Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[Lilofan]

Temperature taking is not a waste of time it does screen for active cases but it does have its limitations. No fever in conjunction with distancing goes hand and hand to prevent spreading and how the heck do you distance in WDW

6 feet away from the nearest men's urinal when I need to go? I don't think so...

 

[celluloid]

That’s the thing. Nobody would be denied entrance without evidence. The would be delayed entrance until the factual evidence was acquired or they were proven negative.

The company that cut free dinner bread is not prepared to question a family fifteen minutes, potentially more, after taking their temperatures and finding no results.

 

[Lilofan]

Nonsense. As a lawyer, I'm telling you Disney has every legal right to exclude entry on almost any basis (except for race, etc). They would have to refund the ticket of course. Knowing Disney, they would likely provide a future return ticket.

"For the safety of our guests, all entrants will be screened for fever.Those with temperatures over 100.1 will not be permitted entry. Those excluded for fever can undergo on-site testing for Coronavirus and referral to appropriate medical providers. "
(by the time parks re-open, testing should be widely available).

I'm sure Universal Studios legal team agreed prior to temp checks are going on at the Singapore park. Disney legal probably taking some tips.

 

[eliza61nyc]

e. We are a "sue" happy society, a doctors office in a major urban hospital is fighting the same battle. you guys want 100% guarantee that a company can control anything. bottom line with this virus is that if you go outside and come in contact with another person there is risk involved.
I totally agree Disney is doing this with very little success. but the reason why they are doing it is because SOMEONE, SOME WHERE is going to claim negligance.

The same reason why my hospital is doing it.

 

[havoc315]

Again, what is done after a high temp read? And someone is suspect after questioning? Then you have them wait an hour for results. They are there. They are a family who have all arrived at this moment.

My best guess -- By then, testing will be widely available. There may also be a surplus of extra hotel space.

Thus, one possible option -- For onsite guests -- You are referred for onsite testing, quarantined in your hotel room, with Disney providing "free" delivery meals. Those testing positive are referred to medical providers as appropriate.
Those testing negative, are allowed in the park when they are fever free for 48 hours. Their park tickets are refunded, they are given a future incentive (free ticket for return in the next year, etc etc).

Off-site guests are refunded their ticket.

Similar procedures are already being put in place at open theme parks and tourist destinations in China.

 

[celluloid]

I'm sure Universal Studios legal team agreed prior to temp checks are going on at the Singapore park. Disney legal probably taking some tips.

A place where you get caned for not flushing a public toilet. Not comparable and it did not work.

 

[havoc315]

I'm sure Universal Studios legal team agreed prior to temp checks are going on at the Singapore park. Disney legal probably taking some tips.

Law in Singapore is different than in the US. But regardless, it is fully legal to exclude people based on a fever.

In fact -- legally speaking, as a lawyer myself, I would recommend Disney perform temperature checks.
Why??

Imagine Disney re-opens.... and a mini-pandemic breaks out at Disney, hundreds of guests get infected, dozens of guests die..
Many families SUE Disney.

If I'm the lawyer for the families that are suing, I say: Disney acting negligently. They failed to take adequate safety precautions to protect the public. Theme parks through Asia required temperature checks, etc, to reduce infection. Disney did not take reasonable steps to protect the public.

So if I'm the lawyer for Disney right now, giving them advice, I would be telling them, "you are facing legal exposure if people get sick at your park, and you didn't take reasonable steps to lower the risk of sickness. If parks in the rest of the world are checking temperatures and you don't do it, then you can be found negligent."

 

[Lilofan]

Law in Singapore is different than in the US. But regardless, it is fully legal to exclude people based on a fever.

In fact -- legally speaking, as a lawyer myself, I would recommend Disney perform temperature checks.
Why??

Imagine Disney re-opens.... and a mini-pandemic breaks out at Disney, hundreds of guests get infected, dozens of guests die..
Many families SUE Disney.

If I'm the lawyer for the families that are suing, I say: Disney acting negligently. They failed to take adequate safety precautions to protect the public. Theme parks through Asia required temperature checks, etc, to reduce infection. Disney did not take reasonable steps to protect the public.

So if I'm the lawyer for Disney right now, giving them advice, I would be telling them, "you are facing legal exposure if people get sick at your park, and you didn't take reasonable steps to lower the risk of sickness. If parks in the rest of the world are checking temperatures and you don't do it, then you can be found negligent."

Winner winner, chicken dinner!!

 

[peter11435]

The company that cut free dinner bread is not prepared to question a family fifteen minutes, potentially more, after taking their temperatures and finding no results.

Completely different scenarios. I won’t defend that decision (that they later reversed ) but it was about saving money and boosting profits. This is about being able to reopen closed operations worldwide. The decision making process is not even comparable nor is it being made by the same people. Low level managers (that are likely currently furloughed) trying to boost sales is in no way comparable to senior executives attempting to navigate a global pandemic.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

This virus is evil..

I have taken some time away from this thread and coronavirus headlines in general the past few days to try and detox a bit. But life pulls me back in...

After 10 days of being COVID-19 presumptive (since they’re only testing healthcare workers, their families and those who are very sick), with primarily extreme fatigue, cough and body aches (varying between no fever and low grade), my BIL’s temp jumped to 103 yesterday and he struggled to breathe. He is now in the hospital and has been confirmed positive (they just got in the rapid tests - ironically, I read a story about it on our local paper’s website yesterday). He’s on oxygen but not a ventilator...

He is 44, with a 6-year old son. No pre-existing conditions. On Sunday he was feeling a little better. I think until yesterday, my sister was in denial because he didn’t have a fever most of the last 10 days. Yet here we are. This is terrifying.

I'm so sorry.

 

[Polynesia]

The people going out there and working are doing so at significant risk to themselves and their families. When this is over it will be difficult to tell them they are not worth better wages in the economy that they helped to save.

My husband works at a hospital so he goes out every day. In his case I don’t think he’ll ever say he’s worth more. But I understand the people at the supermarkets. Hopefully these workers will get a pay bump.

 

[celluloid]

[

Completely different scenarios. I won’t defend that decision (that they later reversed ) but it was about saving money and boosting profits. This is about being able to reopen closed operations worldwide. The decision making process is not even comparable nor is it being made by the same people. Low level managers (that are likely currently furloughed) trying to boost sales is in no way comparable to senior executives attempting to navigate a global pandemic.

It was a joke for levity, but the points to yours and legal reasons stand. You would eventually be turning people away vs allowing personable responsibility and inherent risk, which is a level things should be at when places like WDW reopen.
PR, but pointless.

 

[DisneyDoctor]

Swab tests don't provide immediate results... though testing is starting to become available with results in 15-45 minutes. But still not practical -- Swab someone, then have them stand off to the side for 15-45 minutes??

But temp checks are more than a fake measure just to promote safe feelings.
Don't confuse elimination of disease transmission with reduction of disease transmission.

Yes, asymptomatic people *CAN* spread the disease. But symptomatic people are more likely to spread the disease. And coronavirus does produce symptoms in 50-75% of those infected.

So imagine -- No temperature checks, 50 infected people walk through the gates. Of which about 30 are symptomatic, and the most highly transmitting.
With temperature checks -- Only 20 infect people get through the gates, and they are relatively low transmitters.

Which scenario is better? 30 high transmitters + 20 low transmitters, or just 20 low transmitters?

Temperature checks are certainly not a guarantee... but they do make things safer. Extra handwashing stations are not a guarantee, but they make things safer. etc, etc.

I’d argue that asymptomatic people will pass the virus more frequently than symptomatic. If the asymptomatic patient isn’t feeling crummy they’ll be out and about touching everything and exposing way more people than the symptomatic person at home isolating themselves.

We can argue the variability of shedding between the two subtypes, but that doesn’t take into account their behavior based on symptoms.

 

[celluloid]

But they already rode the monorail/ferry/bus to the park and waited in a huge crowd. The damage has already been done.

And how the heck do they get out after? Haha.

 

[JoeCamel]

Law in Singapore is different than in the US. But regardless, it is fully legal to exclude people based on a fever.

In fact -- legally speaking, as a lawyer myself, I would recommend Disney perform temperature checks.
Why??

Imagine Disney re-opens.... and a mini-pandemic breaks out at Disney, hundreds of guests get infected, dozens of guests die..
Many families SUE Disney.

If I'm the lawyer for the families that are suing, I say: Disney acting negligently. They failed to take adequate safety precautions to protect the public. Theme parks through Asia required temperature checks, etc, to reduce infection. Disney did not take reasonable steps to protect the public.

So if I'm the lawyer for Disney right now, giving them advice, I would be telling them, "you are facing legal exposure if people get sick at your park, and you didn't take reasonable steps to lower the risk of sickness. If parks in the rest of the world are checking temperatures and you don't do it, then you can be found negligent."

Does that happen on cruise ships or do they hide behind the country of registration?
I am genuine in this question, it seems to be a good analogy. Do the cruise lines have a standard of care in a virus outbreak onboard?

 

[Patcheslee]

It wouldn’t have to be simply further questioning. Upon failing the temperature screening guests might be subject to a 15 minute test.

The downfall is a positive result and given the nature of Disney they would then have to find out what transportation method they used, if they are staying at a resort, and at minimum which CMs they may have had close contact with. CDC requires reporting of positive cases so it opens up a can of worms for liability.

 

[peter11435]

But they already rode the monorail/ferry/bus to the park and waited in a huge crowd. The damage has already been done.

Depending on where screening takes place they may not have already rode those transportation methods. Regardless it’s not about transmission elimination but transmission reduction. There is value in reduction even if you can’t eliminate.

 

[havoc315]

But they already rode the monorail/ferry/bus to the park and waited in a huge crowd. The damage has already been done.

what makes you think there won’t be a temperature check before they board the monorail/bus/ferry??

and the damage is already done? You think after they spread the infection to a couple people, they can’t transmit it to anyone else??

Damage is already done? If they already spread it to 2 people, might as well let them spread it to another 50??

again, it’s about REDUCING transmission.

 

[havoc315]

I’d argue that asymptomatic people will pass the virus more frequently than symptomatic. If the asymptomatic patient isn’t feeling crummy they’ll be out and about touching everything and exposing way more people than the symptomatic person at home isolating themselves.

We can argue the variability of shedding between the two subtypes, but that doesn’t take into account their behavior based on symptoms.

Obviously, an asymptomatic person will spread more disease in the park then a symptomatic person that stays home.

But we are talking about symptomatic people who still opted to go to the park.

 

[celluloid]

Yes, great idea, the news will love the people who tested positive in the middle of their trip who can say they caught it at Disney and have a confirmed test result that Disney provided to enforce the possibility whether true or not. Same bad PR if they do not check. Now we have jumped from screening temps to they are going to test and confirm?