Could ‘Rx: Pet therapy’ come back to bite you?
The best answer is, “It’s conceivable, but really unlikely.” Donna Vanderpool, MBA, JD, an author and attorney who develops and implements risk management services for psychiatrists, has not seen any claims or case reports on litigation blaming mental health clinicians for injury caused by emotional support pets after the clinicians had written a letter for housing purposes (oral and written communications, April 7-13, 2014).
Dr. B might wonder whether writing a letter for Ms. A would imply that he had evaluated the dog and Ms. A’s ability to control it. Psychiatrists don’t usually discuss—let alone evaluate—the temperament or behavior of their patients’ pets; even if they did they aren’t experts on pet training. Recognizing this, Dr. B’s letter could include a statement to the effect that he was not vouching for the dog’s behavior, but only for how the dog would help Ms. A.
Dr. B also might talk with Ms. A about her need for the dog and whether she had obtained appropriate certification, as discussed above. The ADA provisions pertaining to use and presence of service animals do not apply to dogs that are merely patients’ pets, notwithstanding the genuine emotional benefits that a dog’s companionship might provide. Stating that a patient needs an animal to treat an illness might be fraud if the doctor knew the pet was just a buddy.
Bottom Line
Psychiatrists can expect that more and more patients will ask them for letters to support having pets accompany them at home or in public. Although liability seems unlikely, cautious psychiatrists can state in such letters that they have not evaluated the animal in question, only the potential benefits that the patient might derive from it.
Disclosure
Dr. Mossman reports no financial relationship with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing articles.
