NPR Story: Disability Access on Cruise Ships

[smchan]

Interesting story on NPR this morning framing out some of the issues on whether and when US law applies to cruise ships not sailing under a US flag.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4515894

Sam

 

[tvguy]

Yes, a lawsuit was filed.

Two basic issues:
1) Can non-U.S. flagged ships be made to comply with a U.S. law. Currently ships follow the laws of the nation they are registered in, and there is no international law on access for the disabled.

2) If above is true, do ALL cabins have to be handicapped accessable. (as opposed to current practice of having special cabins for those needing such access).

 

[videogal1]

Yes, a lawsuit was filed.

Two basic issues:
1) Can non-U.S. flagged ships be made to comply with a U.S. law. Currently ships follow the laws of the nation they are registered in, and there is no international law on access for the disabled.

2) If above is true, do ALL cabins have to be handicapped accessable. (as opposed to current practice of having special cabins for those needing such access).

1) Incorrect: Currently ANY ship that has home port in the areas serviced by the 11th Circuit are required to comply with the ADA..i.e. DCL, which is of Bahamian registry, but calls Port Canaveral its home port.

Those ships that currently home port in areas served by the 9th circuit, on the other hand, (Galveston, for instance) are not required to comply with the ADA.

This specific case involves Norwegian Cruise Lines, which, for one, does not permit service dogs aboard at any time and, despite their TV interviews, are so disabled-intolerant they do not even bother to have a special services department to handle important issues, such as oxygen, transfers, appropriate excursion activities.etc.

The purpose of this case is to make some sort of judicial sense out of two currently conflicting court decisions.

What would be the harm if EVERYTHING were handicapped accessible, including all the staterooms??

 

[dcandmc]

What would be the harm if EVERYTHING were handicapped accessible, including all the staterooms??

In a word, cost. While I think that all services, activities and events should be handicapped accessible, requiring that every stateroom also be accessible is going too far. This would drive up the cost of design and construction (either new construction or retrofitting), which would lead in turn to higher prices for the cruise, which would mean that some people who would otherwise be able to cruise (both handicapped and non-handicapped) would be priced out of the opportunity. The standard should be that there must be reasonable availabilty of handicapped accessible staterooms.

I would be interested in seeing the figures from DCL, and other cruise lines. How often do they run out of handicapped accessible staterooms, and have handicapped guests who aren't able to cruise because they can't be accommodated? If it happens more often than not, or even only once in a while, then I would say that the ship needs more handicapped accessible staterooms. But I think that it's going too far to say that every stateroom should be handicapped accessible.

 

[Honu]

They will not need to convert all the cabins. There will be a minimum number required based on the total number of cabins, just like hotels have a set amount of HC rooms based on the hotel size.

What will be interesting to see if the new push to follow ADA requirements will impact smoking onboard. The banning of smoking in offices, restaurants and bars is a result of the ADA protections for employees.

 

[tvguy]

1) Incorrect: Currently ANY ship that has home port in the areas serviced by the 11th Circuit are required to comply with the ADA..i.e. DCL, which is of Bahamian registry, but calls Port Canaveral its home port.

Those ships that currently home port in areas served by the 9th circuit, on the other hand, (Galveston, for instance) are not required to comply with the ADA.

This specific case involves Norwegian Cruise Lines, which, for one, does not permit service dogs aboard at any time and, despite their TV interviews, are so disabled-intolerant they do not even bother to have a special services department to handle important issues, such as oxygen, transfers, appropriate excursion activities.etc.

The purpose of this case is to make some sort of judicial sense out of two currently conflicting court decisions.

What would be the harm if EVERYTHING were handicapped accessible, including all the staterooms??

You hit at the central issue in the case. Which nations laws govern the ship? The nation of the ships registry? Or the nation of it's home port?
I don't think service dogs are covered by ADA, ADA has to do with the physical structure of the facilities. Interesting, if true that NCL bans service dogs, the first cruises I ever say service dogs on were NCL's now defunct Norway but that was before ADA existed.
Disney is considered fully ADA compliant. That's great. Only issue they face is they have more accessable cabins that customers who want them. And judging from the posts on this board, that IS a problem for them because the passengers in general who get these cabins and don't need the facilities find them inferior to standard staterooms.

 

[Talking Hands]

1)
This specific case involves Norwegian Cruise Lines, which, for one, does not permit service dogs aboard at any time and, despite their TV interviews, are so disabled-intolerant they do not even bother to have a special services department to handle important issues, such as oxygen, transfers, appropriate excursion activities.etc.

Does this include guide dogs or just service dogs for physcially disabled? WOW! They are so uninformed. Guess this is one cruise line that I will cruise on.

 

[HooKooDooKu]

Usually when I hear these ADA related news stories, I find myself pulling for the one getting sued because it usually seems like someone trying to unreasonably force others to provide them special treatment.

(NOTE: This is not ADA bashing, I'm only refering to the stories odd enough to become news worthy and NOT the many reasonable complaints that ADA was intended for).

When I heard the start of the story, I though... the crusie line might win this one. Legally they are a foreign ship and perhaps the ADA shouldn't apply to them (even if the complaint is justified in this case).

But then I heard the Norwegian Cruise Lines' tickets state something to the effect that "disputes will be handled by U.S. Law". So now I'm thinking "you idots are toast". If they are blatantly in violation of ADA laws and include statements like that on their tickets, they deserve to get burned.

 

[videogal1]

In a word, cost. While I think that all services, activities and events should be handicapped acessible, requiring that every stateroom also be accessible is going too far. This would drive up the cost of design and construction (either new construction or retrofitting), which would lead in turn to higher prices for the cruise, which would mean that some people who would otherwise be able to cruise (both handicapped and non-handicapped) would be priced out of the opportunity. The standard should be that there must be reasonable availabilty of handicapped accessible staterooms.

I would be interested in seeing the figures from DCL, and other cruise lines. How often do they run out of handicapped accessible staterooms, and have handicapped guests who aren't able to cruise because they can't be accomodated? If it happens more often than not, or even only once in a while, then I would say that the ship needs more handicapped accessible staterooms. But I think that it's going too far to say that every stateroom should be handicapped accessible.

Well, what exactly do you think is so expensive about an accessible stateroom?
The shower?
The bed?
The closet?
The door?
It is not going too far to say that every stateroom should have these things because every stateroom does have these things.
What makes a stateroom accessible is the arrangement of these things.

It does not matter if accessible staterooms are never used by those who are disabled. What does matter is that they are available and accessible to all. Cost is a false issue, as is whether someone who is disabled cannot take a cruise. The issue is whether the same facilities are available to all passengers equally. If someone cannot use the pool...does that mean no cruise? If there are no accessible excursions offered...does that mean no cruise? If someone in a power chair cannot use the bathroom...does that mean no cruise?....No to all of these. But, as cruise lines do not offer discounts based on what percentage of a cruise or the ship is inaccessible to a disabled passenger the one bearing the greatest cost right now is the disabled passenger...100% cost for 50% cruise. So, who is advocating for the disabled passenger, who could be anyone at any time? The able-bodied passengers who fight over the staterooms with the huge handicapped accessible verandahs? The cruise lines, who are ignoring the huge potential cruising market in our aging population? You? Obviously not. 36" wide easy-to-open doors and sensibly-arranged staterooms benefit everyone and are cost neutral.

 

[DancingBear]

When I heard the start of the story, I though... the crusie line might win this one. Legally they are a foreign ship and perhaps the ADA shouldn't apply to them (even if the complaint is justified in this case).

But then I heard the Norwegian Cruise Lines' tickets state something to the effect that "disputes will be handled by U.S. Law". So now I'm thinking "you idots are toast". If they are blatantly in violation of ADA laws and include statements like that on their tickets, they deserve to get burned.

But those idiots have won in Federal District Court and the Court of Appeals.

 

[DancingBear]

Well, what exactly do you think is so expensive about an accessible stateroom?
The shower?
The bed?
The closet?
The door?
It is not going too far to say that every stateroom should have these things because every stateroom does have these things.
What makes a stateroom accessible is the arrangement of these things.

It does not matter if accessible staterooms are never used by those who are disabled. What does matter is that they are available and accessible to all. Cost is a false issue, as is whether someone who is disabled cannot take a cruise. The issue is whether the same facilities are available to all passengers equally. If someone cannot use the pool...does that mean no cruise? If there are no accessible excursions offered...does that mean no cruise? If someone in a power chair cannot use the bathroom...does that mean no cruise?....No to all of these. But, as cruise lines do not offer discounts based on what percentage of a cruise or the ship is inaccessible to a disabled passenger the one bearing the greatest cost right now is the disabled passenger...100% cost for 50% cruise. So, who is advocating for the disabled passenger, who could be anyone at any time? The able-bodied passengers who fight over the staterooms with the huge handicapped accessible verandahs? The cruise lines, who are ignoring the huge potential cruising market in our aging population? You? Obviously not. 36" wide easy-to-open doors and sensibly-arranged staterooms benefit everyone and are cost neutral.

I disagree. Cost is most definitely an issue, particularly in retrofitting existing facilities. In your own post you refer to larger doors and the larger verandah requirements. You don't mention things like larger and modified showers. I support reasonable accomodations, and sensible design in new construction, but we can't pretend these things don't cost.

 

[arlenesp]

My Dh and I took his scooter on the last cruise. We stayed in a cat 6. The scooter had to stay by the elevator as unless we broke it down there was no way to get it past the bathrooms. As anyone who has stayed in these rooms,the bed sticks out and you have no clearance.
He had a bit of a problem with the tightness of the bathroom but perservered.The only disppointment was with the pools. The ladders is the pools are not very user friendly. If there were steps at one end of the pool he would've been able to use them more often.
On our first cruise we had to use the family pool as the water level was lower than the adult pool. He got out ok but the effort wasn't worth the abuse with all the kids in the pool.
Other than that he had no complaints. We're doing a third and hopefully he will be in better condition to try the pool again.
But I wonder if they hold the handicapped rooms open til the end as I have seen reports of people being upgraded to them? We were considering it but will stay with the original plan.

 

[dcandmc]

Well, what exactly do you think is so expensive about an accessible stateroom?
The shower?
The bed?
The closet?
The door?
----------------------------------------
So, who is advocating for the disabled passenger, who could be anyone at any time? The able-bodied passengers who fight over the staterooms with the huge handicapped accessible verandahs? The cruise lines, who are ignoring the huge potential cruising market in our aging population? You? Obviously not. 36" wide easy-to-open doors and sensibly-arranged staterooms benefit everyone and are cost neutral.

Yes, yes, yes and yes. All of these things mean a HIGHER COST. I didn't say "so expensive," those are your words. To claim that designing and building (especially when retrofitting) handicapped accessible facilities does not add to costs is to ignore reality. I didn't say that those costs shouldn't be incurred; I said that such an expense should be taken on reasonably. In my opinion, it's not reasonable to make every stateroom handicapped accessible.

As to the last part of your post: please don't characterize me as not advocating for the disabled passenger just because I don't think that it's reasonable to make every stateroom handicapped accessible. That's not fair. In my post, I said that "all services, activities and events should be handicapped accessible..."

If DCL (or any other public accommodation) puts able-bodied customers in handicapped accessible facilities, and thus deprives handicapped customers of the opportunity to cruise (or whatever), then that's an issue to address with DCL. It's not a justification for making every stateroom handicapped accessible.

Finally, what about the able-bodied passenger that wants a stateroom that hasn't been designed to be handicapped accessible? For instance, a passenger that wants a high-sided jacuzzi tub, something that likely would not be found in a handicapped accessible stateroom. Should the able-bodied passenger be made to give up such an amenity because all the staterooms have been made handicapped accessible? If your answer is to have the high-sided tub and a handicapped accessible shower or tub, that goes directly to the issue of higher cost.

 

[Lisa F]

Well, what exactly do you think is so expensive about an accessible stateroom?

To put it simply, the floorspace... not only to accommodate everything that you have mentioned (larger doors, larger showers, larger closets etc) but also to accommodate large enough pathways for chairs and power chairs to turn around in. On a cruise ship, space is at a premium and it would be suicidal for a cruise line to put half as many staterooms so that they can all be accessible and still charge the same prices. This is a completely unreasonable request IMO, not to mention the fact that on a cruise like Disney where there are lots of families with small kids, a roll in shower would make their lives much HARDER because they wouldn't have a tub to bathe their children in.

I'm a big proponent of universal design wherever possible. On ship however, it's just plain unreasonable to expect that every stateroom be accessible. Heck, we don't even require that every hotel room be accessible since many design consideratons that are beneficial to people with disabilities are actually inconveniences to people who don't have the same needs and routines. Public areas should be barrier free but requiring all staterooms to be accessible to a wheelchair/motorized chair is IMO going way too far. I believe the ADA requires reasonable accommodations be made, not that every single inch of the ship be accessible by scooter.

 

[tvguy]

I think in relation to this board the important thing to note on this board is that Disney offers handicapped accessable cabins, at no extra charge and is ADA compliant.
Considering those cabins are bigger, I think you don't have any room to complain.
From a practical standpoint, I think there would be huge liability issues with someone with limited mobility in the pools. Do you expect cruise lines to provide you with an attendant to prevent you from drowning?

 

[DancingBear]

To be fair, I don't think videogal was complaining about DCL. As to the pools, there are plenty of mobility-impaired folks who are able to enjoy the water safely. Since there is no standard of ability for the non-mobility-impaired folks (nobody will stop an able-bodied non-swimmer from getting into the Goofy Pool), I don't think accomodating the mobility-impaired in the pool is a significant additional safety issue. And, videogal's suggestion for steps would be a safety enhancer for all. (Of course, steps use up space, which is a cost issue.)

 

[MickeyB426]

I'll echo some of the previous posters:

Anyone who thinks that there wouldn't be a higher cost involved in initially fitting OR retrofitting cruise ships to be totally handicapped accessible is, to put it bluntly, not being realistic or reasonable.

There's a thread about this on the DVC board (don't know where it is right now) where a DVC member got put in a handicapped accessible room at the BCV and hated it. Less closet space, lower beds, no tubs...the list went on and on.

When you have a problem dealing with 5% of the people (I'm just throwing that number out there), I'm not in favor of solutions that negatively impact the other 95%.

 

[KimDisFan]

I think in relation to this board the important thing to note on this board is that Disney offers handicapped accessable cabins, at no extra charge and is ADA compliant.
Considering those cabins are bigger, I think you don't have any room to complain.
From a practical standpoint, I think there would be huge liability issues with someone with limited mobility in the pools. Do you expect cruise lines to provide you with an attendant to prevent you from drowning?

We sailed DCL with my FIL who was handicapped and had no issues. After he passed away we sailed RCCL NOS and we noted that had lift chairs by one of the pools to assist a person to get in. I believe the cruiselines are continuing to develop and get better about it. Like everything else, it won't happen over night.