What are some differences between humans and animals?
The scientific community would answer intelligence or behavior. Humans are civil and part of what Peter Singer calls a “moral community.”
We have rules, while animals have natural selection. Even though it is proven, all animals have “cognitive empathy” and adjust to different needs in their community.
Humans are self-centered and instinctively want to categorize things as part of early cognitive development. Piaget’s theory describes this categorization as Schema. It is a natural way to learn.
Children are curious. Someone with a visible disability may be challenging to understand because they can’t immediately identify and categorize us.
Animals and people can learn to adjust according to De Waal’s research. Living beings have the instinct to protect their own for the survival of their species.
Humans dominate the planet, but that doesn’t negate other species’ intelligence or needs. Studies of animals and disability converge when discussing the issues of service animals.
“Politics define animals as “equipment” that has functions and not feelings. They serve to perform tasks.
The law separates humans and animals by ignoring natural emotional interactions between humans and animals.
Reasons that people need a service animal varies. The fundamental reason is to help them be “more productive members of society” (Oliver, 111).
Disabled people contributions to society
This belief that disabled people inherently make lesser contributions to society is ableist.
It extends the thought that disabled people cannot just be an equal part of society.
In the hierarchy of disability, there is a line drawn between what an “acceptable disabled person can do.”
Those with severe conditions are closer to animals that humans “mercy kill” Severe disabilities render a human less valuable.
A service dog can be a tool to lessen the burden of disability on society.
“The fact that service dogs are seen to provide independence for the people they serve shows that we discount our dependency on non-human animals.” (Oliver, 113)
Emotional Support Animals
The rise of emotional support animals demonstrates that humans need animals beyond functionality. The ADA does not recognize emotional support animals like service dogs.
“We built walls and fences, corrals and cages not only to regulate their (animal’s) physical proximity but also, and moreover, to keep them out of our moral community.” (Oliver, 117)
This question of morality and ethics surfaces in animal and disability rights. Disability rights are human rights.
Animals are living creatures that share the planet and ethically deserve respect. Otherwise, humans would be “animals” crossing a line.
According to De Waal’s theory of learned adjustment, “it could go in multiple directions– if animals learn another animal is vulnerable, they might take advantage of her, abandon her, help her or accept her” (Taylor, 17).
I believe humans are as capable as any other animal of choosing among available options.
Morally we have the option to be good or bad. Humans “discount” animal connection possibly to maintain lines and categories where everything fits.
When something is unfamiliar, we can either reject it or learn from it.
Studies between humans and animals are separate because we’re not
“one of those” animals. But the same logic of morality and ethics influences the politics of human life.
Sources
Taylor, C. (2020). Animal crips. In S. Jenkins & K. S. Montford (Eds.), Disability and animality:rip perspective in critical animal studies (pp. 13-34). Academia. https://www.academia.edu/45026461/Disability_and_Animality_Crip_Perspectives_in_Critical_Animal_Studies?auto=citations&from=cover_page
Oliver, K. (2020). Service dogs: between animal and disabilities studies. In S. Jenkins & K. S. Montford (Eds.), Disability and animality:crip perspective in critical animal studies (pp. 13-34). Academia. https://www.academia.edu/45026461/Disability_and_Animality_Crip_Perspectives_in_Critical_Animal_Studies?auto=citations&from=cover_page