Can the mere label “therapy animal” result in legal complications during trial?
We do not believe so. Of course, while one judge may not see any issue with the label, another judge may decide the label — and the presence of the therapy animal in the courtroom — are not appropriate and could convey that the child is in need of special help. There is no existing case law on incorporating any type of animal into a courtroom, and there are no laws addressing it. So it is purely up to the discretion of the judge whether to allow a therapy animal, or any other type of animal, into the courtroom. There is no all-encompassing rule that the term “therapy animal” will detrimentally impact a case. Since many child-abuse prosecutions involve the child’s counselor, therapist or psychologist testifying during trial, the mere indication that a child has sought help is not considered prejudicial.
