Response to ADA Suit

[aaarcher86]

again, another opinion, that you will have to accept that people don't agree with.

Well, that's fine. Since emotions and feelings don't have bearing on a legal obligation or decision it seems pretty clear.

I could only request then that other posters not engage in emotional responses. That will only get this thread closed.

 

[mttmilner]

I agree with aaarcher86. I would really like to keep this thread going and not get it shut down.

Obviously this issue brings out a lot of passion in a lot of people.

I will say this. It seems that every time this issue is raised those of us siding with Disney are thought to be uncaring, cold hearted, and a variety of other things. I wish that wasn't the case. I wish that we could have a rational conversation with valid reasons being brought forth on both sides of the argument.

One thing I haven't seen is this and I'm hoping Kathy, or someone else in her position, can answer. What would you like to see done? What kind of compromise could be reached so both sides would be happy. I think we all know the days of the GAC are over so what's next? I think that's what is going to hurt this lawsuit is it doesn't appear to ask for anything besides bemoaning the loss of the GAC. Like a previous poster stated, due to the varying degrees ASD and other disabilities, and with growing online forums, it's hard for Disney to give one ASD child something without all the other parents wanting it.

My suggestion would be as follows. When you get your DAS return time instead of it being 10 minutes shorter than the wait time, it's 10 minutes longer, and when you come back, instead of going through the fast pass line, you do get immediate access. You would also only be able to have one return time at a time. The child would still not be able to ride the same ride multiple times in a row, but it would allow them to not have to wait in the line which appears to cause so many problems.

That's just my suggestion and I'm sure it isn't perfect but I would love to hear some other compromises.

 

[LilyWDW]

i think we will just have to agree to disagreed that it does. but then again, that is not for you or I to decide really, whether we like it or not.

Actually, the ADA is very clear in the fact that a business does not have to provide every single possible situation for every single possible person. It is also clear the the experience may not be the same person to person and it doesn't have to be. This isn't an "agree" or "disagree" issue. It is clearly spelled out in the law.

Perhaps, being from Canada, the law is different there and thus there is some confusion?

 

[Mrsjvb]

I also have a difficult time differentiating between front of the line or immediate access and accelerated access. If the average wait time is 60 minute, how much of that would need to be cut off for it to be accelerated access for those individuals that need it. Like a previous poster stated, if they did that then everyone would say they could only wait in line for 5-10 minutes and we would be right back where we started from.

you know, now that I think about it, they are ALREADY getting accelerated access.. they get ten minutes knocked off the standby wait time on their DAS.

so once again we are back to the definition of 'reasonable'. is ten minutes less reasonable? 20? 45? a percentage of the current wait time?

and for the ones who will argue that the FP+ line can still be 20 minutes long, and thus the total wait is actually longer..well, what do you suggest? penalizing the rest of the guests by allowing even fewer FP+ tickets be issued per hour so that the FP+ line is nonexistent? a new, separate line requiring having to hire more CMs to man so that DAS holders can skip even the FP+ wait too?

 

[2tinkerbell]

Personally, I have a problem with the accelerated access issue. I think that was the problem with the GAC. Too many individuals needing accelerated access. I also tend to believe that it was difficult to draw the line on who needed it and who didn't. One can say that Disney just made the over use issue up, however, if you look at the raw numbers (how many GACs a day could be issued for Autism alone and how many people a day are in the parks)you can see that Disney isn't making that up. Sorry, but, I think Disney would have an idea of the usage and therefore, I tend to believe them when they say it was use and not abuse that caused the demise of the GAC.

When I disagree with someone's point of view, I am told that I do not understand and I have no empathy. Sorry, but, I totally do understand and I have empathy as I also have a child who is on the spectrum. BTDT

I, personally, can't look at life in terms of black and white, fair or unfair. It is what it is - sometimes grey, sometimes white, sometimes black, and many times colorful (to say the least). Ron Suskind, in his book "Life Animated" talks about his son, Owen, who is on the spectrum. Ron states that "Owen is just like you and I, only more so and less so." He says that children on the spectrum are "different, not diminished." I guess that is what makes me "different" because I can't and won't look at my life or my DD's life as unfair. I simply can't get into the argument of fair versus unfair because it is an emotional argument and when emotions are involved, no one wins, no one understands, no one cares, etc. If I choose to look at my life as unfair, no one can make it fair just as no one made it unfair.

I think that there is something said to the personal responsibility issue to. I am not advocating the extreme of keeping your child home if they can't handle crowds, noise, heat, etc. Nor am I an advocate of putting my child in a situation that she simply can't handle. Because of this, yes, my child does miss out on some things, but, she also is successful in the experiences she has. I have to take the personal responsibility for making choices whether my DD can be successful or not and setting up situations, where I can, for her to be successful. I have the responsibility to teach my child to do that for herself. For example, we learned that the FP lines are busiest at the beginning and the end of the hour, so we didn't use either our FP or DAS return time during those times.

Yes, my DD has obtained a DAS card which she and I utilized last January at the DLR. I felt it was better than the GAC! I felt that the DAS was equal. I felt so strongly about our success using FP and DAS that I wrote to Meg Crofton about it. Yes, I am taking my DD to DLR again because of our experience.

 

[asta]

You don't have to look very deep to see that the old GAC system had to be be done away with. It provided such a tremendous benefit that many people were able to justify a need for it. I really don't think there were that many cheating the system to get one. Instead many people can come up with a legitimate reason that someone in their group is just as deserving as other people that were using the GAC. Speaking globally, not specifically, my or my child's disability is more important to me than yours is. It is evident from reading here that many others feel the same way about the issues they face. Your issue is near and dear to you and it is easy to attach an elevated urgency to it. What you can't do is think that urgency diminishes someone else's need.

The fault in the old system was not in the 'other' park guests but in a poorly designed system that had to be changed.

 

[OurBigTrip]

Yes, abuse existed, but it was not the reason for the change. The system was changed because the number of families (like mine) who were in need of, and thus legitimately requesting, the GAC was increasing dramatically, as is the number of children in our country who are developing autism spectrum disorders.

Not all of the families that were using the "alternate entrance" GAC needed the unlimited FP that the GAC provided. They wanted it, but they didn't need it - it was overused.

 

[Coonhound]

what i think some will never understand is that equality in the case of the disabled might mean that they wait less time or get what other consider to be preferred treatment.

no amount of debate will change some views on this unless. anything preferred that my child gets will be perceived by this group of people as extra and why they can not get the same extra my child gets.

i have given up trying or trying to rationalize that equally and accommodation does mean differential treatment.

that said, if i could trade my child's disability in exchange for your ability to wait less time in line, then let's chat. i would gladly wait more for my child to not be disabled. in fact, i would wait in line, get to the front again, then let everyone else in line ahead of me until there was NO more line and then i would go on the ride.

since it is impossible for anyone to trade places with you, there is no point to this line of thinking and it really adds nothing to the discussion.

i think most parents would. it is nice, as a parent of disabled child, to, on a limited occasion, catch a break. whether that happens to be person that instead of writing a return time to come back in 30 minutes writes a shorter time - and make no mistake about it, there is NO way anyone could think our child is not disabled - then i take it. because i know that those breaks are few and far between.

accommodations at Disney are to allow access to rides, they are not meant to make up for hardships you or your child incur in everyday life.

one need only look at the bleak employment outlook for my child.

again, employment has nothing to do with this thread.

i am 100% certain that we will have to support her for the rest of her life and then hope, that one of my nieces or nephews is responsible enough and i have found an independent trustee to ensure she is taken care of when i and my wife are long gone. she might have a job, but that will be because of an organization that values inclusion in the work force and the intangible value diversity brings to the work force. will it be enough to support her, no way - and i would love to be totally wrong on this point. ...... and i am certain another worker will probably expect to get the extra treatment she does.

[just to be clear, my child's disability is not autism]

My comments in bold. I think we should strive to stay on-topic.

 

[OurBigTrip]

So, back to the lawsuit...if we could strip away the overly emotional verbiage and the wild allegations that Disney put the DAS in place to drive away the disabled, is there anyone that believes the suit has any level of merit?

 

[mttmilner]

I can't imagine it does. I think the fact that half of the plantiffs either haven't been since it went into effect or have been but didn't use the DAS will hurt. Also, I think it will hurt that they don't specifically state what it is they want.

To me, the lawsuit reads an angry breakup note and not a lawsuit. There accusations are full of emotional responses and not facts and the facts they do bring up (Disney planted the story of GAC abuse, Disney wanting to rid the parks of disabled people, Disney telling their employees to be rude to guests) will not only be impossible to prove, but they don't pass the eye test.

 

[wilkeliza]

So, back to the lawsuit...if we could strip away the overly emotional verbiage and the wild allegations that Disney put the DAS in place to drive away the disabled, is there anyone that believes the suit has any level of merit?

I see no level of merit because what Disney is offering is the same as many other major theme parks all over the US. On top of that the only one that actually visited the parks Disney claims their records show the transaction couldn't of happened as described.

 

[aaarcher86]

So, back to the lawsuit...if we could strip away the overly emotional verbiage and the wild allegations that Disney put the DAS in place to drive away the disabled, is there anyone that believes the suit has any level of merit?

No. They cited the 2 things from the ADA that are relevant.

1. Unlimited, shortened wait times are not something required.

2. They are not required to offer something that hinders operations.

After those two things, nothing else really matters.

 

[jcb]

So, back to the lawsuit...if we could strip away the overly emotional verbiage and the wild allegations that Disney put the DAS in place to drive away the disabled, is there anyone that believes the suit has any level of merit?

It is quite difficult to get past the wild allegations.

If I could, I can't imagine the parents will get a return of GAC or "near immediate" access. If the parents can show, in practice, that DAS is such an abysmal failure that it means Disney is not willing to individually evaluate the modification their child needs, then perhaps. (I am not saying DAS works or not, I'm not qualified to say.)

But even here, the question would then be, what modification is reasonable under the circumstances. Disney doesn't have to provide every desired modification, just a modification that permits the full and equal enjoyment.

 

[CPT Tripss]

So, back to the lawsuit...if we could strip away the overly emotional verbiage and the wild allegations that Disney put the DAS in place to drive away the disabled, is there anyone that believes the suit has any level of merit?

Nope

 

[2tinkerbell]

No. They cited the 2 things from the ADA that are relevant.

1. Unlimited, shortened wait times are not something required.

2. They are not required to offer something that hinders operations.

After those two things, nothing else really matters.

I agree.

I personally hope that the lawsuit is dismissed, which, if I read correctly, is what Disney is asking.

 

[TulipsNZ]

What accommodations would help those who need immediate access.

If their were a central DSA booth that could monitor ride wait times? Then those with a card could approach the booth inform which ride they want to ride and get a pass for that ride with the estimated wait time for the line as it stands? That way they don't have to approach the ride and leave yet still have to wait the same length of time as other patrons.

I have no idea if this sort of thing would work but just theorising options that may help.

 

[LilyWDW]

So, back to the lawsuit...if we could strip away the overly emotional verbiage and the wild allegations that Disney put the DAS in place to drive away the disabled, is there anyone that believes the suit has any level of merit?

Note: I am not a lawyer and I have not worked with the ADA in the capacity of a theme park. I HAVE worked with it when it comes to design in general.

Now that I have made sure everyone is aware of where I am coming from, I do not think that this lawsuit has merit. All one has to do is look at the ADA itself as to what Disney is required to do. They already provide a way for people to ACCESS the attraction that takes into account that waits in lines can be hard for some people. This is giving them equal access which is all the ADA requires of a business (except in specific situations where it can be required to have more (education) or allowed to have less (historical preservation) but Disney does not fall into any of these).

Now, a bit more of a personal note. The idea that the ability to loop could be considered "equal" is something I can not wrap my head around. Like I have said before, I have anxiety, depression, OCD, and PTSD. I have also been seen for, but not diagnosed with, autistic tendencies. Would I love to be able to ride my favorite attraction over and over (Haunted Mansion in my case if you cared)? Heck yes. Is that a fair accommodation? Heck no. I should also say that if I plan to ride something and it is down, it is very hard for me to get off that fact. I focus on it and it can be difficult for me to change my focus. But that is for me to deal with and Disney shouldn't be required to give me a FP or something instead. Why? Because it is not something that someone without my problems would EVER have access to... which means my access would be greater and not equal any longer.

 

[North of Mouse]

Disney doesn't have to provide every desired modification, just a modification that permits the full and equal enjoyment.

Disney 'can't' give everyone full and equal enjoyment. I have 'neck' issues which prevents me going on coasters (which I used to love), but Disney cannot give me equal enjoyment of riding them like many others have. But that's 'my' problem, not Disneys. I 'can' have the access, just not the enjoyment, and that is definitely not a fault of theirs.

We all have to have the personal responsibility of dealing with the hand that we are given.

 

[MickeyWheels]

As a parent of a child with severe special needs, we have a rule... if you cannot wait a reasonable amount of time you do not get to ride the ride. My child has been pulled out of lines when near the front because she chose to melt down. Its a life skill. She waits in line to get to the Park, waits in line to get in the park, waits in line to get the DAS, waits in line for the return time, and waits in line to get on the ride. It's part of going to Disney. Yes, we use the DAS (more for her physical disability than her sensory/anxiety) but we rarely get back exactly when the return time is. We get the return time, we set the alarm on the clock so she knows when we get to go back, then we go and do something distracting (Hidden Mickey hunt, see how many people with blue shoes we can spot, etc) Life is not going to give my child a front of the line pass. If she cannot wait a reasonable amount of time we skip the ride. We make better choices on behavior and we get to ride the rides. Yes many kids are more severe than my kid, but in life no one will give you a fastpass, so instead you have to find ways for the kids to learn a life skill.

Also, I miss the alternative waiting area. My child has severe brittle bone and lines are a physical danger to her. When they had the safe waiting areas we could hang out 30 minutes or more safely until it was our turn and it worked great.

As for the comment that a ramp was the same as accelerated access... that is so wrong. a ramp is a walkway. Everyone can use it . Its a simple access path. Accelerated access means you bypass everyone who waited patiently on that ramp.

All this said.... I strongly believe kids with cancer and other near end stage illnesses should get a front of line pass. THOSE are the kids it was designed for initially. For kids with a short life expectancy so they could do Disney and build memories with their family within their health endurance. My kid has a 3 hour window before she needs to rest due to her health decline,and a front of line pass would be great, but we have never used "front of line" because we feel that she is no better or different than anyone else, and she CAN wait for the reward of riding the ride or she can skip the ride. Its a parenting choice.

 

[KathyRN137]

I do want to point out that the term 'speshul snowflakes' is a very 'loaded term'.
It has not appeared in this thread until a few posts ago

Agreed, Sue. I quoted this offensive term from another board, not this one. No one here has used these words. Term used for illustrative purposes only.

Thanks,

Kathy