a lifetime commitment from everyone involved. Programs like this one are great because they provide troops who don’t have a more serious need with so much of what they do need, cost very little, if anything, and all of the factors specifically associated with a service dog are taken away.  They also have the potential to not divert a lot of funding and effort away from areas where, in my view, they are better expended, e.g., the training of full-up service dogs for those people who have physical injuries as their primary issue.

No question whatsoever that there are still many veterans who really need and would benefit from a service dog, and I remain convinced that we still aren’t reaching those with severe physical disabilities, particularly the relatively younger group of OEF/OIF veterans. But I’m also convinced there are a whole lotta people that don’t need that level of support, and we need to be talking about these kind of programs first before making the big jump to right away talking about service dogs for everybody.

Why Haven’t We Heard More About This Well-Known Veteran’s Service Dog Discrimination Case?

Haven’t had a lot to say lately, largely because I haven’t seen a lotta good things to write about, or even bad things that have enough substance to make them worth commenting on.

There is one story, though, that, while not a good one, definitely got my attention and I wanna talk about because no one else seems to be. It’s been 11 days since I first saw it on October 30th, and there’s still no reaction on major news services, Twitter, or blogs, which, given that I routinely see all three erupt over much, much less serious service dog incidents than this one, really strikes me as odd.

Here’s the story, buried in the Courthouse News Service – read it for yourself:

“Iraq Vet Says McDonald’s Workers Beat Him

Luis Montalvan, Sen Al Franken, and dog Tuesday.

Luis Montalvan, Sen Al Franken, and Tuesday.

So let’s review:

  • Highly visible OEF/OIF wounded warrior – ‘poster guy’ for Puppies Behind Bars, been to the inauguration, Sen Franken says this is the guy who inspired him to write his recently passed service dog legislation, been featured on many news stories, including this one in the Wall Street Journal in July that got loads of attention: “‘Sit! Stay! Snuggle!’: An Iraq Vet Finds His Dog Tuesday”
  • Biggest fast food chain on the planet, McDonald’s.
  • Happened right in New York City (Brooklyn).
  • Physical attack with garbage can lids that resulted in a significant injury.

Add all that up, and it’s clearly a huge story. And that’s true whether it turns out to be accurate or not, which is the point I want to make here.

Obviously, it’s a major story if it’s true, and, if so, my gut reaction is somebody needs to get hammered, bigtime. My standard ‘I’m not an attorney’ disclaimer applies, but those are some very serious accusations, and I don’t think you have to be a lawyer to see a big bucks civil action settlement, a lotta bad press for McDonald’s, and maybe additional criminal charges coming.

What’s not so obvious is that it’s still a huge story even if things didn’t happen this way – the story doesn’t just go away. There are a lotta serious questions that would need to be answered including, depending on the circumstances, ones about this particular dog placement, the screening and training process associated with that placement, and the overall concept in general of placements specifically for those with post-traumatic stress as their primary issue.

Let me be very clear – as a retired Air Force Chief Master Sergeant who has nothing but the utmost respect for all these young servicemembers today who have to deal with lots more stuff than I ever did, I’m the last guy in the world to say anything disrespectful about them, and I am not doing that here. That does not, however, remove the need to ask some hard questions and be extremely careful, particularly where we are placing assistance dogs into the mix.

Let me also be very clear that I’m not saying that things didn’t happen exactly the way Luis Montalvan says they happened. I wasn’t there and have no inside information or any other reason to believe they didn’t.

What I AM saying is, either way, this story deserves a lot more of all of our attention than it’s getting and cannot be ignored the way it seems to be getting ignored. If it’s true, I expect some serious action to be taken, and if it isn’t, I also expect some serious action – it doesn’t just vanish in one of those Emily Litella “never mind” moments I’ve written about.

Please keep your eye on this one – I know I will be.

Wounded Warrior Receives Canine Companions Service Dog Raised in Prison Program

Wounded Warrior Receives Canine Companions Service Dog Raised in Prison Program

That’s what the headline and angle for this story could’ve actually been (or something like it) if someone wanted to write it that way.

The story I’m referring to is this article from The Oregonian a few days ago about Canine Companions for Independence puppies being raised at the Coffee Creek Correctional Facility for women in Wilsonville, OR:

“Future service dogs get their training by women inmates at Coffee Creek lockup”

It’s a good story, too (albeit with a few inaccuracies – for example, they aren’t “therapy dogs”), but my point is that, as I’ve said before, there are a number of service dog organizations who have puppy raising programs in prisons and place dogs with wounded veterans as well.  Some definitely do a much better job of promoting themselves than others, too, but you need to be very careful not to confuse the quality of the public relations effort with the overall quality of the program.

I remain convinced that Canine Companions is the premier service dog organization in this country, and that’s why I’ve chosen to concentrate my efforts there.  That surely doesn’t mean they are “the only game in town” and, in fact, contrary to what some seem to believe, they don’t want to be, either – there’s no way in the world CCI could handle the need for assistance dogs all by themselves, and they are well aware of that.

Make no mistake – while I’m a “CCI guy”, I’m for ANY service dog organization that’s doing a top-notch job of providing dogs for veterans, the key being “top-notch”, a subject I’ve addressed here many times.  Let’s just say I continue to see things organizations say about themselves that, as a minimum, are a stretch, and, at worst, could be intentionally misleading.

No organization is perfect, but that’s something I’ve just never seen from Canine Companions – if anything, they don’t toot their horn enough, certainly not anywhere near as much as I’d like them to. I think I have a good idea why that is, too – as I’ve said repeatedly, I don’t speak for CCI, but I have had a close association with them for enough years now to understand some things, so I can give you an educated opinion here.

First, they are very, very sensitive to graduate privacy or, to put it more bluntly, they aren’t gonna pimp their graduates. They certainly don’t hide them – you can go to the newsletters on the website and see pictures of all the graduate teams, for example.  But when you see a very public and active graduate team, that’s because they’ve chosen to be that way on their own with no pressure from CCI.

Second, there is also a great sensitivity to not pandering to what’s popular, especially where veterans are concerned. That means you won’t likely ever see CCI changing their core mission – as some service dog organizations have done without even mentioning it – from training dogs for those with severe physical disabilities to training dogs for those whose primary diagnosis is post-traumatic stress.  (The irony being that post-traumatic stress will almost certainly be present in a veteran with the type of physical injuries we’re talking about, anyway.)

Unfortunately, that sensitivity has also meant Canine Companions hasn’t talked about the work they have done to incorporate post-traumatic stress into both the screening of candidates and training of dogs.  For example, they long ago brought in outside post-traumatic stress experts who sat down for several days with training staff to discuss this subject in detail.  Those discussions were very successful and resulted in a number of improvements in both those areas – I hope someday you’ll be hearing about that directly from CCI instead of just me.

Bottom line is that you can be confident and comfortable in what Canine Companions is doing with veterans – you just may have to work a little harder to see it.  Some organizations might do a better job of promoting themselves, but no one does a better job making individually matched lifelong placements of assistance dogs.

“Franken – Isakson Service Dogs For Veterans Act” Introduced

The much discussed bill sponsored by Sen Al Franken, D-MN, was introduced on the floor of the US Senate today.

The actual bill is not online yet, but here’s the press release in its entirety for your review.

———————————————————————————————————————

Senators Franken and Isakson Introduce the Service Dogs For Veterans Act

Sen. Franken’s First Piece of Legislation Will Help Wounded Veterans

WASHINGTON DC [7/22/09] – Today Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) and Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-G.A.) introduced the Service Dogs for Veterans Act, which will set up a pilot program within the Department of Veterans Affairs to pair service dogs with veterans who have physical or mental wounds, including PTSD. This bipartisan legislation marks Sen. Franken’s first piece of legislation since taking office two weeks ago.

Additional co-sponsors are Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-L.A.), Sen. Mark Begich (D-A.K.), and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-O.H.).

“As someone who’s spent time with our troops on USO tours to Iraq and Afghanistan, and met wounded warriors at Walter Reed and Bethesda, I feel a real obligation to the men and women who have risked life and limb on our behalf,” said Sen. Franken. “There’s a huge return on investment here. Service dogs can do amazing things, and there is evidence to suggest that increasing their numbers would reduce the alarming suicide rate among veterans, decrease the number of hospitalizations, and lower the cost of medications and human care.

“I believe it is enough simply to improve the lives of those of whom we asked so much. But this program isn’t just the right thing to do. It’s the smart thing to do. This small investment will pay dividends for these veterans for years to come.”

“I have seen firsthand the therapeutic effects of service dogs assisting individuals,” said Sen. Isakson. “The potential they bring for the therapy and treatment of soldiers with post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injuries should be studied.”

The Franken-Isakson Service Dogs for Veterans Act will:

· Pair a minimum of 200 veterans and dogs, or the minimum number necessary to produce scientifically valid results on the benefits of the use of the dogs (whichever is greater).

· Ensure that fifty percent of veterans participating in the pilot program will be those who suffer primarily from mental health disabilities, and fifty percent those who suffer primarily from physical injuries or disabilities.

· Direct VA to partner exclusively with non-profit agencies who do not charge for their animals, services, or lodging.

· Require VA to provide seed money to pay for the first fifty service dogs, and match its non-profit partners’ contributions for the rest of the service dogs.

· Continue the pilot program for at least three years; the Secretary of the VA must make annual reports to Congress on its implementation; the National Academies of Science is directed to study and report on the program’s effectiveness at the end of three years.

· The scientific study of the pilot program will study both the therapeutic benefits to veterans, including quality of life benefits reported by the veterans; and the economic benefits of using service dogs, including savings on health care costs, such as reduced hospitalization and prescription drug use, and productivity and employment gains for the veterans.

—————————————————————————————————————-

http://is.gd/1I6WH

Why You Don’t See Me Writing About Some Very Popular “Service Dogs For Veterans” Stories

If you ever see a service dog story, especially if it involves a wounded warrior or veteran with a disability, where everybody BUT me seems to be talking about it, chances are pretty good this is why – I wrote this post a little over three months ago, and it all still applies:

“Service Dogs, Veterans, and PTSD”

The only thing I’d change would be to change most, if not all, of the “PTSD” references to “post traumatic stress”. Uncle Jimbo definitely got my attention about not calling it a disorder with this “Post Traumatic Stress Disorder or Post Traumatic Stress Reaction?” post at the Warrior Legacy Foundation blog about six weeks after I’d written that, and I’ve tried to completely stop using the term ever since. I will still use the PTSD tag, but that’s simply a search thing that might help someone find something useful to them.

Other than that, though…I stand by what I said, even though I know it’s very much not the popular thing to say.  And I’m just gonna leave it at that.

How To Be Smarter Than Celebrities Are About Service Dog Programs

Based on some of the things I’ve been reading online and seeing on TV today, looks like it’s a really good time to say this yet again:

I don’t care if you “heard about it on Oprah”, or you read about it here on my blog, or a well-known veterans organization is associated with it, or Charity Navigator gives it four stars (a discussion for another time, but for now note it’s significant that they are currently changing their methodology), or your best friend told you about it, or even if someone in your own family actually has a dog from the organization. Do your own research - the good places can stand up to the scrutiny, the not-so-great ones can’t, and the onus is on them to provide you the answers to your questions.

There’s lots more I could say (and have actually already said here: “Tough Questions You Need To Ask About Every Service Dog Organization”), but I’m a little tight on time right now, so let me make this simple:

When you see a story about service dogs for veterans, no matter how good it sounds or how touching it is, the very first thing you need to do is to go to the Assistance Dogs International list of accredited members and see if the organization is on it:

http://www.assistancedogsinternational.org/membershipdirectory.php

If so, great; if not, I’d suggest you find another place that is accredited to support – it’s that simple.

Sure, the non-accredited organization could still be a good place, but with so many great organizations on the ADI list who have taken the necessary steps to be accredited (and all of whom could use your help), why would you turn to a place that hasn’t?   Doesn’t make sense to me.

Plus, if a regular old guy like me knows that’s the first thing you should be looking for, then why can’t celebrities who have lots of money, research staffs, and pretty much every resource available figure that out?  You got me.

Let me be perfectly clear – this isn’t about personal favorites; it’s about the troops and doing what’s truly best to support them.  ADI accreditation isn’t some club membership – it’s a very serious evaluation that tells you a lot about an organization.  And not having it tells you something about an organization, too – at the very least, they’ve made a conscious choice not to seek accreditation.  At the very worst…well, let’s not talk about that.

Remember – just because you buy into a great idea, doesn’t mean you also have to buy in to the organization that’s pushing that idea.  If you see what you think is a great story about service dogs for wounded veterans, that doesn’t mean you have to support the organization you see in that story – if you’re willing to do a little looking, you may very well find there are much better places to support.

Please – all I ask is that you look closely – very closely.   You may be surprised what you see – and, more importantly, don’t see.

“Writing A Prescription For A Pet Does Not Transform Fluffy Or Fido Into A Service Animal.”

Amen.

I saw this quoted in a response by someone to an earlier letter in a small newspaper in Northern California today (“Will the real assistance animal please stand up?”).  The response then goes on to talk about how dogs have to be trained for specific tasks to be considered service dogs.

Of course, I don’t disagree with that at all – I would just add that, while there’s no question those tasks are a critical element, a successful service dog placement goes way beyond that. You want a strong support organization with an end-to-end program that starts with a thorough application and screening process, continues right on through training, and, most importantly, finishes with regular follow-up contacts after the placement is made.

So don’t get caught up in the number of commands a particular organization says they train. In fact, when I see top organizations training in the range of 40-50 commands, and someone else saying they train a lot more commands than that, I have to wonder why.  Could be a good reason, could just be they want to be able to advertise they train more commands. Either way, more doesn’t mean better, and that’s not a standard by which you can compare service dog organizations.

You need to look for the total package, and always keep that in mind whenever you see any service dog place on television or in the news, especially when military veterans are involved.

Tough Questions You Need To Ask About Every Service Dog Organization

Last time I talked about how you can’t know if a dog is really a service dog, and ended up promising I’d tell you how you can have a huge impact on the overall quality of service dog placements, and why it’s absolutely critical that you do. (I’ll forewarn you that this is a longer post than I like to write, but it’s that important.)

Lemme get right to the heart of things and tell you first why it’s so critical.  Some people, including me, fear that there’s a really bad service animal “incident waiting to happen” just around the corner and it’s only a matter of time. That fear isn’t based on some irrational hysteria – it’s because of the ongoing proliferation of service dog programs.  Seems like every time I turn around there’s another new one, often with a big press release about how they’re gonna be endorsed by some famous celebrity or appear on a talk show, and many times they are targeting their services directly at veterans with severe emotional or physical disabilities.

All it’s gonna take is one bad placement, one time where an inadequately trained dog and/or an improperly screened recipient results in an out-of-control situation where people get hurt. And God forbid the incident involves a wounded veteran from the Iraq or Afghanistan conflicts, especially one who’s been diagnosed with PTSD. We’ve already seen how the media in its normal way has been all over those kinda stories, sensationalizing them and maligning all OEF/OIF veterans over the actions of a few.

The fallout from an incident like that could destroy in an instant all that so many have worked so hard to achieve for so many years.  And I can guarantee you if something like that does happen, even if it’s later shown to be a dog that wasn’t properly trained, or an applicant that wasn’t properly screened, or a shaky dog organization, it’s not gonna matter – all service animals and those who benefit from them will likely be hurt, and significantly.

My point last time was that laws, while they have their place and are one tool in the arsenal, aren’t going to solve this problem.  You can only hammer so much – while laws might get some marginal “service dogs” out of public areas and maybe even cause some bad programs to shut down, they aren’t gonna produce more good dogs or placements, nor do they give the average person something they can use to help make that happen. You accomplish that (and this is where you can have that huge impact I mentioned) by only supporting the good programs so they thrive, and not supporting the marginal ones until they either improve, or go away altogether.

That means you have to make informed decisions about organizations that train and place service dogs, and to do that you have to educate yourself and make your own judgments about any service dog organization.

And I mean ANY organization.  I don’t care if you “heard about it on Oprah”, or you read about it here on my blog, or a well-known veterans organization is associated with it, or Charity Navigator gives it four stars (a discussion for another time, but for now note it’s significant that they are currently changing their methodology), or your best friend told you about it, or even if someone in your own family actually has a dog from the organization. Do your own research - the good places can stand up to the scrutiny, the not-so-great ones can’t, and the onus is on them to provide you the answers to your questions.

What do you look for?  Here are a few revealing questions to ask every time you see a service dog organization:

Is the organization an accredited Assistance Dogs International member? And, if so, how long has it been an accredited member?

I’ve mentioned this one before (“How to Find the Best Service Dogs for Disabled Veterans”) – at this point, if I don’t see this, I have to ask why.  In fact, the better a program looks to me and the more publicity it gets, the more the absence of ADI accreditation jumps out as a potential big red flag.

Do they provide specific descriptions of what the dogs are trained to do as it relates to accepted standards?

For example, if a place talks about how they train psychiatric service dogs or dogs for PTSD, then I’d expect to see as a bare minimum a reference to the International Association of Assistance Dog Partners’ “Service Dog Tasks for Psychiatric Disabilities” (http://www.iaadp.org/psd_tasks.html), or, better yet, a detailed description of how they follow the guidelines outlined at length in that document.

What is the real focus of the organization? Are they truly focused on “the human end of the leash”?

Service dog programs now often have a number of individual elements they promote, sometimes all combined into one program – for example, prisoners raising dogs (one element) rescued from shelters (another element) that will become service dogs (another element) for wounded veterans (another element).  On the upside, each one of those is a great thing by itself, and, naturally, in combination, it comes across as even that much better.  On the downside, though, those things can easily be competing priorities, and the organization – and you – have to figure out what’s the primary focus.

Are they more interested in rescuing dogs from shelters?  Or is the real priority helping prisoners?  Or is their true passion helping wounded veterans? Harsh as this may sound, the bottom line is the focus has to be on making a life-changing, lifelong improvement for the person receiving the dog, and those other interests are side benefits that are important only to the degree that they help make that happen.  Again, look closely, but sometimes I think this one jumps out at you.

And, most importantly: Will the organization make the tough calls when they need to?

The reality is that it’s easy to look good with the general public on this subject, especially when you involve the other elements I mentioned, particularly veterans with disabilities.  Most people love dogs, the level of specialized knowledge about service dogs isn’t there, and, on top of that, when you say you’re going to help out a wounded warrior who really needs the help, most people’s automatic inclination is “What’s not to love? Tell me where I sign up.”

But, like so many things that look good on the surface, when you look closer, it’s a lot tougher and more complex than it seems, and there are some hard calls that have to be made. Will they release a dog from training, even though it’s a wonderful dog and everyone loves it, and it’s at 90% of where it needs to be, but still just doesn’t meet the service dog standard?  Will they turn down an applicant, even though it’s someone who has faithfully served their country, been severely injured while doing so, whose situation tears at your heart, but yet you know just isn’t a good fit for a service dog? Will they do those things, knowing that they are likely to be vilified by some, condemned in the media, and maybe even have their motives or qualifications questioned?

Or will they take the easy way out and not make those kinds of tough decisions? Let a dog slide through training because, hey, 90% is close enough, there’s a real need, and things will probably be OK?  Grant a borderline application request because they get caught up in the emotion of dealing with a wounded veteran and want to “do the right thing”? Or, maybe worst of all, are they firmly convinced that they know better than all the established assistance dog organizations and associations, and that they are actually helping someone, when, in fact, they may be doing more harm?

Maybe none of that will happen, but, ultimately, you have to ask yourself:  Am I absolutely certain that the organization will never, ever, for any reason, risk placing someone who receives one of its dogs in a potentially unsafe situation?

If you’ve read this far, you could easily be asking, “Sheesh, Al, all these places are trying to do is help – why are you being so tough?” Trust me – as somebody who loves these dogs, is a veteran, and is deeply involved as a volunteer with one of these organizations, I know how tough it can be sometimes to stay focused on the real goal. I also know how hard it can be to accept some of those tough calls that have to be made – I’m just thankful I’m not the guy who has to make them. But somebody has to, and you better be absolutely sure that any service dog organization you’re gonna support is willing to do that.

Please go back and reread what I said at the beginning – we simply can’t afford an incident like that.  Pay very, very close attention to the organizations you read about or see on television, don’t take anybody’s word – mine, a famous celebrity’s, anybody’s – about those places, and go check them out yourself using the guidelines I’ve given you.

Service Dogs, Veterans, And PTSD

I’ve been wanting to say something about this subject for some time, but I’ve been wrestling with just what to say because I want to add something helpful and not just more fuel for all the arguments about what is a controversial subject.  So, I think the best thing to do is just tell you my approach and how I got there.

Probably no topic generates more heat in the assistance dog world than just what is and what isn’t a real service dog.  Once you get past the subject of people who have no respect whatsoever for the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) and flagrantly violate that law by claiming their pet is a service animal, I’d say the next biggest area of contention is what have come to be referred to as emotional support animals and psychiatric service dogs. That discussion has already been going on for years, and what’s really brought it to the forefront lately is the proliferation of new programs that say they are training dogs specifically to help with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), usually associated with our returning OEF and OIF veterans.

Now, I don’t question PTSD for a second, or that the right dog can be very helpful, or the motives of most, if not all, of the people who’ve put those programs together. There are, however, still a number of legitimate concerns about the details of these “PTSD dog” programs, such as how candidates are evaluated, providing effective training, ensuring that the animal is not being placed into a public situation that’s beyond what can be reasonably expected of it, regularly scheduled follow-up support services, and so on – really all the same  things that the top service dog organizations I’ve already talked about (How to Find the Best Service Dogs for Disabled Veterans”) have been doing for years.

But here’s the thing, and this is really my point…

The reality is there’s already enough potential unmet need for service dogs for veterans with physical disabilities that I could devote the rest of my life to that and still likely never meet that need. Rather than spending time on new programs that train dogs focused only on PTSD, trying to determine if that’s a valuable thing to do in and of itself, and, if so, which programs are best, I’ve chosen instead to concentrate on organizations that provide service dogs to veterans with physical disabilities where PTSD is being incorporated into an existing program. I know that there are ongoing focused discussions about how best to do that, for obvious reasons – if you’re placing an assistance dog with a wounded warrior, it’s also highly likely that PTSD is present as well.

You may come to a different conclusion, but, for me, frankly, life’s too short to spend time arguing about or chasing a new area – I’ve got more than I can handle already and need to concentrate my efforts where I believe the most significant impact can be made.  And so you will likely not see any discussion here about what I would call PTSD-only dogs, and that’s why.