Florida Commission - Disney Policy Violates Law

[JZCubed]

Disney's new policy for Disabled individuals ruled discriminatory.

http://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/...scriminated-against-autistic-visitors.896828/

My thought comes from this quote:
The commission determination found that the DAS program would not allow a disabled visitor “to enjoy the park as it was intended to be enjoyed by all other patrons.”

The solution seems to be to allow Disabled people and their families an opportunity to enjoy the Parks in a way that was not intended to be enjoyed by all other patrons. I also wonder if the Commission believes that all family members should be included to pass to the front of the line or just the disabled person and a single caregiver?

Does the Commission have the same opinion about these same families being able to jump the line at airports or other public places?

It just seems to me that this Florida Commission has opened the door for people to once again 'game the system' by claiming a member of their party has a cognitive disability that deserves different treatment for queueing.

I'm all in favor of people with disabilities being afforded accommodations (autism is a disability), but I cannot see how this decision can prevent Disney from stopping abuses by people willing to lie about disabilities or abuse their own disability.

If there needs to be a policy change for one type of disability, it most likely will result in a change for all disabilities and the abuse will happen again from the same unscrupulous people or those given an idea by these many lawsuits.

I really thought Disney had an appropriate balance in their policy change.

I dunno', sometimes it just seems to me that these legal opinions set back the very causes they are trying to uphold or undo, because we all, unfortunately, know there will be another series of headlines pointing out when the disabled 'tour guides' return.

 

[DDLand]

Before this gets started, remember to keep this civil. People can be very passionate about this issue. Let's make sure that no one gets offended. Over at wdwmagic they were taking it way too far. Be kind.

I don't know a lot about ADA regulations. From what I can tell Disney doesn't seem offensive or discriminatory towards the disabled with this policy change. Though I'm no expert.

 

[dbramer]

Remember, this is a Florida State Commission. They do not have the power to enforce or interpret law. The courts will still need to decide the specific interpretation of the law and how the DAS provides accommodations. They cannot speak for the Federal Court System or ADA requirements, which would override ant state requirements unless the state requirements are more stringent than federal law.

The commission is a regulatory commission, not a judicial proceeding. They fall under the state executive branch, not the judicial systems.

 

[hopeful4fl]

It is the gamers who should be brought up in court. They are the ones that completely ruin it for people who are truly in need.

 

[rteetz]

There has been a lot of backfire ever since Disney put the new DAS into effect people don't like it. Disney did it for a number of reasons one of the big ones was abusing it. Disney legally can't ask if or how someone is disabled so that's why they went to this to try to help stop the abuse of the system.

 

[KYMickey]

I found this statement made over at WDWmagic and I think it pretty much sums up my feelings on the subject:

"The commission determination found that the DAS program would not allow a disabled visitor “to enjoy the park as it was intended to be enjoyed by all other patrons.”
====
Well, it is my determination that allowing guests to skip the lines prevents me from being able "to enjoy the park as it was intended to be enjoyed by all other patrons" since it causes unnecessary delays in the ride queue."

The present system seems to be a good compromise between doing nothing and allowing them to come to the front of the line. It still removes the burden of actually waiting in line while not allowing them to jump ahead of everyone else. I don't see how they can say that this is violating the rights of those handicaps.

By the way, I am disabled so this does affect me.

 

[mamaode]

This is crazy. I thought the new DAS was great. My son is moderately autistic and needs a variety of accommodations but we don't mind waiting. Just Id prefer to do it elsewhere. He talks non-stop and paces not aware of personal space. It's as much for us as it is for those all around us in lines . IMO the DAS does allow you to enjoy the park as intended by others. All other guests have to wait, so it makes no difference if we have to wait the approx same wait time. I'm just happy to not be make all the guests around me crazy with my talky walky son

 

[TXAKDisneyFan]

I agree with the overall sentiment expressed this far. The new policy seemed fair in allowing those with disabilities to not have to wait in line, while also remaining fair to other guests in that everyone must wait their turn.

I haven't read the ruling, but I wonder if having places for people to wait their turn would make a difference. I know a lot of people comment/complain about a lack of benches in the parks. And while there are a few play areas, there aren't all that many. Would it make sense for Disney to provide more places for guests to sit or play while they wait for their turn?

 

[smiths02]

I'm no lawyer, but I thought the law was equal access not equal enjoyment.

 

[gdrj]

IMO. Disney probably does more than most other companies and more than most of not all entertainment/amusement parks as a whole. IMO when gov't entities get involved with interpretation and intent and you have a state or federal bureaucrat making decisions it usual ends up being a head scratcher. At what point does giving equal access (or greater) have a negative impact on the majority come into play?

How a consumer can demand and have legal standing that they are being discriminated based on their disability, while Disney can NOT, ask questions about the disability is confusing and makes it difficult.

I am not making lite of a families daily struggles and challenges but what about standing on line at Wal-Mart during Christmas? Can they be sued because a family with an autistic child or a family member with other issues can not stand online for long periods of time at the register? How about Black Friday sales do retailers have to give special assistance for those customers waiting in parking lots. If a person has a disability which impacts their ability to watch a movie in a darkened theater do they need to leave the lights up?

To what end should accommodations be made? The laws will never be rolled back but if Disney is found in violation by the courts, probably most businesses in America would fail the same standard.

Whenever there are decree's or rulings etc. it may address the issue for one segment but have repercussions elsewhere that were unforeseen. The system may not be perfect but if they have to adjust I can almost guarantee that other members of the public will be impacted negatively including those with disabilities.

 

[tup1830]

Can someone educate me? If I see a business in NYC that is on a second floor without access to an elevator, can we sue them for not giving us the "same" experience or access as the person that can climb stairs?

 

[smiths02]

Can someone educate me? If I see a business in NYC that is on a second floor without access to an elevator, can we sue them for not giving us the "same" experience or access as the person that can climb stairs?

Possibly. There are exceptions for old buildings and/or small businesses.
Some of it would fall under "reasonable."

 

[DisneyNutMary]

"The commission determination found that the DAS program would not allow a disabled visitor “to enjoy the park as it was intended to be enjoyed by all other patrons.”

Here is where I have an issue with the commissions decision, and I hope the court of law agrees. The ADA requires equal access, not equal enjoyment.
I have a condition called strabismus, and because of the way my eyes work, I am incapable of seeing 3-d movies the way others see them. While others are reaching up to grab at objects that appear to be right before them, I see the objects in 2 dimension on a screen, large, but still out of reach. I do not lack depth perception, I just lack the ability to use both eyes together in the way the film intends. Should WDW bring in Donald Duck to fly in front of my seat at Philharmagic? According to this finding, they should, and I would have a valid suit under this finding. But the reality of the situation is, WDW does provide me equal access to Philharmagic, and glasses that both fit me and meet the needs of the film being shown. The fact that I cannot enjoy the film as my family members do is not in any was a discrimination against me or my condition, it's the condition that prevents my enjoyment, not any outside influence.
My sister gets headaches on RnR, bad headaches from the side to side banging of her head in the restraint. Does she have equal enjoyment? No. Should she sue because of this? Absolutely not.
When is the point when people take responsibility for themselves and adjust to what they are given rather than expecting the world to adjust to them?
These lawsuits are an embarrassment to those who live with challenges daily, and work to enjoy the world with the access they are given rather than use their challenges to expect the world to cater to them.
By all means, equal access is necessary, an interpreter for the deaf, ramps for the mobility impaired, separate waiting areas for the cognitively impaired. But better access to increase your enjoyment? There's something for that! It's called a VIP tour, go ahead and buy one if you need instant access to rides in order to enjoy your life.

 

[JZCubed]

There has been a lot of backfire ever since Disney put the new DAS into effect people don't like it. Disney did it for a number of reasons one of the big ones was abusing it. Disney legally can't ask if or how someone is disabled so that's why they went to this to try to help stop the abuse of the system.

You are being far more succinct than my OP. Thank you.

And yes, the dialogue here has been far more civil. Thank you all for that.

I agree that the DAS does negatively impact some people with a very particular type of disability. I submit that their needs are not being met by the current policy.

And I understand that Disney cannot ask about a disability.

However, the apparent legal resolve is to force Disney back to the old method that was easily abused. That's my problem.

Seems to me the 'burden' should be on the person(s) requiring the additional accommodation than on Disney needing to open the door for anyone claiming to have a disability that requires an accommodation above the current policy (that was struck down by the Commission).

I dunno', I'm back to the circular reasoning in all this - that all people with disabilities, whether they need to or not, will now be able to enjoy the Parks in a manner in which they were not intended and there will once again be news stories about abuse of the system.....because the current policy is not ample enough for a small subset of people with disabilities and nobody is required in any way to validate a need for an accommodation.

I'm just trying to understand how Disney can stop the abuse of people willing to lie or cheat at everyones else's expense, while also protecting the rights of people with disabilities.

This Commission seems to think the only answer is the go back to the old policy and live with those who are willing to cheat. I can live with this, but that does not mean I have to like their solution.

 

[rteetz]

You are being far more succinct than my OP. Thank you.

And yes, the dialogue here has been far more civil. Thank you all for that.

I agree that the DAS does negatively impact some people with a very particular type of disability. I submit that their needs are not being met by the current policy.

And I understand that Disney cannot ask about a disability.

However, the apparent legal resolve is to force Disney back to the old method that was easily abused. That's my problem.

Seems to me the 'burden' should be on the person(s) requiring the additional accommodation than on Disney needing to open the door for anyone claiming to have a disability that requires an accommodation above the current policy (that was struck down by the Commission).

I dunno', I'm back to the circular reasoning in all this - that all people with disabilities, whether they need to or not, will now be able to enjoy the Parks in a manner in which they were not intended and there will once again be news stories about abuse of the system.....because the current policy is not ample enough for a small subset of people with disabilities and nobody is required in any way to validate a need for an accommodation.

I'm just trying to understand how Disney can stop the abuse of people willing to lie or cheat at everyones else's expense, while also protecting the rights of people with disabilities.

This Commission seems to think the only answer is the go back to the old policy and live with those who are willing to cheat. I can live with this, but that does not mean I have to like their solution.

There have been several lawsuits already regarding the new DAS card. If this was wrong the government would've stepped in already. I don't think Disney will go back to the old system nor should they.

 

[DisMommyTX]

I personally like the new system. It works great for most kids with cognitive delays, including mine. Trust me, you do NOT want to be waiting in line with our kids! However, for a certain subset of guests, this system is pure torture.

I certainly hope they would not return to the old system. However, this one-size-fits-all model is not the best either. There are simple steps that could make the experience of visiting the parks much more feasible for those guests who cannot function with the current system. Disney says that additional accommodations can be made, but they are not often granted, and there is no process to qualify. Most of these parents would be more than happy to provide documentation--just tell them what they need to do. The number of guests who need additional accommodations is tiny, but the impact on the families is immeasurable. Done right, other guests would never notice a difference, except for maybe witnessing fewer of our children melting down.

We are close to a great system for all children to experience the magic, it just needs a few tweaks.

 

[lanejudy]

Remember, this is a Florida State Commission. They do not have the power to enforce or interpret law. The courts will still need to decide the specific interpretation of the law and how the DAS provides accommodations. They cannot speak for the Federal Court System or ADA requirements, which would override ant state requirements unless the state requirements are more stringent than federal law.

The commission is a regulatory commission, not a judicial proceeding. They fall under the state executive branch, not the judicial systems.

This Commission seems to think the only answer is the go back to the old policy and live with those who are willing to cheat.

As dbramer posted, this "finding" doesn't actually do much. My understanding is that this Commission is an appointed board that reviewed the paperwork submitted and determined that what was written has enough merit to recommend the issue could proceed to trial. Until such trial occurs, with a court hearing testimony and arguments presented and rebutted, there has been no actual "fault" found with the current DAS system. The media headlines are somewhat misleading with sensationalism.

 

[Gillyrose779]

I wonder if there would have been less abuse if Disney could have given out harsh penalties for abusing the system.

For example, if it could have been proven that people were paying "tour guides" in order to abuse the system they could be banned from Disney for life. Given I know there are a lot of flaws to this like how to prove and who would take the time to investigate and prove BUT, if people knew they could be banned for life for abusing, would the abuse decline?

 

[Alice Royal]

I have never understood why so many people are up in arms over DAS.

I'm a 19 year old college student with autism. Draw whatever conclusions you want to about me being 'high-functioning', but I do not use that label. I've gotten plenty of stares and nasty comments about 'gaming the system' because my disability is invisible, too. (Top tip: Many people who may look like they are abusers of DAS actually just have invisible disabilities).

I've used DAS for about a year now because it allows me to avoid the nasty side effects of waiting in an enclosed space with many people for long periods of time. I see absolutely no reason why being able to wait for the same amount of time, sometimes even less, is not maintaining 'equal access' to the attractions here.

What I would like to see, perhaps, is a move toward what Universal does with the Attraction Assistance Pass, where if the wait is less than 30 minutes for any attraction you are directed to their Express line immediately. Perhaps this isn't possible at Disney due to larger capacity/larger use and abuse of the accommodations, but it would effectively give people with disabilities the option to really power through rides if they wish to. Get your FPs for the headliners in advance, get a DAS time for something else while the wait is long, and hit up a bunch of lower-wait rides while you're 'waiting'.

It's always seemed to me that the parents who complain about DAS claim that their child can only handle being in a park for a few hours while attempting to do what I just described or something akin to how we all used to game FP- for those few hours.

 

[ParrotBill]

I expect this will be overturned in Federal court. As noted above, the ADA requires accommodations to provide access, not enjoyment. It does not require individualized accommodations for each different disability. There are going to be things that some disabled people cannot do even if they have access. A severely autistic child may not be able to go through a grocery checkout line. Does that mean the Grocery store has to provide a checkout lane with no line for that family? If you extend this thinking to all the possible disabilities no business could ever provide every accommodation needed.