PDD-NOS & Height Requirement

[SueM in MN]

Disney only measures on rides where there is a safety issue with the ride. If a child is not able to follow the direction to stand straight to be measured, how can CMs know that this child will follow safety directions on the ride? It doesn't seem unreasonable to expect a child to stand straight under a stick in order to ensure height. If a child can't tollerate standing straight under a stick then I question whether the child will tollerate bars lowering on him or follow other safety precautions including simple things like not standing during the ride.

We do skip attractions and shows where my daughter can't tollerate something including many shows where there are no accomodations available at all so no I'm not suggestion something I won't do myself. Disney already goes far beyond what they have to do and I'm extremely appreciative of that, something I demonstrate by continuing to spend my money with them.

Very good additional points.

 

[OnlyDisney]

If a child is not able to follow the direction to stand straight to be measured, how can CMs know that this child will follow safety directions on the ride?.......If a child can't tollerate standing straight under a stick then I question whether the child will tollerate bars lowering on him or follow other safety precautions including simple things like not standing during the ride......

Standing to be measured has nothing to do with sitting on a ride. My son has a problem with interacting with other people. It seems people like to make up statistics and correlations with no hard facts to back them up. I think it's time to unsubscribe from this thread.

 

[clanmcculloch]

Standing to be measured has nothing to do with sitting on a ride. My son has a problem with interacting with other people. It seems people like to make up statistics and correlations with no hard facts to back them up. I think it's time to unsubscribe from this thread.

I'm sorry that you feel in some way attacked. I know that certainly wasn't my intention. I didn't make up (or list for that matter) any statistics and as far as correlations go, I'm stating what could be a correlation in the view of CMs. I realize that this may not be true for your child or for every child, but a CM has no way to know so for the safety of everybody involved including your child, the CM has to err on the side of caution.

Since this issue for you has to do with the interaction with the CM, I would think that the CM would allow you to be the person to instruct your son to stand up under the measuring stick. Work with him ahead of time so he knows what to expect and then walk him to the measuring stick yourself. Your son does need to be able to follow the rule of being measured if there's any question about his height. If your son can't tollerate your direction on this rule then really, there is a concern that he may not follow your direction on safety rules. The measuring is a safety rule so this is a direct correlation. Again, this isn't said as any kind of attack. I'm just trying to explain possibly reasons behind the rule and how you can prepare for it.

 

[livndisney]

I'm sorry that you feel in some way attacked. I know that certainly wasn't my intention. I didn't make up (or list for that matter) any statistics and as far as correlations go, I'm stating what could be a correlation in the view of CMs. I realize that this may not be true for your child or for every child, but a CM has no way to know so for the safety of everybody involved including your child, the CM has to err on the side of caution.

Since this issue for you has to do with the interaction with the CM, I would think that the CM would allow you to be the person to instruct your son to stand up under the measuring stick. Work with him ahead of time so he knows what to expect and then walk him to the measuring stick yourself. Your son does need to be able to follow the rule of being measured if there's any question about his height. If your son can't tollerate your direction on this rule then really, there is a concern that he may not follow your direction on safety rules. The measuring is a safety rule so this is a direct correlation. Again, this isn't said as any kind of attack. I'm just trying to explain possibly reasons behind the rule and how you can prepare for it.

I saw no attack

If you speak with the CM they will do their best to assist you in measuring your child. They will allow you to direct your child. I have even seen CM's "step back" to allow the child room at the measuring stick. But they do have to provide a safe environment for all. I second what clanmcculloch said. Work with your child on how to stand up tall and straight. Let them know what to expect. I hope you have a great trip!

 

[livndisney]

Another point to mention since I saw this is your first trip to Disney. Not every ride has a height requirement. The rides your child would be measured on are VERY limited. Maybe 1 or 2 in each park. So this is not something your child will have to deal with for every ride. Riding Dumbo? No measurment. None of the rides in FantasyLand have a height requirement.

http://adisneyworld.disney.go.com/m...traction Height Chart - Walt Disney World.pdf

List of rides with height requirements.

 

[bookwormde]

Sue,
Title III accommodations covers all "public accommodations" so WDW is not different. Accommodations are also individual not by cumulative group so unless it is an unreasonable financial burden or substantively changes the nature of the accommodation for others then reasonable accommodation must be made.

I have talked with the individual who oversees ADA for US Disney parks and they are quite aware, committed to and understand the breadth of their responsibilities in this area which is only limited by the two items above.
If you would like I can call him and ask if it is OK to share his number with you (and the 2 individuals who have direct responsibility for WDW). While he asked me not to publically share them, I am sure as moderator of DIS he would be happy to talk with you. He is amazingly dedicated to providing equal access.

Safety is always first, and valid "cheating issues" have been raised, but so have practical accommodations.
I can dig out a link to Title III if that would be helpful, although without going deeply into the administrate guidance and rulings, it is hard to have a full understanding.
Bookwormde

Also it is unreasonalbe to expect a child to stand up straight repeatedly if it is limited by the child's disability, whether it is due to a physical disability, sensory limitations or social skills deficits. All parents try to expand their child's skills, but often it is beyond the current skill set.
This is the exact reason ADA exists, so that the child is not discriminated against and denied equal accommodatons, because of by not fitting into the standard "system".

 

[SueM in MN]

Sue,
Title III accommodations covers all "public accommodations" so WDW is not different. Accommodations are also individual not by cumulative group so unless it is an unreasonable financial burden or substantively changes the nature of the accommodation for others then reasonable accommodation must be made.

I have talked with the individual who oversees ADA for US Disney parks and they are quite aware, committed to and understand the breadth of their responsibilities in this area which is only limited by the two items above.
If you would like I can call him and ask if it is OK to share his number with you (and the 2 individuals who have direct responsibility for WDW). While he asked me not to publically share them, I am sure as moderator of DIS he would be happy to talk with you. He is amazingly dedicated to providing equal access.

Safety is always first, and valid "cheating issues" have been raised, but so have practical accommodations.
I can dig out a link to Title III if that would be helpful, although without going deeply into the administrate guidance and rulings, it is hard to have a full understanding.
Bookwormde

Also it is unreasonalbe to expect a child to stand up straight repeatedly if it is limited by the child's disability, whether it is due to a physical disability, sensory limitations or social skills deficits. All parents try to expand their child's skills, but often it is beyond the current skill set.
This is the exact reason ADA exists, so that the child is not discriminated against and denied equal accommodatons, because of by not fitting into the standard "system".

I think there is a misunderstanding here.

I understand how the ADA works - I have been dealing with disabilities since before the ADA existed. My DD has multiple disabilities, some physical, some not.
I did not mean to imply that WDW was not required to make accommodations. I was responding to what I understood you to write (which may be a misunderstanding on my part).

My understanding of what you initially wrote was that if someone says they need a particular specific accommodation, WDW is required to provide that particular accommodation. It also seemed to me that you were writing that the guest gets to decide what is reasonable or not.

That was what I was responding to in saying that I did not believe the ADA went that far in what is required. My understanding of the ADA is that the person with a disability states their need and then the public accommodation offers what they feel will mitigate that need. If the guest doesn't feel the offered accomodation will meet their needs, then a sort of 'negotiation' occurs between the 2 parties in an attempt to meet the needs of both parties.

There will be situations where the 'perfect' accommodation according to the person with a disability is not reasonable or even possible. It's easier to see in physical situations - such as the example I gave before with the moving walkway. It can either be stopped or not and in the case of Peter Pan, WDW feels they can't make that accommodation for a variety of reasons (even though they do make it on other attractions). There are other factors involved - including the guests who would be suspended above the ground for a period of time and the mechanism for that particular attraction, which includes moving from the ground to above ground. WDW not stopping that particular moving walkway does not mean that they are not providing reasonable accommodation. They do provide other accommodations at that attraction, such as a place where guests can enter the moving walkway from a different place that allows more space/time to get on. That may be helpful for someone with physical difficulties, but may also be helpful for someone with psychological difficulties who needs more time.But, what is reasonable may not be enough in all cases - this happens a lot with physical disabilities. There are many attractions where it is not possible to make enough accommodations for someone to experience that attraction.

There are many other examples, which are totally allowed under the ADA, including things like Sign Language interpretation. The guest who needs it may feel that it would be reasonable to provide a personal sign language interpreter in all attractions in all situations, but there are guidelines on what is reasonable that allow for things like sign language schedules because of things like scarcity of sign language interpreters.

It may be relatively easy to measure kids in Guest Relations and put that on the GAC, and maybe that part would be reasonable. I was trying to point out that part is only one part of the situation and the other things that would need to be done to make it work may not be easy or inexpensive enough to be considered reasonable.
There may well be other things that would be reasonable accommodations, but I understood you to write that if the guest wanted that particular accommodation, it would need to be provided.

So, if I misunderstood, I apologize.

 

[bookwormde]

Sue,
I very well may have misinterpreted what you were saying, I agree if there is an accommodation that works and provides an equivalent experience then there is no need to reinvent the wheel. And I agree if both parties are working cooperatively together if is very rare not to finds a solution (although they are rarely perfect solution.) WDW and the CMs are exceptionally good at this.

What I notice is that "reasonable" is often looked at as some undefined term, when in particle is it defined by the two limitations I discussed above and of course safety.
Thanks
bookwormde