Response to ADA Suit

[Coonhound]

Agreed.

When the DAS issue was first being "discussed" in social media there was one comment that struck me in particular. This person wrote, "No offense to parents of kids with autism, BUT if your child can't handle the noise and crowds, perhaps a theme park vacation isn't for you."

I wrote back that his comment was the same as telling the parent of a child without the ability to walk that "if your child can't handle stairs, perhaps tall buildings aren't for you."

It is not about equal experience, it's about equal ACCESS. If you do not live with a person with severe developmental and/or sensory issues it is a difficult concept to grasp.

The accommodation in question is not front-of-the-line or immediate access to attractions, it is accelerated access to attractions -- reduced wait time as had been previously provided to some, not all, who utilized the old GAC system. Certain individuals DO require accelerated access, not an "alternate waiting environment" in order to access attractions successfully.

I know that a good number of people without disabilities or intimate experience with those who have disabilities do not want to hear that, but in many cases it is true. Nevertheless, giving accelerated access to these disabled individuals is viewed as an "infringement" by people who are supportive of accommodating the disabled, but not if it means any sacrifice on their part.

Accelerated access is to some as a wheelchair ramp is to others. It is about ACCESS, not enjoyment, and certainly not entitlement.

Yes, there are lots of folks who try to game the system and, yes, it is extremely difficult if not impossible to structure and regulate such a system to ensure that every person who asks for accommodation actually requires it, especially the way the ADA is written. I'm not saying that I have the answer, because I don't.

Finally, it is truly regrettable that this complaint was written with such ridiculously emotional language that portrays these families as victims with an over-developed sense of entitlement. I do not support it and believe it has done more harm than good.

It has had an extremely negative effect on the public's acceptance of people with cognitive disabilities and it's perception of the family members who care for and advocate for them daily. Reading the many comments on this and other forums has been a very sobering experience.


Kathy

But accelerated access is another way of saying "cutting in line past all the people who have been waiting". It's bad manners.
Also when does accelerated access turn into a front of the line pass, because with the GAC you either entered through the exit or you went thru the fastpass line...to give someone an accelerated line, should we ask them how long they are able to wait and ensure they aren't having to wait longer than whatever time they say? If we do that we are back to square one, because everyone is going to say "I can't wait at all, or I can't wait more than 5 minutes, or 10 minutes, etc.
The fact is, no one wants to wait.
It's an unreasonable accommodation to assume you can go to a busy, crowded theme park and somehow magically not wait in lines.
I don't think when people say "perhaps a theme park isn't right for you" that they're being mean...they're being honest and realistic...sometimes the truth hurts...if you can't handle noise, crowds, long lines and waiting ...then disney doesn't sound like a good place for you to go They can't somehow make all the lines disappear for you without allowing you to cut in front of waiting people. I'm really surprised you seem to think that it's okay to allow your child to cut in line or to display for them that that would be acceptable behavior.
it sounds mean to say "perhaps disney isn't right for you" but we all are responsible for ourselves and our families and sometimes we have to take a hard look at what our abilities are and be realistic about what our children can and cannot handle, and make decisions accordingly. There are things we simply don't try to do with our kids because we know they can't handle it. My son is not autistic but has PTSD and cannot handle crowds, therefore it is my job as his parent to work with him to help him but it is also my job as his father to not place him into situations that are too much for him.
We cannot expect others to make unreasonable accommodations for us that would have any kind of impact on others (allowing our kids to cut ahead of all the other people waiting in line) because that's not reasonable and it's our job as parents to make decisions for our kids and take ownership of our responsibility- it's not Disney's job to handle my child with kid gloves. It's my job to know what my child can and can't handle and plan my trip accordingly. It's about personal responsibility.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Sorry let me clarify.

But the non-disabled guest who is there in front of the reserved wheelchair spot now has to spend time to go find another spot because they are not allowed to sit there. I've taken time away from them just like immediate access through the Fastpass line would take time away from others in line.

I just feel that we're all in the park together and sometimes we have to give and take a bit so that we all can enjoy the parks. Stating that any infringement is wrong is what I have a disagreement with. At some point the infringement becomes too large but some smaller infringements would be reasonable.

I have to disagree. Pthe wheelchair viewing areas are clearly marked, and are generally monitored. Anyone not needing ambulatory who positions themselves in front of one is responsible for their own decision and their own need to relocate.

 

[sukhakuli]

Agreed.

When the DAS issue was first being "discussed" in social media there was one comment that struck me in particular. This person wrote, "No offense to parents of kids with autism, BUT if your child can't handle the noise and crowds, perhaps a theme park vacation isn't for you."

I wrote back that his comment was the same as telling the parent of a child without the ability to walk that "if your child can't handle stairs, perhaps tall buildings aren't for you."

It is not about equal experience, it's about equal ACCESS. If you do not live with a person with severe developmental and/or sensory issues it is a difficult concept to grasp.

The accommodation in question is not front-of-the-line or immediate access to attractions, it is accelerated access to attractions -- reduced wait time as had been previously provided to some, not all, who utilized the old GAC system. Certain individuals DO require accelerated access, not an "alternate waiting environment" in order to access attractions successfully.

I know that a good number of people without disabilities or intimate experience with those who have disabilities do not want to hear that, but in many cases it is true. Nevertheless, giving accelerated access to these disabled individuals is viewed as an "infringement" by people who are supportive of accommodating the disabled, but not if it means any sacrifice on their part.

Accelerated access is to some as a wheelchair ramp is to others. It is about ACCESS, not enjoyment, and certainly not entitlement.

Yes, there are lots of folks who try to game the system and, yes, it is extremely difficult if not impossible to structure and regulate such a system to ensure that every person who asks for accommodation actually requires it, especially the way the ADA is written. I'm not saying that I have the answer, because I don't.

Finally, it is truly regrettable that this complaint was written with such ridiculously emotional language that portrays these families as victims with an over-developed sense of entitlement. I do not support it and believe it has done more harm than good.

It has had an extremely negative effect on the public's acceptance of people with cognitive disabilities and it's perception of the family members who care for and advocate for them daily. Reading the many comments on this and other forums has been a very sobering experience.


Kathy

Sorry, I disagree. I do understand kids being OCD and rigid. Believe me, I do. We worked with my ds for YEARS to teach him to be able to wait in line. It's not just about Disney, but the grocery store, the doctor's office, the lunch line at school and so on. He needs to be able to wait. It's super hard for him. It's hard for all of us trying to distract him constantly. But this is a super important skill for him to have, so we keep at it. I just don't think that Disney needs to allow kids to have instant access or loop constantly.

At DL they have a Nemo ride in a submarine. If you can't transfer, they have an "alternate experience" for you. Is that fair? You don't get to ride the ride at all, you sit and watch the ride. Some people could argue that it is unfair. But it falls under the ADA's statue of access. They have access to the ride. It's not the exact same thing, but they do get to see it. But for some reason, you don't see people with physical disabilities suing Disney about it. Why is it that the cognitive disability parents, or at least some of them, are so unhappy with the accommodations they do get? I don't get it.

 

[OurBigTrip]

Agreed.

The accommodation in question is not front-of-the-line or immediate access to attractions, it is accelerated access to attractions -- reduced wait time as had been previously provided to some, not all, who utilized the old GAC system. Certain individuals DO require accelerated access, not an "alternate waiting environment" in order to access attractions successfully.

The GAC was never supposed to provide accelerated access, but that's what it morphed into. And while that is not why everyone used the GAC, there is little question that the majority of the people wanted it for that, and the accelerated access was certainly the basis for the people that paid the disabled to "escort" them through the parks.

And while in general I disagree with the notion of "if they can't handle it, don't come", I do believe that if the ONLY way a guest can access an attraction is to have a shorter wait time, then they probably shouldn't come to WDW, because that kind of preferential treatment is too much of an infringement on the experience of other guests.

 

[Gracie09]

But accelerated access is another way of saying "cutting in line past all the people who have been waiting". It's bad manners. Also when does accelerated access turn into a front of the line pass, because with the GAC you either entered through the exit or you went thru the fastpass line...to give someone an accelerated line, should we ask them how long they are able to wait and ensure they aren't having to wait longer than whatever time they say? If we do that we are back to square one, because everyone is going to say "I can't wait at all, or I can't wait more than 5 minutes, or 10 minutes, etc. The fact is, no one wants to wait. It's an unreasonable accommodation to assume you can go to a busy, crowded theme park and somehow magically not wait in lines. I don't think when people say "perhaps a theme park isn't right for you" that they're being mean...they're being honest and realistic...sometimes the truth hurts...if you can't handle noise, crowds, long lines and waiting ...then disney doesn't sound like a good place for you to go They can't somehow make all the lines disappear for you without allowing you to cut in front of waiting people. I'm really surprised you seem to think that it's okay to allow your child to cut in line or to display for them that that would be acceptable behavior. it sounds mean to say "perhaps disney isn't right for you" but we all are responsible for ourselves and our families and sometimes we have to take a hard look at what our abilities are and be realistic about what our children can and cannot handle, and make decisions accordingly. There are things we simply don't try to do with our kids because we know they can't handle it. My son is not autistic but has PTSD and cannot handle crowds, therefore it is my job as his parent to work with him to help him but it is also my job as his father to not place him into situations that are too much for him. We cannot expect others to make unreasonable accommodations for us that would have any kind of impact on others (allowing our kids to cut ahead of all the other people waiting in line) because that's not reasonable and it's our job as parents to make decisions for our kids and take ownership of our responsibility- it's not Disney's job to handle my child with kid gloves. It's my job to know what my child can and can't handle and plan my trip accordingly. It's about personal responsibility.

I have to agree that as parents it is part of our job to know when something is simply too much for our children. For example my dd1 cannot deal with the beach. The combination of the heat, sand, vastness of the water etc bring her to a meltdown as soon as she looks at it. (She has sensory issues among other challenges.) doesn't sound too bad, right, except having grown up on long island and spending my entire summer on the beach, it's my happy place and something I was exited to share with my children. My other dd loves the beach. So even though my parents live on the beach and we live by the jersey shore, we don't go. The nature of the beach is such that other than removing the barrier (essentially the sand) there is no way for my dd to access it. At Disney the lines, noise, flashing lights etc is part of the experience. They even theme the lines to incorporate them into the experience. In fact people use to complain that when using the gac they couldn't experience the themed lines. For some, no matter what Disney does they will not be able to have an equivalent experience. That doesn't mean Disney has to create an individual plan for that person, this isn't eduction, they just have to have a reasonable accommodation. What thy have created has been used in many other parks for years. I don't see people suing cedar point or universal both of whom have a similar program that predates disneys.

 

[jon18uk]

Agreed.
When the DAS issue was first being "discussed" in social media there was one comment that struck me in particular. This person wrote, "No offense to parents of kids with autism, BUT if your child can't handle the noise and crowds, perhaps a theme park vacation isn't for you."

I wrote back that his comment was the same as telling the parent of a child without the ability to walk that "if your child can't handle stairs, perhaps tall buildings aren't for you."

Unfortunately that can be true too, that a day out a building with stairs isn't suitable for someone who cannot handle them.
For example a 1,100 year old Castle here in England is a tourist attraction. if you want to walk to the top of the tallest tower and along the ramparts this would involve walking hundreds of steps. Although other areas of the castle are accessible to some degree due to the nature of an old building many areas cannot be adapted. For these accessibility reasons I would not recommend it as a day out for someone with no mobility.
In a similar way if I knew someone who was not good with crowds and standing in line I would suggest that a day at a theme park may not be enjoyable for them.
I have a friend with claustrophobia and crowding issues and he frequently decides not to go to the theatre with is as he doesn't like the feeling of being stuck in the middle of a row, for that reason i would rarely recommend he joins us.
Not every experiance is suitable for all and although best efforts can be made (and both the USA and UK have laws to mandate equal access) it isn't possible to please 100% of the people 100% of the time.

 

[aaarcher86]

Accelerated access is to some as a wheelchair ramp is to others.

I don't find that accurate. Accelerated access would be the equivalent of a business needing to make sure you can get up that ramp.

If a WC user is alone and doesn't have the ability to wheel themselves up the ramp, the business doesn't need to provide additional assistance. Your analogy is the equivalent of WC users demanding personal pushers to get up ramps and access the business.

I really feel like sometimes we advocate so much in an educational, daily setting, that we forget that educational rights are much more vast. Business do not need to provide EVERY tool or method for access that a person feels is necessary. There are 2 sides to the accommodations. This is what you're owed legally, and this is what you desire.

Most people also don't look at the fact that the DAS is MEANT to be used with FP+, which is essentially 3x you get accelerated access. There's no reason at all that combining the 2 systems together you wouldn't be able to get minimal waits for a good chunk of your day. Alternate them. Just because it's no longer easy breezy doesn't mean it's not a possibility, but Disney doesn't have to hand it to you.

 

[Mrsjvb]

The accommodation in question is not front-of-the-line or immediate access to attractions, it is accelerated access to attractions -- reduced wait time as had been previously provided to some, not all, who utilized the old GAC system. Certain individuals DO require accelerated access, not an "alternate waiting environment" in order to access attractions successfully.




Kathy

but accelerated access IS unfair to everyone else. sorry but unless you pay for the super deluxe VIP tour or are a MAW tripper, you ( generic you) are NOT entitled to get anything faster than the guy standing next to you.

the accommodations for accelerated access are built in to FP+ and a good touring plan.

none of my needs are met with a GAS so I do not qualify for one/am entitled to one. but I also have fatigue issues and cannot do a 12 hour day in the parks. i get really annoyed at the ones who whinge and say that Junior is so disabled he can only do 2 rides and then he is done for the day so obviously he deserves to get on faster.

Umm no. first of all there is a whole helluva lot more than rides to enjoy at Disney. second of all, on a good day i MIGHT be able to manage 3 rides before basically being knackered and needing to take a LONG break( which I accomplish by TS meals or a nice long show or sit down ride like Carousel of Progress).

 

[KathyRN137]

I thank you for your responses, however, I'm afraid that we must agree to disagree.

Disney allowed the GAC to "morph" into an accelerated access accommodation because over the past 10 years the numbers of children with autism and related disorders has skyrocketed. When attendance was low post 9/11, Disney had no problem marketing themselves as the most accommodating and disability-family-friendly vacation destination in the world. Accommodations were freely provided to improve attendance. Now that low attendance is no longer a concern, the company has no need of the disabled population and accommodations were drastically reduced.

Make no mistake about it, the GAC system was not replaced because of rampant abuse. That is the way Disney is spinning the story.

Yes, abuse existed, but it was not the reason for the change. The system was changed because the number of families (like mine) who were in need of, and thus legitimately requesting, the GAC was increasing dramatically, as is the number of children in our country who are developing autism spectrum disorders.

The two biggest reasons that accelerated access is no longer being provided as an accommodation for guests with cognitive disabilities are:

1) It required that guests work on "the honor system" and provide a realistic and truthful description of their needs. Clearly, this was difficult if not impossible to validate and enforce.

2) Guests without intimate knowledge of these disabilities complain that the providing accelerated access to guests with severe cognitive disabilities is "unfair" to them.

I do not think that the accelerated access accommodation is unfair. However, I firmly believe that it is an accommodation that is impossible to provide, given the unscrupulous nature of many individuals and the overarching intolerance of our society toward that which they do not understand and with which they do not empathize.

As one person expressed, quite openly and honestly when addressing families of children with severe autism. "It sucks to be you."

Yes. Yes, it does.

I don't expect you to understand; but it would be a kinder and gentler world if people would at least try, instead of implying that we should just stay home with our - quote - "speshul snowflakes" and not bring them and their siblings to Disney because it is spoiling the vacation experience of the non-disabled.

To these people I say, that as much as I try to understand where you are coming from, I cannot help but feel that you are preaching to the choir when you try to lecture me on what is unfair. No one understands the raw unfairness of life better than the mother of a child with autism.

I understand why the system needed to be changed. I do not support the ADA complaint brought by these 16 families and although the underlying pain and grief in their complaint does resonate with me, I do not believe that they speak for me and for all parents on the spectrum.

Having said that, it would be a mistake to view all of us as possessing feelings of entitlement just because Life dealt us a crappy hand. It's not the cards you're dealt that matter, it's how you play them.

I'm grateful for the accommodations that Disney will offer my family on our next vacation. But do not for one minute think that that because I choose to stay in the game that I am out to cheat the other players at the table.


Kathy

 

[intheshadows]

2) Guests without intimate knowledge of these disabilities complain that the providing accelerated access to guests with severe cognitive disabilities is "unfair" to them.

Kathy

Let me give you this example that I witnessed last summer:

A small child (4-6 years old) has been waiting patiently to see a character. A MAW child comes up, cuts the line. Mother of small child is courteous and tells the child, "We will wait a little longer."

As soon as the MAW child leaves, a GAC holding family accosts the line handler. They demand to be escorted to the front of the line because the mother says they "don't wait because her son has autism."

Again, the first child is told they are going to wait just a little longer.

Another GAC family comes up, makes the same demand, and is taken ahead of the child who has been in line.

The mother of the patient child finally asks the character handler what is going on, and the handler says, "I have to let them through. They have the card."

At which point, the character takes their required break, and the child who had waited patiently does not get a visit.

Please, tell me how this is fair to the child who did nothing wrong and waited patiently? Should we slight him?

This is why the GAC was a problem. Imagine this happening over and over on ride after ride...delaying the FP queue with GAC holders and their families, plus regular FP...and people who figured out how to "hold" a FP until that was stopped.

 

[Mrsjvb]

I.

Disney allowed the GAC to "morph" into an accelerated access accommodation because over the past 10 years the numbers of children with autism and related disorders has skyrocketed. When attendance was low post 9/11, Disney had no problem marketing themselves as the most accommodating and disability-family-friendly vacation destination in the world. Accommodations were freely provided to improve attendance. Now that low attendance is no longer a concern, the company has no need of the disabled population and accommodations were drastically reduced. Bull twinkies. it morphoed into that because parents of Spectrumn children insisted that was the ONLY way they could do Disney and the company's reputation for being over the top in accommodating the 'customer is always right theorem' was severely abused.

Make no mistake about it, the GAC system was not replaced because of rampant abuse. That is the way Disney is spinning the story. Nope. it became too big for its britches and the USE( not ABuse) could no longer be sustained within the constraints of the existing infrastructure

Yes, abuse existed, but it was not the reason for the change. The system was changed because the number of families (like mine) who were in need of, and thus legitimately requesting, the GAC was increasing dramatically, as is the number of children in our country who are developing autism spectrum disorders. again, nope. the numbers of people with the issue has not changed. the number of people demanding special treatment because of i having a name for it now has. in my day 40 years ago, someone who today woudl be labeled mildly or moderately autistic was just a brat who couldn't wait his turn.

The two biggest reasons that accelerated access is no longer being provided as an accommodation for guests with cognitive disabilities are:

1) It required that guests work on "the honor system" and provide a realistic and truthful description of their needs. Clearly, this was difficult if not impossible to validate and enforce.

2) Guests without intimate knowledge of these disabilities complain that the providing accelerated access to guests with severe cognitive disabilities is "unfair" to them. and it is. having a disease/ASD or whatever is not a valid reason to get accelerated access.


I don't expect you to understand; but it would be a kinder and gentler world if people would at least try, instead of implying that we should just stay home with our - quote - "speshul snowflakes" and not bring them and their siblings to Disney because it is spoiling the vacation experience of the non-disabled. My 18 year old Nephew is about as severely autistic as you can get. non verbal;, regular has violent fits that has gotten him kicked out of every Capital District school district in NY and he now attends across the state border. he has put both his parents in the hospital several times with SERIOUS injuries and as soon as a spot opens up for him in the local adult nursing home that can handle his issues, he;s going. it would have been the epitome of insanity to even CONSIDER bringing him to disney let alone any local theme park. and hos three siblings have had to miss out on a normal childhood too.

To these people I say, that as much as I try to understand where you are coming from, I cannot help but feel that you are preaching to the choir when you try to lecture me on what is unfair. No one understands the raw unfairness of life better than the mother of a child with autism. and there you go again making your issues out to be something that only a select few can possibly understand if I don;lt have a spectrum child I have no right to even dare to comment whatsoever. try being told at the age of five that not only do they NOT knwo what is wrong with you, you will never walk again and will probably be dead by 12. what is UNFAIR is that I lost any hope of a 'normal' childhood that day just as finally as your kid did the day he was diagnosed.



Kathy

just because I am not on the Spectrum does not mean I have no empathy or haven't walked a mile in your shoes. I experienced discrimination too growing up. may not be the exact type but it was discrimination nonetheless. and I predate the ADA so even more options were denied to me growing up.

 

[SueM in MN]

This thread has stayed remarkably well on task and little arguing so far

Please continue to keep it that way so or can remain open as a respectful discussion

I do want to point out that the term 'speshul snowflakes' is a very 'loaded term'.
It has not appeared in this thread until a few posts ago and was entered by a parent of a child with autism. So, please no characterizations that people on this thread are using that term thru the whole discussion.

 

[asc]

what i think some will never understand is that equality in the case of the disabled might mean that they wait less time or get what other consider to be preferred treatment.

no amount of debate will change some views on this unless. anything preferred that my child gets will be perceived by this group of people as extra and why they can not get the same extra my child gets.

i have given up trying or trying to rationalize that equally and accommodation does mean differential treatment.

that said, if i could trade my child's disability in exchange for your ability to wait less time in line, then let's chat. i would gladly wait more for my child to not be disabled. in fact, i would wait in line, get to the front again, then let everyone else in line ahead of me until there was NO more line and then i would go on the ride.

i think most parents would. it is nice, as a parent of disabled child, to, on a limited occasion, catch a break. whether that happens to be person that instead of writing a return time to come back in 30 minutes writes a shorter time - and make no mistake about it, there is NO way anyone could think our child is not disabled - then i take it. because i know that those breaks are few and far between.

one need only look at the bleak employment outlook for my child.

i am 100% certain that we will have to support her for the rest of her life and then hope, that one of my nieces or nephews is responsible enough and i have found an independent trustee to ensure she is taken care of when i and my wife are long gone. she might have a job, but that will be because of an organization that values inclusion in the work force and the intangible value diversity brings to the work force. will it be enough to support her, no way - and i would love to be totally wrong on this point. ...... and i am certain another worker will probably expect to get the extra treatment she does.

[just to be clear, my child's disability is not autism]

 

[mistysue]

The two biggest reasons that accelerated access is no longer being provided as an accommodation for guests with cognitive disabilities are:

1) It required that guests work on "the honor system" and provide a realistic and truthful description of their needs. Clearly, this was difficult if not impossible to validate and enforce.

2) Guests without intimate knowledge of these disabilities complain that the providing accelerated access to guests with severe cognitive disabilities is "unfair" to them.

...
To these people I say, that as much as I try to understand where you are coming from, I cannot help but feel that you are preaching to the choir when you try to lecture me on what is unfair. No one understands the raw unfairness of life better than the mother of a child with autism.

I understand why the system needed to be changed. I do not support the ADA complaint brought by these 16 families and although the underlying pain and grief in their complaint does resonate with me, I do not believe that they speak for me and for all parents on the spectrum.

Having said that, it would be a mistake to view all of us as possessing feelings of entitlement just because Life dealt us a crappy hand. It's not the cards you're dealt that matter, it's how you play them.

I'm grateful for the accommodations that Disney will offer my family on our next vacation. But do not for one minute think that that because I choose to stay in the game that I am out to cheat the other players at the table.


Kathy

Kathy,
It may help you to realize (I mean come to terms with, you obviously comprehend it) that autistic children are not the only people meant to utilize the DAS. There are many many disabilities that are difficult and families of autistic children are not the only families struggling and going through difficulties. That applies both at Disney and in regular life. You aren't as alone in struggling as it sounds like you feel you are.

That said, I agree with much of what you are saying and I do feel for you, but suggest that you might find things easier if you realize there are many more people struggling for all sorts of non-autism reasons as well.

I would also like to toss out there the idea that accelerated access, which I'm sure is an actual need for some, is such an appetizing dangling carrot that somebody has to draw the line on who gets it. Right now that line is drawn at MAW kids. If that were an option, who gets it? How do you request it? How to be sure people aren't exaggerating to get it? What happens what child A and child B have identical situations but one gets that card and the other doesn't? What happens when all the other autistic kids you know get it and your child doesn't for some random reason? It can't simply be given to everybody who asks because everybody can come up with a reason they should have it vs. the next guy.
So it's complicated. (as you know) I suspect that most people who are so vocally against it wouldn't be if they understood some clear system to figure people who legitimately needed it. There is no system so with the potential for abuse that the idea comes across as crazy and infringing on everybody- because if offered on a wide and easy to get scale it would be. Even just looking at Autism, it's a wide spectrum, there is no good solid yes/no line for needing assistance.

 

[Disneylvr]

Let me give you this example that I witnessed last summer:

A small child (4-6 years old) has been waiting patiently to see a character. A MAW child comes up, cuts the line. Mother of small child is courteous and tells the child, "We will wait a little longer."

As soon as the MAW child leaves, a GAC holding family accosts the line handler. They demand to be escorted to the front of the line because the mother says they "don't wait because her son has autism."

Again, the first child is told they are going to wait just a little longer.

Another GAC family comes up, makes the same demand, and is taken ahead of the child who has been in line.

The mother of the patient child finally asks the character handler what is going on, and the handler says, "I have to let them through. They have the card."

At which point, the character takes their required break, and the child who had waited patiently does not get a visit.

Please, tell me how this is fair to the child who did nothing wrong and waited patiently? Should we slight him?

This is why the GAC was a problem. Imagine this happening over and over on ride after ride...delaying the FP queue with GAC holders and their families, plus regular FP...and people who figured out how to "hold" a FP until that was stopped.

GAC was not for character meet and greets and in fact that was stated on our GAC's and verbally stated to us by CM's. If that was allowed last summer in a character line, that was a CM error.

 

[aaarcher86]

I think most people here believe it was use and not abuse that caused the change from the GAC to the DAS.

Regardless of what we feel entitled to, the ADA doesn't require an accommodation that negatively impacts operations. Since accelerated access does just that, it's not required. How we all feel about it doesn't really matter.

 

[aaarcher86]

Can we also please not start playing disability Olympics. We would all move mountains for our kids to live 'normal' lives.

That kind of argument is attempting to hold people at emotional fun point and has no place in this thread.

 

[asc]

I think most people here believe it was use and not abuse that caused the change from the GAC to the DAS.

Regardless of what we feel entitled to, the ADA doesn't require an accommodation that negatively impacts operations. Since accelerated access does just that, it's not required. How we all feel about it doesn't really matter.

i think we will just have to agree to disagreed that it does. but then again, that is not for you or I to decide really, whether we like it or not.

 

[asc]

Can we also please not start playing disability Olympics. We would all move mountains for our kids to live 'normal' lives.

That kind of argument is attempting to hold people at emotional fun point and has no place in this thread.

again, another opinion, that you will have to accept that people don't agree with.

 

[aaarcher86]

i think we will just have to agree to disagreed that it does. but then again, that is not for you or I to decide really, whether we like it or not.

That's not actually an opinion. It's stated in the ADA, which is what dictates what accommodations Disney is obligated to give.