Feature

by Belinda Lyons

While many of us take our mental health for granted, it is a major factor in our lives that deserves our attention. As our lives grow increasingly fast paced, one in three Americans is chronically overworked, according to a 2005 study by the Families and Work Institute. As recently reported in the American Journal of Sociology, communities are more fragmented and disconnected than ever before, and trust in one another and the number of confidants we each have, on average, has been declining steadily for the past 40 years.

The stress and lack of confidants is taking its toll. An estimated one in four individuals will experience a mental illness each year. In fact, psychiatric disorders are the top reasons for hospital admissions nationwide. More common than cancer, heart disease, diabetes and arthritis, mental illnesses include anxiety, stress and serious debilitating conditions including depression, schizophrenia, dementia, compulsive hoarding and other disorders.

Emotional support is a key factor in a speedy and thorough recovery from mental illness. At times, this support may come from an unexpected source: animals. Most people know that state and federal laws regarding reasonable accommodation for people with disabilities include waiving “no pet” policies to allow a blind tenant to have a seeing-eye dog. However, many people are unaware that similar accommodation may be required for other disabilities, such as depression. Other mental and emotional disorders can also be alleviated by animal companionship.

In an August 2004 legal case, the California Court of Appeal held that an exception to a landlord’s no-pet policy may be required in certain circumstances as a reasonable accommodation for people with mental disabilities. In Auburn Woods Homeowners Association v. Fair Employment and Housing Commission, the court held that a condominium association in Auburn, California, had discriminated against homeowners Jayne and Ed Elebiari, who both suffered from severe depression, by refusing to allow them to keep a pet dog. Noting the positive effect the dog’s companionship had on their well being, the Elebiaris requested a policy waiver, and when this was denied, they complained to the state’s Fair Employment and Housing Commission.

An administrative law judge ruled that making an exception to allow a dog in this case was a reasonable accommodation required by the state’s Fair Employment and Housing Act, and that Auburn Woods’s denials constituted unlawful discrimination. In addition, the Elebiaris were awarded $12,500 in damages for emotional distress. A trial court later reversed the opinion, but the California Court of Appeal reinstated it, holding that substantial evidence supported the commission’s original determination. The court found that mental conditions such as depression can “limit a major life activity” and therefore may meet the definition of “disability” under the FEHA and other discrimination laws. The court also found that the Elebiaris’ disabilities “interfered with their use and enjoyment of their home, and that having a dog improved this situation.” Auburn Woods had a duty to open a dialogue with the Elebiaris, rather than “simply sit back and deny a request for reasonable accommodation because it did not think sufficient information had been presented” about their disabilities and need for accommodation.

Even if an animal has had no special training, and therefore does not qualify as a service animal, under the FEHA “there is no basis for asserting that there is no duty to reasonably accommodate non-service animals…[the dog] did not need special skills to help ameliorate the effects of the Elebiaris’ disabilities. Rather, it was the innate qualities of a dog, in particular a dog’s friendliness and ability to interact with humans, that made it therapeutic here.”

Worrisome as it may sound to some landlords and apartment managers, the court decision and the precedent it set do not provide a loophole for any tenant who wants to subvert a no-pet policy. Important in Auburn Woods v. FEHC was verification by the Elebiaris’ psychiatrists of the couple’s disabilities and that the dog’s companionship had significantly improved their mental health. A landlord may request similar verification from a tenant requesting special housing accommodation.

The presence of support animals in a tenant’s apartment likely won’t have much impact on landlords, as tenants will be responsible for the care and actions of their support animals, including any damage they may cause. However, landlords may still deny a request for an emotional support animal if they can show that granting such a request would force them to either suffer an undue financial burden or affect a fundamental change in their business. Other accommodations for people with psychiatric disabilities considered reasonable include requests for a monthly written or oral reminder to pay rent, and for a change in guest policies to accommodate a full-time caregiver.

Denying such requests may be regarded as discrimination based on disability. Disability is defined as having or being regarded as having a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities (such as walking, seeing, hearing, working, learning or caring for oneself). Other forms of discrimination, if based on disability status, include refusal to rent to a tenant, differential treatment, eviction, steering current or prospective tenants to different types or locations of housing, refusal to make a reasonable accommodation, intimidation and retaliation, inaccessibility of buildings, and seemingly neutral rules that disproportionately affect people with disabilities.

Policies and actions taking any of these forms may be punishable under the Fair Housing Amendments Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Employment and Housing Act and the Unruh Civil Rights Act. However, if a tenant poses a direct threat to others, is not otherwise qualified for housing or would cause substantial property damage, he or she may be excluded from protection and legally denied tenancy.

In addition, privacy laws prevent housing providers from asking questions that would force tenants to reveal their disability, unless directly related to the housing contract. Examples of such exceptions include questions used to determine eligibility for disability-specific housing, priority or rent reduction for housing based on disability, and the necessity for a reasonable accommodation request. By being aware of and following landlord policies and the aforementioned laws, landlords and tenants with disabilities can work together to create a lasting and productive relationship free of unnecessary anger and resentment.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of SFAA or SF Apartment Magazine. Belinda Lyons is the executive director of the Mental Health Association of San Francisco, a nonprofit citizen’s organization dedicated to improving the mental health of residents in the diverse communities of San Francisco through advocacy, education, research and service. Information for this article was gathered with assistance from the AIDS Legal Referral Panel and an article (“Understanding Reasonable Accommodation,” PAWS Prints, Spring-Summer 2006) written by Andrea Brooks and Kevin Underhill, Esq. of Pets Are Wonderful Support. Copyright © 2007 by SF Apartment Magazine. All rights reserved.