Sainsburys refuses autistic man assistance

[Melly1]

https://www.mylondon.news/news/south-lo ... e-24080800

[bowlingbun]

I'm really not sure what to think about this. I have sympathy with both sides!?

[Charles_2112]

I see no difference, in the health and safety department, between cats and dogs. If the cat is trained as an assistance animal, there really should be no issue.

On the other hand, if it isn't a trained assistance animal (which seems to be the case as no one has suggested there's any training been given), then he doesn't really have much of a case. Assuming it's not a case of bad journalism, that is.

[susieq]

This was a subject of an item on Jeremy Vine's lunchtime Radio 2 show on Friday; whilst a lot of the people ringing in were sympathetic, one caller did make a compelling case for it not being allowed. His partner suffers from an extreme allergy to cat hair whereby the smallest amount can send her into anaphylactic shock - he was concerned that, although the cat is restrained, it could shed hair during the man's progress around the store and couldn't see how Sainsbury's could ensure that the store was a safe environment for his partner.

I admit I thought "oh whatever next !" when I first heard the report but then I stopped to think and thought "well he does have a case"..

Like you BBI can understand and sympathise with both sides.

[helena_1512]

I am very much a cat lover but yes, I can see both sides! Especially with regard to the dander that cats shed, and the risk to people with allergies. But surely dogs shed too?

[Melly1]

I am very much a cat lover but yes, I can see both sides! Especially with regard to the dander that cats shed, and the risk to people with allergies. But surely dogs shed too?

I thought that too, Helena, but haven't researched it.

Melly1