Antonio
Content Warning: These stories are about violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation and may include references to suicide or self-harming behaviours. They may contain graphic descriptions and strong language and may be distressing. Some narratives may be about First Nations people who have passed away. If you need support, please see Contact & support.
Antonio relies on his service dog, Bruno, for most day-to-day activities. Bruno opens doors, retrieves objects, turns appliances on and off and helps Antonio stand, balance and get ready for bed. Because of Bruno, Antonio has more stamina, improved mobility and greater confidence when he’s out in the community.
Antonio bought Bruno in the US. He told the Royal Commission he immediately noticed people responded to him differently. Instead of giving him piteous looks or comments, people engaged him and Bruno in conversation.
A few years ago Antonio decided to move back to Australia and needed Bruno to travel with him on the plane. But the airline wouldn’t accept Bruno’s US service certification.
Antonio contacted every dog certifier in each Australian state but no-one would certify Bruno without seeing him. Despite having videos of Bruno demonstrating he exceeds US and Australian standards, Antonio couldn’t persuade anyone to give him even provisional registration.
Without Australian certification, Bruno had to travel as airline cargo and quarantine for 10 days in a facility with regular dogs.
Bruno’s absence during this period severely affected Antonio. In addition to being without day-to-day assistance, Antonio needed to retrain Bruno. Bruno became overenthusiastic in response to other dogs, forgot he was working and needed a large amount of redirection to focus. Antonio estimates this took 16 months.
Antonio hoped once he was in Australia the certification process would be simple. But he says it’s almost impossible. Most organisations are under-resourced and do not certify dogs who are not part of their programs. Antonio is still waiting for some companies to respond to his enquiries.
Without Australian certification Antonio is often refused service.
Once, at Centrelink, a security guard told Bruno to leave because he didn’t have the state’s service identification. Antonio showed the guard Bruno’s US certification documents. He then had to show him vet records, medical evidence and evidence of his need for a service dog. The security guard went through the documents ‘with a fine-tooth comb’ and after 15–20 minutes Antonio was allowed to re-join the queue. ‘The words and actions of the security guard were over the top.’
Antonio said the treatment he experienced ‘brought back feelings of embarrassment and frustration at the level of discrimination’. Antonio’s wife was with him and commented she ‘felt very unwelcome in the Centrelink customer service centre’.
The lack of awareness and acceptance of the use of service dogs is also a barrier to employment.
Because Bruno isn’t allowed on some premises, Antonio is unable to attend meetings with colleagues and clients. He has problems flying domestically because of the US certification and he has also experienced problems accessing some train services.
Antonio is frustrated ‘there is nowhere to escalate the problem of access issues for service dogs in Australia’ and says ‘there needs to be a chain of command and appeals process to seek redress’.
Antonio would like reciprocal certification standards between Australia and other international countries and community education about the value of service dogs.
When Antonio is with Bruno he said people ‘see him more as a person’ rather than focusing on his disability. He appreciates being seen for who he is – ‘someone who is capable, professional and approachable’.
Disclaimer: This is the story of a person who shared their personal experience with the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability through a submission or private session. The names in this story are pseudonyms. The person who shared this experience was not a witness and their account is not evidence. They did not take an oath or affirmation before providing the story. Nothing in this story constitutes a finding of the Royal Commission. Any views expressed are those of the person who shared their experience, not of the Royal Commission.