EDITED to correct spelling and grammar and add a little additional context.
Interesting reading here. All good perspective and points. So far, this line of posting has focused on the concept of the
individual disabled person and their party achieving an equitable, inferior or superior experience compared to the
average non-disabled person and party. I am interested in your thoughts if we expand that and include other real-world factors because DAS was changed by Disney and Disney had to factor in these other considerations in changing DAS.
Start with the fact that the parks are already ADA compliant. So, DAS is a compassionate gift that Disney has a right to choose the scope and inclusion or exclusion parameters. (This is a big difference in understanding between this forum and the Facebook forum discussed above.)
Add in the concept of what is an equitable experience
for the individual disabled person and their party, as you have been doing above. Surely, this is a necessary part of the discussion and of defining equitable experience. But, don’t stop there. Disney has the numbers, but must also compare the macro experience and impact on all stakeholders, not just the individual disabled person and party. Other stakeholders include non-disabled guests and their parties, cast members, stock holders, leadership who must deal with complaints or supervise the front line staff, contractors who provide services like the countries who support the Epcot pavilions or own restaurants, merchandise suppliers, and a host of others who depend on the business continuing; including the local area population, non-Disney hotels and restaurants nearby and governments. The penumbra of Disney operations is huge! It does not just focus on the disabled person and their party.
Somebody above did a by-the-numbers post that was exceptionally informative based on percentage of the population that is disabled in the US and globally according to WHO numbers. Then they applied the numbers to annual Disney park visitors. Then they showed what giving DAS to just all disabled individuals would do to the numbers even without Genie plus. It would seriously lengthen the wait in the LL lines. (None of this even considers adding non-disabled cheaters.) It made the LL so long, it defeated shortening the wait to tolerable (and equitable) levels for the disabled person. Then they added 3 to the party granted DAS LL access and showed those numbers. Even though this is down from 6 in the "old DAS", it choked out the probable capacity of the LL lines.
Now, add in the factor that the LL lines are supposed to move fast to shorten the wait. Forget paid LL users and profit motive. Just assume for a minute that LL lanes are dedicated to the disabled — and open to all disabilities with a party of four total. If that crowd choked the LL lanes, the stand-by would be a ghost town — because to would be the stand-still line. Fact: to keep the LL lane moving fast the ratio of LL boarding the ride to stand-by was four to one — during average to slower times. During crowded park times it was 93% LL to 7% stand-by. That was in the
old DAS which just ended. (I agree, Disney should have changed the name for the new program.) By any measure, that is not equitable for the people in stand-by. So, the disabled were getting a far superior experience. The old argument that the DAS approved are just getting an equivalent experience because of their virtual wait does not hold water in this example because not only did they avoid suffering the stand-by line (the stand-by queues are hard on the non-disabled too), but they did get to pre-schedule a few rides, could do other things while waiting and could come back at any time. So, in my view, it was superior. This does not, in any way, diminish my empathy for the disabled and their limitations. But the goal here is equitable —
for all — not just the disabled.
So, Disney also sees some revenue in the LL. Fine. The parks are ADA compliant without DAS. It is a gift, not a requirement. Fact: too many in the DAS line destroyed the benefit for the disabled, the LL paid users and the standby-line users. Too many eligible for DAS also destroys the functionality of the stand-by lines; which is still the vast majority of their 58,000,000 annual guests. Two hour stand-by lines impacts the number of people willing to go spend thousands on
Disney vacations, which impacts hotel revenue, food, merch, costs to hire extra staff to provide support and services to all guests including especially the disabled, etc. Here's another fact that has not been discussed; Disney has to maintain additional staff costs and benefits to service the additional needs of disabled guests and their parties. It is not just absorbed into regular operating costs. It costs money to do that. I can see that this impacts their business.
Do not forget that at the same time Disney is trying to launch streaming and the parks are still the backbone for generating revenue. Disney needs the parks to operate well or the whole company could fail or be vulnerable to corporate take-over and raiding. Corporate raiding would destroy the Disney we all know and love! This is a serious consideration. A raider buys the whole company and then cherry picks and destroys what we know as Disney. So, Disney pulled hard on the reigns and changed DAS. if it turns too negative, they may well do away with DAS entirely.
As I have said before, many people, including myself, cannot do everything the parks offer. But I do not see Disney World or
Disneyland as just headliner rides. I don't see a successful trip to the parks as riding one headliner and another back-to-back to get my money's worth. (Sometimes I wonder if the parties doing this with a disabled person aren't being too hard on the disabled person's comfort and needs. Maybe even, some of the "family" is using the disabled person and their motives are really arising out of self-interest or even selfishness in taking the person to the parks. Whose wants are really being met if the disabled person is suffering at the parks -- forget the ride lines -- they suffer just being in the parks. But, that is just me. I saw a pediatrician comment that if a baby or toddler is sun and heat intolerant that the parents should not be taking the baby to the park. I have also been shocked to see newborns in the parks and being exposed to all the diseases and bacteria. In my day we didn't take newborns anywhere for the first three months or longer. But that is just me and my concerns. I am not judging; just observing.) I do think there are many disabilities that Disney cannot accommodate. It isn't just the waiting in the stand-by lines. Some should reconsider coming to the parks. However, I do not see this as the same thing that Disney, through callousness or design is trying to exclude people. I just think that even DAS or any of the other accommodations will not correct the serious challenges the disabled person is experiencing just by being in the parks. That is an individual's responsibility to make that decision; or their caretaker.
I want to end with these repeated attacks on Disney from the other forum and the intentional harassment of CMs, their health care advisor consultants and Disney leadership. (The health care consultant is not diagnosing or treating. They are just advisors to Disney and Disney could engage anyone -- including just a business executive with zero medical experience. But that is a whole different topic.) That very public and relentless tear-down, being done with ill-informed disabled people and their parties, could end the DAS program.
