jcb
always emerging from hibernation
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
For those not familiar with the several lawsuits against Disney brought by parents of children with autism or other disabilities, I suggest you first read these blog posts:
Post when the lawsuit was filed:
http://blog.wdwinfo.com/2014/04/04/new-lawsuit-attacks-disneys-new-disability-access-service/
Post when Disney moved to dismiss the lead lawsuit after it was transferred from California to Florida
http://blog.wdwinfo.com/2015/11/02/disney-asks-court-to-dismiss-autismdas-lawsuit/
Florida court dismissal of lead autism discrimination lawsuit.
http://www.wdwinfo.com/news-stories/federal-court-rules-for-disney-in-lead-dasautism-lawsuit/
I realize these links look like a shameless plug for old posts, so here is a brief update. Several parents filed a lawsuit in California when Disney changed from the Guest Assistance Card to the Disability Access System. The California court transferred the lawsuits to Florida, where the court initially dismissed most of the claims on grounds that let the parents refile the lawsuits elsewhere. The court ultimately dismissed the only remaining claim (under the ADA), upholding Disney's change to DAS and holding the parents didn't give DAS enough of a chance to allege it wouldn't work for their child. That dismissal is on appeal.
Meanwhile, several parents filed (or refiled, doesn't matter) lawsuits in California, alleging Disneyland's adoption of DAS violates California law. (This isn't surprising, most folks feel California courts are more receptive to claims such as this.) Disney recently asked the California court to dismiss the lead lawsuit there.
By this point, I've said all I need to say about the merits of the claims and Disney's arguments in its motion to dismiss are the same it made in Florida. What interests me now are Disney's explanations (supported by sworn testimony or statements) for changing to DAS and the problems it had with GAC. For example, Disney brief asserts:
Disney also conducted studies when it implemented DAS (though it doesn't say when it did the studies). Disney explained:
Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), quoting testimony from its autism expert (Dr. Kelderman):
As i said, I haven't gone into the merits of this specific claim but it appears Disney has moved to dismiss one of the weakest of the California claims - Disney argues the child does not in fact has autism but a respiratory distress syndrome which is not caused or aggravated by DAS and which has flared up only once in 16 visits to Disneyland, all of which occurred after Disney implements DAS in October 2013.
Post when the lawsuit was filed:
http://blog.wdwinfo.com/2014/04/04/new-lawsuit-attacks-disneys-new-disability-access-service/
Post when Disney moved to dismiss the lead lawsuit after it was transferred from California to Florida
http://blog.wdwinfo.com/2015/11/02/disney-asks-court-to-dismiss-autismdas-lawsuit/
Florida court dismissal of lead autism discrimination lawsuit.
http://www.wdwinfo.com/news-stories/federal-court-rules-for-disney-in-lead-dasautism-lawsuit/
I realize these links look like a shameless plug for old posts, so here is a brief update. Several parents filed a lawsuit in California when Disney changed from the Guest Assistance Card to the Disability Access System. The California court transferred the lawsuits to Florida, where the court initially dismissed most of the claims on grounds that let the parents refile the lawsuits elsewhere. The court ultimately dismissed the only remaining claim (under the ADA), upholding Disney's change to DAS and holding the parents didn't give DAS enough of a chance to allege it wouldn't work for their child. That dismissal is on appeal.
Meanwhile, several parents filed (or refiled, doesn't matter) lawsuits in California, alleging Disneyland's adoption of DAS violates California law. (This isn't surprising, most folks feel California courts are more receptive to claims such as this.) Disney recently asked the California court to dismiss the lead lawsuit there.
By this point, I've said all I need to say about the merits of the claims and Disney's arguments in its motion to dismiss are the same it made in Florida. What interests me now are Disney's explanations (supported by sworn testimony or statements) for changing to DAS and the problems it had with GAC. For example, Disney brief asserts:
Most commonly, some guests fabricated their need for a pass at all. More egregiously, some guests created counterfeit GACs, posted Craigslist ads offering the use of GACs -- at the cost of thousands of dollars -- for unauthorized “tours” of Disneyland, and used the internet to sell unexpired GACs. Id. This misuse became notorious; in May 2013, the New York Post, NBC News, Fox News and other media outlets ran stories documenting accounts of wealthy mothers from New York City paying disabled tour guides to lead them through Disney’s theme parks so they could skip lines.
This exaggeration or fabrication of need for GAC reached a point where a ride sometimes had more guests in the GAC line than in the standby line. Id. For example, at Disneyland, guests would ask for a GAC card to bypass the GAC line because the GAC line was too long and at times it exceeded the regular wait for the attraction. Id.
This exaggeration or fabrication of need for GAC reached a point where a ride sometimes had more guests in the GAC line than in the standby line. Id. For example, at Disneyland, guests would ask for a GAC card to bypass the GAC line because the GAC line was too long and at times it exceeded the regular wait for the attraction. Id.
Disney also conducted studies when it implemented DAS (though it doesn't say when it did the studies). Disney explained:
guests with DAS can experience significantly more rides in a day than guests without DAS. DSUF ¶ 31. This point was confirmed by a study Disney conducted in which testers used the ride passes available to them (i.e., DAS, FastPasses, or re-ads) to experience as many attractions as possible during two days. In other words, DAS guests, if they so choose, can experience significantly more attractions and spend much less time waiting in queues. Id. As Disney’s industrial engineering expert Bruce Laval concluded, “DAS not only reasonably accommodates and provides equal access to guests with disabilities, for whom it may be difficult to wait in a traditional queue,” but it provides more than equal access to such guests overall “because they can experience the most popular attractions faster and, if they desire, in greater number than what [redaacted] of guests [i.e., non-DAS guests] at Disneyland can do without DAS.”
Finally, Disney emphasized that DAS is consistent with how professionals work with people who have
Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), quoting testimony from its autism expert (Dr. Kelderman):
Dr. Kelderman explained that “the accommodations under DAS mirror strategies utilized by parents, educators, and clinicians working with people with ASD, which are outlined in the literature.” This uncontroverted expert evidence demonstrates that the accommodations provided to plaintiffs -- which allowed them to experience many attractions -- are “clearly not intolerable in a civilized community; rather, they are consistent with the accepted treatments for challenging behaviors associated with ASD and the current research.” Indeed, it is “obvious to anyone familiar with the field that Disney incorporated behavior principles consistent with best practices” in its DAS system and guidebooks, and that it is indicative of “a conscious effort to maximize the positive experiences” of guests with disabilities visiting Disney. It is therefore not surprising that tens of thousands of individuals have been using DAS each month at Disneyland since its inception, and DAS has been “extremely popular among persons with cognitive disabilities.” (quoting Disney's industrial engineering expert).
As i said, I haven't gone into the merits of this specific claim but it appears Disney has moved to dismiss one of the weakest of the California claims - Disney argues the child does not in fact has autism but a respiratory distress syndrome which is not caused or aggravated by DAS and which has flared up only once in 16 visits to Disneyland, all of which occurred after Disney implements DAS in October 2013.