Colleague Calls Me Not Disabled Enough for Therapy Dog, AITA for Refusing to Share?

A 28-year-old woman refused to share her therapy dog after a coworker basically told her she was not disabled enough to “need” one. And honestly, it’s the kind of workplace drama that starts as a comment in a meeting and turns into a full-on moral debate by Monday morning.

OP, who has anxiety and depression, relies on Max, her Golden Retriever, to get through rough days at work. Everyone in the office knows Max is her support. Then Sarah, who’s been stressed lately, makes a snarky remark about OP not deserving a therapy dog, and later asks to borrow Max for a couple days “to see if it helps.”

It sounds like a simple request, until you remember Sarah already judged OP’s need for support.

Original Post

So I'm (28F) and I've been dealing with anxiety and depression for the past few years. It was getting pretty bad, so my therapist suggested getting a therapy dog.

I got Max, an adorable Golden Retriever who has been an absolute blessing in my life. For background, I work in a moderately big office.

Everyone knows about Max and how he helps me get through tough days at work. He's like my little support system.

Now, one of my coworkers, Sarah, has been dealing with stress lately and casually mentioned that she wished she had a therapy dog like Max. I empathized with her but didn't really engage much.

The other day, in a group meeting, Sarah made a snarky comment about how I shouldn't have a therapy dog because I don't seem 'disabled enough' to need one. It hurt a lot, and I found it disrespectful.

Fast forward to this weekend, Sarah asked if she could borrow Max for a couple of days because she wanted to 'see if having a dog helps with stress.' I was taken aback by her request and flat out told her no. I felt like she was being hypocritical and disrespectful.

Sarah got upset and started going on about how I was being selfish and should share Max if I wanted to spread 'positive vibes.' OPINIONS ARE DIVIDED. Some coworkers side with Sarah, saying I should be more 'generous,' while others say I have every right to say no.

So AITA?

The Ethics of Sharing Support

This scenario highlights a complex ethical dilemma. The OP's refusal to share Max with her coworker Sa raises questions about the validity of mental health needs. The fact that Sa openly criticized the OP’s need for a therapy dog complicates the situation even further. It’s one thing to ask for help, but it’s another to question someone’s mental health struggles, especially when that person has been open about their anxiety and depression.

Max isn't just a pet; he’s a crucial part of the OP’s coping mechanism. Sharing him with someone who doubts her need for support could undermine the very purpose of having a therapy dog. This tension between personal boundaries and the desire to help others is something many can relate to, making the community's reactions so varied.

Sarah’s “not disabled enough” comment in the group meeting is what makes her later request for Max feel less like kindness and more like entitlement.

Comment from u/Random_Raccoon77

NTA. Sarah crossed a line questioning your need for a therapy dog. Your bond with Max is personal and not for others to use.

Comment from u/SunnySideUp22

WTF? Sarah's behavior is so out of line. Getting a therapy dog is a huge decision and not just a 'stress relief' tool to borrow.

Comment from u/candle_lighter321

YTA. If Sarah just wanted to try having a therapy dog, you could've explained calmly instead of shutting her down. Sharing could educate her.

Comment from u/curious_cat_mom

NTA. Your mental health journey is personal. Sarah's comment about being 'disabled enough' was rude. She doesn't get to just borrow Max on a whim.

When Sarah asked to borrow Max anyway, OP shut it down fast, because sharing him felt like rewarding the same disrespect.

Comment from u/pizza_lover9000

NTA. Sarah needs to understand boundaries. Max is your support, not a stress relief tool for the office. Stand your ground.

This feels like the standoff between the hyperactive neighbor dog and the calm pup, after playdates kept getting ruined.

Comment from u/flowerpower_89

NTA. Your mental health needs are valid, and you have every right to keep your support system private. Sarah needs to learn some respect.

Comment from u/AdventureSeeker44

NTA. Sarah's comment was insensitive and ignorant. Sharing Max isn't about 'positive vibes,' it's about your well-being. Stay strong, OP.

Then Sarah flipped the script, calling OP selfish and saying she should spread “positive vibes” by sharing her support system.

Comment from u/chocoholic_dreamer

NTA. Your mental health is not up for debate. Sarah should apologize for crossing boundaries and making hurtful comments.

Comment from u/moonlight_writer

NTA. Sarah's entitlement is shocking. Your mental health journey is personal, and Max is your companion, not an office resource for borrowing.

Comment from u/mystic_mermaid23

NTA. Sarah needs to learn empathy and respect for boundaries. Your relationship with Max is personal and crucial for your mental well-being.

Now the office is split, with some coworkers siding with Sarah’s “be generous” angle and others backing OP’s right to say no.

Share your thoughts and experiences in the comments section.

Divided Opinions on Mental Health

The reactions to this post reveal the broader societal struggle with understanding mental health. Some readers empathize with the OP, recognizing that therapy dogs play a vital role in managing anxiety. Others, however, seem to echo Sa’s sentiments, suggesting that not everyone deserves a therapy dog, no matter the circumstances. This divide underscores a common misconception that mental health struggles need to meet certain thresholds to be valid.

The OP's story resonates deeply because it touches on the nuances of mental health advocacy and the importance of support systems. The demand for transparency in mental health needs can be problematic, as it often leads to invalidation. Here, the complexities of personal experience versus public perception create a rich ground for discussion that many can engage with.

The Bottom Line

This story serves as a poignant reminder of how personal boundaries intersect with the complexities of mental health. The OP's decision not to share her therapy dog Max isn't just about an animal; it's a stand for her own well-being. As the conversation unfolds, it raises critical questions: How do we navigate the fine line between helping others and protecting our own mental health? What do you think? Should the OP have considered sharing Max despite the coworker’s comments, or is her decision justified?

What It Comes Down To

The original poster's refusal to share her therapy dog, Max, stems from a deep-seated need to protect her mental health, especially after her coworker Sarah questioned her need for support. Sarah's dismissive comment about the OP not being "disabled enough" struck a nerve, making the request to borrow Max feel hypocritical and disrespectful. This dynamic highlights the tension between wanting to help others and maintaining personal boundaries, as well as the misunderstanding some people have regarding the validity of mental health struggles. Ultimately, the situation underscores how personal experiences with mental health can be easily invalidated by those who haven't walked the same path.

OP might have said no to a dog, but she accidentally started a war over who gets to have support.

Wait till you see why her friend was furious after she refused to use the therapy dog for an Instagram contest.