Disney finally sees huge abuse of the GAC

[stargazertechie]

I'm glad you had a great trip with your father. I'm glad you could make it work. I personally would have never tried, so I commend you for your effort!

It honestly didn't take that much more effort than our "normal" trips- and that is why I sing the praises of Disney! We had to rent a scooter, and then get a GAC for an alternate shaded wait area. The ONLY time we needed the shaded area was for the Indy speedway racers. It wasn't the best choice medically for a ride, but Dad hadn't driven a car in 5 months, and he knew this would be his last chance to "drive" during his time on earth, and boy did he love it.

When he got tired we would head back to the resort. We scheduled our days around his naps coinciding with the sunniest/hottest part of the day. There were times he tuckered out before mom and I, so he would head back to the bus by himself, and go back to the room alone. I don't know of many vacations where someone who was medically fragile could do that type of thing without trepidation.

And thats great for your family. But it is not a risk I would want to take nor would I put others in the situation to mitigate. My father passed away at 55. His dying wish was to run a marathon with me. He had heart disease and that was ultimately what did him in. He made it to the end of the driveway during our first practice run. I stopped the training after that. It was too big of a risk and we ended up getting another year with him.

I respect your position, but for those who DO want to live life to the fullest, KNOWING that they are on borrowed time, it is a blessing to have that option. Nothing would have made my dad last longer. He was given 6-9 months in November of 2011. He died in April of 2012. Cancer is a beast like that. He wasn't going to sit on the sidelines and watch life trickle away. He knew he had months left, and he was going to make the most of every one of them. There was nothing that would slow down the progression of his disease at that point, and there was nothing short of staying in isolation that might have prolonged his life. But he didn't want QUANTITY, he wanted quality. We took precautions to avoid immunological issues, but he didn't let a fear of germs keep him from doing what he wanted to do.

A completely seemingly healthy person can die just as suddenly from an undiagnosed medical condition. You can't let "what ifs" stop you from living.

 

[Sam81]

I believe his point is at some point, it doesn't make sense for some people to try this. There are only so many accommodations that can be made for people. Personally, if my child was unable to wait in line/with other people, WDW would be the last place in the world I would take them. Disney isn't a right, there is no reason that a child HAS to go to Disney, if it's going to cause so much anxiety getting them there.

That’s exactly my point. If my child had extreme social anxiety and a fear of crowds the absolute last place I would take him/her is WDW!

Or if I somehow got separated from my O2 for even a minute and I would literally die, I would not take a chance just to see the Little Mermaid.

Also not to mention the toll it takes on the first responders. My wife is an EMT and she beats herself up when she cannot save someone.

 

[Muddypaws]

There SHOULD be no debate here on the subject of making the GAC harder to get. Those who don't need or don't get a GAC have no problem with making the requirements tougher. Those that do have a legitimate need are tired of suffering the abuse and have no problem justifying to guest relations why they are asking for one.

Of course, there are always a few militant fanatics who will stir up trouble, usually for financial gain. Or those that stir up trouble just for its own sake.

 

[stargazertechie]

There SHOULD be no debate here on the subject of making the GAC harder to get.

The issue that I have with it is the fact that making it "tougher" to get would violate a law that protects those with legitimate disabilities in all arenas of their public existence. People with disabilities already face discrimination even though they have laws that protect their rights. Until such a revision happens with the ADA, I don't think the solution is allowing a corporation to violate that law to keep people from trying to take advantage of a perceived benefit.

 

[starjazz]

Yeah, I agree with Muddy, it would be nice if there was some way to make darn sure that a person receiving a GAC actually needs one, but short of rewriting the law, I don't know how. Should be and will be are two different things here.

 

[Robbi]

I believe his point is at some point, it doesn't make sense for some people to try this. There are only so many accommodations that can be made for people. Personally, if my child was unable to wait in line/with other people, WDW would be the last place in the world I would take them. Disney isn't a right, there is no reason that a child HAS to go to Disney, if it's going to cause so much anxiety getting them there.

Since you don't have a child with this kind of problem, you really can't know what you would do. Children love Disney World, we love our children and want them to enjoy a trip.

I don't think they can replace the GAC with FP+, not if I have straight in my head everything I've been reading about it. What if the person with the disability was staying offsite and not on WDW property? If the FP+ system is tiered, or priority given to those staying onsite, that would be discriminatory against those with disabilities staying offsite ... and that's a whole new can of worms WDW does not want to open.

Of course, with the myriad of FP+ threads, I may be interpreting the way it will be used completely wrong, so take what I've said FWIW.

Good thoughts, thank-you.

That’s exactly my point. If my child had extreme social anxiety and a fear of crowds the absolute last place I would take him/her is WDW!

Or if I somehow got separated from my O2 for even a minute and I would literally die, I would not take a chance just to see the Little Mermaid.

Also not to mention the toll it takes on the first responders. My wife is an EMT and she beats herself up when she cannot save someone.

The parents of a child in therapy for social anxiety might be encouraged to take their child to a place like Disney World. Getting a GAC would be a way to ease them into being able to be around lots of people without them having people right on top of them.

 

[donaldlovesdaisy]

Is it safe to say though that if WDW made receiving them for those who truly need them that none of us would have a problem with it being a so called “front of the line pass”? I know that myself and my family would not care! Sometimes life is not fair and if I have to wait an extra ten minutes because a make a wish family is coming thorough then oh well those extra ten minutes of waiting may do me some good to reflect on life’s little blessings.

 

[Laketravis]

But Disney IS for everyone.

No, it's not for everyone. It's only for those who can afford it.

And just like Disney isn't required by law to waive the costs of admission based on means-testing, they aren't required by law to make unreasonable accomodations for unverifiable "handicaps".

Wheelchair accessibility is required in public spaces by ADA law. GAC is not.

If you don't think GAC was the brainchild of an effort to broaden the theme park audience and raise attendance even more by encouraging those who otherwise wouldn't to attend, then you don't understand how a business works.

Unfortunately, any abuses of GAC are Disney's problem, and they will be forced to deal with it. Ultimately, discontinuing GAC entirely is a solution that might be put on the table but only if it can be shown that it won't negatively impact the one metric that every Disney action is ultimately measured against, and this is it's impact on revenue.

 

[Muddypaws]

I don't think the solution is allowing a corporation to violate that law to keep people from trying to take advantage of a perceived benefit.

I never said anything about violating any law. However, I do think that since Disney World is not on public land that they should have the right to try and establish verification before granting special privileges. This is a case where a law whose intention to protect those with disabilities is quickly getting out of control and actually subjecting them to more discrimination.

 

[aprincessatlast]

The issue that I have with it is the fact that making it "tougher" to get

They don't need to make it tougher to get just not as attractive to use or should I say abuse. (i.e automatic front of the line pass)

 

[Miss Peach]

I think it needs to be less about making it harder to obtain and more about making them less valuable to fakers.

If the CMs do NOT let them be used as front of the line passes, as they do now, it would greatly cut down on their perceived value.

The point of the GAC is to equalize the guest experience, it has now enhanced the guest experience for those that hold the GAC.

If the GAC had a return time, rather than immediate, alternate entrance, that would be a great first step.

If there was a way to tie the number of uses per day to the crowd index, that would be helpful also.

If the GAC allowed the person in need to be accompanied by one companion, while the other members of their group wait in the regular, or fast pass queue, if they hold fast passes for that ride, and the GAC user rejoins their party when they reach the front, that would help.

It the GAC had a photo on it of the GAC requiring guest, that would make a big difference.

These ideas are just off the top of my head.

 

[aprincessatlast]

No, it's not for everyone. It's only for those who can afford it.

If you don't think GAC was the brainchild of an effort to broaden the theme park audience and raise attendance even more by encouraging those who otherwise wouldn't to attend, then you don't understand how a business works.

Unfortunately, any abuses of GAC are Disney's problem, and they will be forced to deal with it. Ultimately, discontinuing GAC entirely is a solution that might be put on the table but only if it can be shown that it won't negatively impact the one metric that every Disney action is ultimately measured against, and this is it's impact on revenue.

You bring out some very interesting points.

 

[KateMW]

I think it needs to be less about making it harder to obtain and more about making them less valuable to fakers.

If the CMs do NOT let them be used as front of the line passes, as they do now, it would greatly cut down on their perceived value.

The point of the GAC is to equalize the guest experience, it has now enhanced the guest experience for those that hold the GAC.

If the GAC had a return time, rather than immediate, alternate entrance, that would be a great first step.

If the GAC allowed the person in need to be accompanied by one companion, while the other members of their group wait in the regular, or fast pass queue, if they hold fast passes for that ride, and the GAC user rejoins their party when they reach the front, that would help.

It the GAC had a photo on it of the GAC requiring guest, that would make a big difference.

These ideas are just off the top of my head.

I think all of these are wonderful ideas. I do agree it should be about Disney making it harder to abuse rather than harder to get. That's a very good point.

 

[Muddypaws]

It the GAC had a photo on it of the GAC requiring guest, that would make a big difference.

These ideas are just off the top of my head.

I have often thought the same thing. And it wouldn't be that big of a deal to implement. After all, Costco does it all the time.

 

[stargazertechie]

If there was a way to tie the number of uses per day to the crowd index, that would be helpful also.

If the GAC allowed the person in need to be accompanied by one companion, while the other members of their group wait in the regular, or fast pass queue, if they hold fast passes for that ride, and the GAC user rejoins their party when they reach the front, that would help.

It the GAC had a photo on it of the GAC requiring guest, that would make a big difference.

I think your last suggestion is FANTASTIC! I have issues with the other two. People who have families that are good planners (rope drop, touring plan, etc) would be punished by limiting the uses of the GAC based on crowd index. As for the having the parties rejoin- I don't like that simply because it's supposed to be about a family vacation, and I wouldn't want to be split up from my family for the purpose of waiting in line.

I do agree though, that the biggest help would be eliminating the "front of the line" usage that seems to have become common practice for those who need an alternate waiting area. The simple answer should be that you are given the option to wait in the accessible loading area for the time equivalent to the posted standby time, or take a pass with a return time equal to the standby wait time and then go and wait in a quiet area.

Actually, that last part wouldn't be hard to enforce at all with the FP+ system. It would be easy to code the RFID card/bracelet to allow access return at the designated time, and it would be loaded into the system so you couldn't just run around and scoop up "GAC access entries"

Disney can send a check my way for that idea

 

[Sam81]

The parents of a child in therapy for social anxiety might be encouraged to take their child to a place like Disney World. Getting a GAC would be a way to ease them into being able to be around lots of people without them having people right on top of them.

But that is not the way it works. Family A waits 30 minutes in the hot sun to see Goofy. Family B has a child with social anxiety and waits in a shaded quiet area for 30 minutes to see Goofy. Family A gets annoyed that they have to sweat and gets a GAC to prevent this. Family C catches on and so forth. Soon the GAC becomes a “tip to avoid standing in the sun.”

 

[Suellen]

Are you an AP holder? That seems like a long time for one.

I have an autistic child and we've had a GAC the past two trips, but they were never issued for more than the length of the stay (4-7 days).

Yes annual pass holder.

 

[autismmom1]

I'm finding it hard to believe that the use of the GAC is really causing that much of a hardship on other, non-GAC-using patrons. Is the fact that is "isn't fair" some get to use the fastpass line the problem? Yes, there is abuse, but in all areas of life, there will be abuse when something like this is offered.

Like many of the others who are thankful for this service, my son has autism. We've been taking him since 2009 to WDW...every year we obtain a GAC and every year we have been decreasing the actual use of the card - he continues to mature (physically and emotionally) and the need is no longer as great. Eventually we hope to discontinue having to use it, but for now, we are so grateful to have that option. It's even more amazing that we don't have to jump through hoops to obtain it - if you only knew what some have to do just to get basic services to help their children live a decent life, you would be shocked. Keep in mind, no one asks for their child to be born with a disability.

To answer those who question whether those people who have disabilities like my son should even attempt WDW, I just want you to understand how invaluable WDW is in helping our kids learn to tolerate the circumstances that may "set them off". It's a simple concept...you can desensitize someone by introducing them to their triggers, very slowly and over periods of time...and the rewards (the attractions) are fantastic motivators! WDW has helped our son to enjoy life, and what he learns there definitely translates into being able to handle his issues better in other locations. It's therapy!

It makes me sad to think that the GAC situation may change, but we'll deal with it if it does.

 

[Suellen]

I think it needs to be less about making it harder to obtain and more about making them less valuable to fakers.

If the CMs do NOT let them be used as front of the line passes, as they do now, it would greatly cut down on their perceived value.

The point of the GAC is to equalize the guest experience, it has now enhanced the guest experience for those that hold the GAC.

If the GAC had a return time, rather than immediate, alternate entrance, that would be a great first step.

If there was a way to tie the number of uses per day to the crowd index, that would be helpful also.

If the GAC allowed the person in need to be accompanied by one companion, while the other members of their group wait in the regular, or fast pass queue, if they hold fast passes for that ride, and the GAC user rejoins their party when they reach the front, that would help.

It the GAC had a photo on it of the GAC requiring guest, that would make a big difference.

These ideas are just off the top of my head.

First point bolded ~ for me I move very, very slow due to my leg... while it is still better for me to walk it takes us a long time to get from ride to ride most of the time AND I have to worry about someone stepping on it or kicking or knocking me off kilter from the typical crowd moving. So really it would take me just as long to tour the park and see the same attractions as someone without the GAC. Trust me ~ I'd much rather go back to walking normal.

Except when it is one parent with two small children... then what?

See all of these would then require making "exceptions" and when those start the whole idea is blown out of the water.

 

[brucerob62]

the bottom line is ....no GAC's should be given out without a doctors note period. That would get rid of alot of abuse right there.