Spotlight on Fitness for Work: Medical Conditions, Disability and Welfare

An assistance animal’s primary responsibility is to safely and reliably support its handler while maintaining its own physical and psychological wellbeing. For this reason, every prospective assistance animal must be assessed not only for behaviour and temperament but also for its fitness to perform the physical and cognitive demands of its intended role.

A diagnosis alone should not determine an animal’s suitability. Instead, decisions should consider the nature and severity of the condition, the likelihood of progression, the anticipated workload, expected quality of life and the long-term welfare implications for the individual animal. However, many medical conditions and disabilities significantly increase the risk of pain, fatigue, injury or reduced working capacity and will generally preclude an animal from commencing assistance animal training or continuing in an assistance role.

The objective is not to exclude animals because they have a disability, but to avoid placing unreasonable physical or psychological demands on an animal whose health or welfare may be compromised by assistance work.

Why Fitness Matters

Assistance animals often work in complex, physically demanding environments over many years. They may travel extensively, negotiate stairs and uneven surfaces, spend prolonged periods on hard flooring, remain attentive in busy public settings and perform repetitive trained tasks throughout the day.

Underlying disease or physical impairment may reduce an animal’s ability to perform these activities comfortably or safely. In some cases, the condition may worsen over time, leading to chronic pain, reduced mobility or early retirement. Commencing or continuing assistance work under these circumstances may place the animal at unnecessary risk and conflict with contemporary welfare standards.

Conditions That Will Commonly Exclude a Prospect

While every case should be assessed individually, conditions that will generally prevent an animal from entering an assistance animal program include those that significantly impair normal body function or are likely to progress during the animal’s working life.

Examples include:

• moderate to severe orthopaedic disease
• significant hip or elbow dysplasia
• chronic lameness or persistent gait abnormalities
• neurological disorders affecting movement or coordination
• epilepsy that is poorly controlled
• significant cardiac disease
• chronic respiratory disease that limits exercise tolerance
• progressive eye disease or significant vision impairment
• deafness or significant hearing impairment
• chronic kidney disease
• chronic liver disease
• endocrine disorders that cannot be adequately managed
• immune-mediated diseases affecting long-term health
• progressive musculoskeletal disease
• chronic pain conditions.

These conditions may reduce the animal’s ability to safely perform assistance work or may worsen as a result of the physical demands associated with working.

Physical Disabilities

Animals with permanent physical disabilities should also be carefully evaluated from a welfare perspective.

For example, a three-legged dog may live an active, happy and fulfilling life as a companion animal and at times even as a therapy animal. However, the altered biomechanics associated with limb loss increase loading on the remaining limbs and spine, increasing the long-term risk of degenerative joint disease, overuse injuries and chronic pain. Asking such an animal to undertake the additional physical demands of assistance work is generally considered inconsistent with a welfare-first approach.

Similarly, animals with significant visual impairment, hearing impairment or progressive neurological disease may experience increased difficulty safely navigating complex public environments and responding appropriately to changing situations. Although some dogs with sensory impairments successfully learn alternative communication methods, WAFA does not generally support intentionally selecting animals with known disabilities for assistance work when equally suitable, healthy candidates are available.

Temporary Conditions

Not every medical issue permanently excludes an animal from assistance work.

Temporary injuries or illnesses that are expected to resolve completely may allow an animal to be reassessed once recovery is complete.

Examples include:

• uncomplicated fractures
• soft tissue injuries
• minor wounds
• temporary infections
• conditions requiring short-term medical treatment.

Before entering or returning to training, the animal should receive veterinary clearance confirming complete recovery and that the condition is unlikely to compromise future welfare.

For example, a young prospect that sustains a fractured toe during normal play may be temporarily withdrawn from assessment while the injury heals. Following successful treatment, repeat radiographs confirming complete bone healing, restoration of normal gait and absence of chronic pain, the dog may be reassessed for suitability. Because previous fractures can increase the risk of osteoarthritis in some animals, periodic veterinary monitoring throughout the dog’s working life may be appropriate to detect any early degenerative changes.

Retirement Following Medical Diagnosis

Medical conditions identified after an assistance animal has commenced work should trigger reassessment rather than automatic retirement.

Factors to consider include:

• whether the condition causes pain or discomfort
• the expected progression of disease
• whether workload modifications are possible
• whether treatment can maintain quality of life
• whether continuing to work remains in the animal’s best interests.

Some animals with mild, stable conditions may continue working safely with reduced duties, increased monitoring or workplace modifications. Others may require partial retirement, career transition or permanent retirement if continuing work would compromise welfare.

The decision to retire should always prioritise the health and wellbeing of the animal over the operational needs of the handler or organisation.

Veterinary Assessment Within the Interdisciplinary Team

A comprehensive veterinary assessment is an essential component of assistance animal selection; however, veterinary clearance alone should not determine whether an animal is suitable to commence or continue assistance work. Unless the veterinarian has extensive knowledge and experience in assistance animals, they may not fully appreciate the physical, behavioural and environmental demands associated with the role. Assistance animals are expected to work in complex public environments, perform repetitive trained tasks, travel extensively and maintain a high level of physical and psychological resilience over many years. Consequently, veterinary findings should always be interpreted collaboratively by the interdisciplinary team, including veterinarians, assistance animal trainers, behaviour professionals and, where appropriate, occupational therapists.

Practice Example

During pre-selection screening, a trainer assessed a young Golden Retriever that demonstrated excellent temperament, motivation and public access behaviour. Several weeks before formal acceptance into the program, the dog sustained a fractured toe while running at home. Training was suspended while the dog received veterinary treatment and repeat radiographs confirmed complete healing. Following rehabilitation, the dog demonstrated a normal gait, no evidence of pain and returned to full function. After veterinary clearance, the trainer proceeded with the dog’s assessment while implementing periodic orthopaedic monitoring throughout its working life to detect any early signs of post-traumatic osteoarthritis. In contrast, another prospect diagnosed with moderate congenital heart disease was not accepted into training because the anticipated physical demands of assistance work were considered likely to compromise the dog’s long-term welfare.

WAFA was asked to consult on a case where a large-breed assistance dog had advanced osteoarthritis and was significantly overweight. The dog’s treating veterinarian initially believed the animal could continue working because it remained ambulatory and was coping well within the home environment, however, the occupational therapist disagreed. However, after discussing the daily physical demands of assistance work—including prolonged walking on hard surfaces, repetitive task performance, public access, extended periods of standing and the long-term welfare implications—the veterinarian immediately revised their recommendation and agreed that retirement was the most appropriate outcome. This example highlights that decisions regarding fitness for assistance work require not only veterinary expertise but also an understanding of the unique occupational demands placed upon working assistance animals.

Occupational Therapy Considerations

Occupational therapists should recognise that an assistance animal’s fitness for work is fundamental to safe, ethical and sustainable practice. While clients may understandably become attached to a particular prospect, selection and retirement decisions must prioritise the animal’s welfare above emotional, financial or practical considerations. OTs should work collaboratively with veterinarians, trainers and other members of the interdisciplinary team to interpret medical findings, understand how health conditions may influence occupational performance and support informed decision-making throughout the animal’s working life. A welfare-first approach recognises that declining to train, modifying duties or retiring an animal due to medical concerns is not a failure—it is an ethical responsibility that protects both the animal and the integrity of the assistance animal partnership.