Families of autistic kids sue Disney parks over policy on lines

[Gomer]

Unfortunately, lots of this classification is strictly due to monetary matters. People like nice well defined categories and abhor the unknown. Once a "class" or "category" has been assigned specific legal status, accommodation, or funding due to their membership in that group of course people want to bend the boundaries for inclusion of that group so it includes them.

People want to "fix" society to meet their own particular circumstances and desires regardless of how it impacts others.

And what exactly is it that you claim are the negative impacts of someone with symptoms of autism being diagnosed as such? What exactly is my son stealing from you because he has a diagnosis? I can’t think of a single thing I or my family has received since my son’s diagnosis that I would have wanted or desired prior except for perhaps the actual life experience required to adequately pass judgment on the situation.

Looking down from a macro level it’s easy to make accusations that people are trying to get something out of it. But having lived within that world you claim people are trying to get into so desperately for 7 years, I’m not exactly what sure what you think those people are after?

 

[Greenlawler]

Good thread and civil discussion.

 

[Gomer]

Interesting post, thanks for sharing!

I agree with you that the spectrum is vast, and it's unfortunate. My mom is a pre-K teacher, and many kids come in and don't get tested when they should. Each year, out of about 40 students, she will have 5 or so on the spectrum. Her program is considered at risk.

I think what people don't get is that the spectrum swings from a very mild case of Aspergers to very low functioning autism (and everything in between, this was just a cornerstone). And while most people work very hard to ensure their children lead normal lives and deal properly with the diagnosis, there are some that simply don't care.

My mom's school is considered to bring in quite a few low income kids. It is often these kids who are on the spectrum (some very obviously even if undiagnosed), that have parents who would be more than willing to seek accomodations beyond their needs. Even some of the parents from the higher income areas over compensate, rather than let their child grow and develop.

For example, one student last year had mild Asperger's, and was in therapy several times a week. The therapist often noticed her obsessions and ticks, but outside of that she functioned well. At picnics and parties, little Suzy would have to bring special food, sit alone, have a specific craft, etc. On a normal day in school, Suzy would eat snack with the other students, participate well in the same crafts, and be a part of the group. The parents failed to recognize that Suzy could function well in groups, and I can easily see them being the type to want front of the line accomodations for all rides, just because Suzy had Asperger's and therefore could potentially have an obsession or meltdown. More than likely, she would react similar to class outings - fixate, but be okay with taking turns and the like.

So while I agree with your point that autism is a vast spectrum and we shouldn't be judging anyone with it, and I certainly am not judging, I also agree with those that feel the newer GAC accomodations are more fair. But, it's hard to be in Disney's shoes. How do you, having no work with the child determine what they cannot do? You can't, so you must generalize. If a parent came to me as a GR CM in this scenario, with something stating their child has autism of any form on the spectrum, I have to take their word for it, regardless of whether or not they intend to abuse the system. It's unfair to expect some doctor to write a three-page letter on what Johnny can and cannot do, a CM to read it, and then according to some code of spectrum determine the aid needed.

First, great post!

Second, I don’t think I’ve done it in this iteration of the thread yet, so I’ll just say it now. I am not opposed to DAS. It works fine for me. My son would be considered moderate to severe on the autism spectrum depending where you are coming from in making that distinction, but we’ve been going to Disney World long enough that we have helped him to adapt to the highs and lows of navigating a theme park with autism to the point where we only use the DAS in times of extreme need. We mostly try to make it by with FP+ and good planning.

Third, I don’t doubt there are parents who overcompensate. I’ve met some of them myself. But at the same time, most parents I’ve met have been the opposite. It’s more of the “my precious darling doesn’t have a problem, it’s the school that has a problem. These people want to have their child mainstreamed with no aides or special assistance so that they don’t appear any different than the other children. Meanwhile, you can watch these children flounder in school without the additional resources they so desperately need.

To me, that is the more typical response to mild autism(formerly classified Aspergers and/or PDD-NOS). Parental denial, not a rush to diagnosis and join the club. But that is just anecdotal evidence based on parents I have met since my son was diagnosed.

 

[networkpro]

Where did I say there were negative impacts of being either included or excluded from any group ? I was implying that there's a tendency for jumping on any bandwagon. I wont tumble down the "everyone knows" or "common sense says" path, lets just stick to facts. Some people can see, hear, and feel certain things, others cannot. Some can "process" these inputs better or worse than others. Should everything be legally mandated to remove items that the entire population cannot interact with ? No music because some cannot hear, no color because some cannot see, no stairs because some cannot climb ?

People pay an admission price to Disney to experience social, visual, optical, and aural experiences. Some of these have limited capacity per hour for concurrent experiential participants, hense systems to order this demand are created: Queues, FastPass+, DAS all which attempt to fairly distribute access to these scarce commodities to all Guests of the parks. What this lawsuit is all about is a legally defined group demanding more than equal access to these scarce resources for the exact same admission price.

 

[raymusiccity]

If the child with autism has such a severe issue with waiting that the potential exists for the child to become violent and harm themselves or others if there is any wait for an attraction why would the parents subject the child to a potentially dangerous, emotionally damaging situation?

If the child cannot wait at all what would happen if they were right about to board and the ride went down?

It seems to me the accommodation being made is pretty reasonable. Promising no wait time ever is like promising no rain ever. Out of anyone's control.

I agree that Disney has constructed a system that allows each of these families to cope with a visit to Disney.

What's unreasonable with having to wait for anything? Otherwise we might as well have special lines for buying theater tickets, check out lines at all retail establishments, or even waiting to have a picture taken with Santa.

You can take a child with attention span issues and take them on 3 Fast Pass experiences, ride several times on attractions with no wait times (People Mover, Small World, etc), catch a parade, stroll around, watch street entertainers, or a show, etc.; snag another set of Fast Passes....Viola!, ....You're done, but you don't get to sue anyone :-(

There will always be people wanting to take advantage of any situation. Look at the proliferation of pseudo 'service animals' ! Just go 'on-line' and order a vest for your favorite pooch

I'll wager this litigation goes nowhere.

As George Carlin warned us about being ever vigilant about the latest illness of the week:

'The FDA has determined that saliva is hazardous to your health......but, only if swallowed in small amounts, over a long period of time !'

 

[Gomer]

Where did I say there were negative impacts of being either included or excluded from any group ?

People want to "fix" society to meet their own particular circumstances and desires regardless of how it impacts others.

That reads to me as if you are implying that people seek out a disability diagnosis in order for personal gain at the expense of others. You reference the advantages of funding, accommodation, and legal status and mention a diagnosis as a way to categorize people as an attempt at inclusion. If I am misinterpreting I apologize.

I don’t disagree with anything you said above from a GAC/DAS standpoint. But when applied at a societal level, implying that people “want in” on autism as a way to get themselves a sense of belonging in the face of the unknown is insulting to those actually experiencing the symptoms that get them acceptance into that exclusive club. As a sense of belonging is the furthest thing from what they will ever have. A diagnosis is a necessary evil. It places you outside of the norm and removes you from the group, not the opposite. But it is necessary so that people can get the help they need to maximize their ability to live as typical a life as possible.

 

[jakeman]

Good thread and civil discussion.

We must do something to change that...

The internet needs us!

 

[StarWarsGirl]

If the child with autism has such a severe issue with waiting that the potential exists for the child to become violent and harm themselves or others if there is any wait for an attraction why would the parents subject the child to a potentially dangerous, emotionally damaging situation?

It's up to the parent to decide if their child can even handle a location such as WDW. None of these systems, including GAC, was ever a Front of the Line pass. It was like a super FP. And sometimes you would have to wait 20-30 minutes in the FP line. So even with the GAC, if a child cannot wait 20 minutes, then it would be up to the parent to decide whether or not to take their child there. But again, that's up to the parent, not anyone else, and most parents know their child well enough to determine situations in which their child would be fine and where he/she would not be okay.

If the child cannot wait at all what would happen if they were right about to board and the ride went down?

That situation would cause a meltdown in kids who WOULD be able to handle a wait. And what happens? Ya deal with it. Sometimes none happens, other times, watch out. As a parent/responsible adult, you just have to be prepared for the fact that it could happen and be prepared to deal with it. Meltdowns happen at home too and you have to deal with it.

It seems to me the accommodation being made is pretty reasonable. Promising no wait time ever is like promising no rain ever. Out of anyone's control.

It is pretty reasonable. It's not perfect, and it's a shame that there was so much abuse that Disney had to change it, but it can work for a lot of kids. The DAS system doesn't make it so the child will never have a meltdown, but it greatly reduces the chances of a meltdown, which is a great relief to those of us who have to deal with this situation

 

[networkpro]

I'm not trying to be combative, pejorative, denigrate, or make light of others situations. Folks know somethings not right but don't know what the cause(s) are, just the symptoms and how its expressed. The lawsuit is based on what the ADA law 's term "reasonable accommodation" can be interpreted to legally mandate to amusement parks. Unlimited no wait rides/repeats ? If that occurs that makes Disney's current model of unlimited rides untenable. I can see a rapid reversion to a per ride ticketing scheme.

 

[natatomic]

That reads to me as if you are implying that people seek out a disability diagnosis in order for personal gain at the expense of others. You reference the advantages of funding, accommodation, and legal status and mention a diagnosis as a way to categorize people as an attempt at inclusion. If I am misinterpreting I apologize.

I don’t disagree with anything you said above from a GAC/DAS standpoint. But when applied at a societal level, implying that people “want in” on autism as a way to get themselves a sense of belonging in the face of the unknown is insulting to those actually experiencing the symptoms that get them acceptance into that exclusive club. As a sense of belonging is the furthest thing from what they will ever have. A diagnosis is a necessary evil. It places you outside of the norm and removes you from the group, not the opposite. But it is necessary so that people can get the help they need to maximize their ability to live as typical a life as possible.

Let me just say that I totally agree with you about it being insulting. But as a CM who used to deal with the GACs on a regular basis, I can tell you that was no shortage of despicable people that "wanted in" on the whole "disability thing" and either exaggerated negligible illnesses/injuries/disabilities or just downright lied about them. And it wasn't always that they "sought out a diagnosis." Disney never require proof so a diagnosis wasn't necessary. They just needed to lie about the diagnosis in the first place. Sad and disgusting, yes, but true nonetheless.

 

[Gomer]

Let me just say that I totally agree with you about it being insulting. But as a CM who used to deal with the GACs on a regular basis, I can tell you that was no shortage of despicable people that "wanted in" on the whole "disability thing" and either exaggerated negligible illnesses/injuries/disabilities or just downright lied about them. And it wasn't always that they "sought out a diagnosis." Disney never require proof so a diagnosis wasn't necessary. They just needed to lie about the diagnosis in the first place. Sad and disgusting, yes, but true nonetheless.

No doubt. I've seen first hand the lengths people will go to to abuse anything and everything in Disney World. It is despicable and always angered me especially because of the way it gave people who actually need assistance a bad reputation from those who don't bother to discern the difference between real and false needs.

But, my post was not speaking about the GAC specifically, but responding to a few posters who were implying (or flat out stating) that autism rates are a scam because people are seeking out a diagnoses due to the benefits to both recipients and doctors. I'm right on board as long as the criticism remains focused on GAC/DAS abuse. But there's alot of crazy conspiracy theorists out there who like to tell anyone who will listen that autism is fake or greatly exaggerated based on nothing but paranoia, listening to too much talk radio, and a sense that they know everything about the world. They pop up from time to time on these threads and I like to tell myself to turn the other cheek and just ignore it, but I can't bare watching their distorted facts sitting out there uncontested in case any impressionable readers mistake their BS for truth. So, I inevitably always take the bait and reply.

I apologize for aiding in derailing the thread though. You may now return to your regularly scheduled debate on queue access rights.

 

[Travel Junkie]

Updating this story, it was ruled Disney did not discriminate against autistic guests.

http://deadline.com/2016/04/disney-...n-americans-with-disabilities-act-1201746416/

 

[Cesar R M]

Updating this story, it was ruled Disney did not discriminate against autistic guests.

http://deadline.com/2016/04/disney-...n-americans-with-disabilities-act-1201746416/

so.. common sense wins on this case?

*edit*

Only thing I know and that I agree. was this..

The filing also claimed that once-helpful Park and Resorts staff was now inadequate and “robotic” in dealing with such disorders, resulting in various cases of breach of contract and emotional distress

 

[Tip Top Club]

Updating this story, it was ruled Disney did not discriminate against autistic guests.

http://deadline.com/2016/04/disney-...n-americans-with-disabilities-act-1201746416/

Thanks for sharing.

 

[flynnibus]

Updating this story, it was ruled Disney did not discriminate against autistic guests.

http://deadline.com/2016/04/disney-...n-americans-with-disabilities-act-1201746416/

wow.. this is huge. The judge basically called their 'inability to wait' argument horse@%$ based on their own past demonstrations like traveling, etc. (as many people have cited). But the general shutdown approach the judge used was pretty unsympathetic at all.

What is left dangling tho is the counterpoint relied on the issuing of readmitance passes.. not just DAS virtual queuing. That still leaves a pretty big hole.

I would have to think this crowd isn't done challenging Disney.. if someone has the pockets to keep trying. Clearly Disney has a leg up here in the judge's view of the plantiff's claims regarding their flexibility or lack of.

The article makes it sound like it was simply because they were given 'equal or better' access... but the real reason for shutting them down was the judge saying their need for immediate, unfettered access was baloney and the combination of DAS + Readmission cards gave them sufficient accommodations based on his interpretation of what they really could or could not do in waiting.

 

[arko]

wow.. this is huge. The judge basically called their 'inability to wait' argument horse@%$ based on their own past demonstrations like traveling, etc. (as many people have cited). But the general shutdown approach the judge used was pretty unsympathetic at all.

What is left dangling tho is the counterpoint relied on the issuing of readmitance passes.. not just DAS virtual queuing. That still leaves a pretty big hole.

I would have to think this crowd isn't done challenging Disney.. if someone has the pockets to keep trying. Clearly Disney has a leg up here in the judge's view of the plantiff's claims regarding their flexibility or lack of.

The article makes it sound like it was simply because they were given 'equal or better' access... but the real reason for shutting them down was the judge saying their need for immediate, unfettered access was baloney and the combination of DAS + Readmission cards gave them sufficient accommodations based on his interpretation of what they really could or could not do in waiting.

Given that the cases were separated this ruling is only on one of the 16 cases, the judge really took the case apart and the death knell was this paragraph. However the judge was pretty clear on how he felt about the DAS implentation in general and that it provided equal access. Its important to note that not only did they have the DAS they also were given fastpasses for 3 rides for 6 people. Each case will have different details, and some may have stronger cases than this one but in general with this ruling he is setting the bar very high for the rest of the plaintiffs.

Plaintiff’s family did not even give DAS and their remaining readmission passes an opportunity to fail them because Plaintiff was redirected to other attractions after one ride. (Doc. No. 159-3 p. 13, 118:17-23). They did not schedule any return times using DAS and had eighteen remaining readmission passes among the six of them. Plaintiff’s family could have simply planned visits to the attractions on Plaintiff’s list by using a combination of DAS return times and readmission passes. (Doc. No. 159-1 p. 50 ¶ 30). This is especially true because the wait time report from December 19, 2013 shows that seventy-five percent of the attractions on his list had queues of fifteen or fewer minutes, before the ten minutes are subtracted with DAS, which is within Case 6:14-cv-01544-ACC-GJK Document 234 Filed 04/28/16 Page 15 of 16 PageID 5500 Deadline.com - 16 - the range of his ability to wait. (Doc. No. 159 p. 17). Readmission passes could have been used to access the other attractions with longer wait times. Therefore, regardless if Plaintiff was injured, it was not fairly traceable to Defendant’s conduct—the accommodations it provided were available and underutilized. Defendant’s Motion is granted and Plaintiff’s Motion is denied because regardless if he has standing, Defendant made an individualized assessment of his needs and Plaintiff’s requested accommodation is necessary.

 

[TP2000]

Updating this story, it was ruled Disney did not discriminate against autistic guests.

http://deadline.com/2016/04/disney-...n-americans-with-disabilities-act-1201746416/

Thank you! I had lost track of where this case was. Now we know.

This statement from Judge Anne Conway (psst! @arko, the judge is a she) sums the whole thing up beautifully...

“Plaintiff was given an opportunity to experience Magic Kingdom in a similar manner as guests that do not need accommodations,” - Judge Conway

I imagine there's a bunch of theme park managers having a celebratory drink somewhere tonight. Cheers!

 

[flynnibus]

Thank you! I had lost track of where this case was. Now we know.

This statement from Judge Anne Conway (psst! @arko, the judge is a she) sums the whole thing up beautifully...

“Plaintiff was given an opportunity to experience Magic Kingdom in a similar manner as guests that do not need accommodations,” - Judge Conway

I imagine there's a bunch of theme park managers having a celebratory drink somewhere tonight. Cheers!

Don't circle around that fun qote tho... the idea the opportunity was similar is not the key to the dismissal. The keystone is that the judge didn't buy into argument that the kid needed immediate access all the time to accommodate his specific disability.

(this is where the article does a poor job of extracting from the Judge's order)

 

[flynnibus]

Given that the cases were separated this ruling is only on one of the 16 cases, the judge really took the case apart and the death knell was this paragraph. However the judge was pretty clear on how he felt about the DAS implentation in general and that it provided equal access. Its important to note that not only did they have the DAS they also were given fastpasses for 3 rides for 6 people. Each case will have different details, and some may have stronger cases than this one but in general with this ruling he is setting the bar very high for the rest of the plaintiffs.

Yeah, which is why I noted the dependency on the readmission passes in his judgement. That's a bit of a loss because it makes it a essential part of the program and an area of debate over how many are really needed (and not addressed specifically in this judgement).

As for the other cases... as long as they are in front of this judge... they better come with something better than 'meltdowns'

 

[BigRedDad]

My personal take on this is on both sides. The original process was abused but something is needed and I understand that people with special needs require an environment that does not trigger adverse situations. Here is what WDW should do. Anyone can get the pass because HIPPA protects from divulging the information. The person with the need has it added to their Magic Band. That person and 1 family member are provided access to a waiting area AT the attraction. The rest of the party goes into the line and waits like everyone else. If there are only 2 people, a person in the line at the same time they get there are given one of those wait time check necklaces. When the party gets to the front of the queue, the 1 family member and guest needing assistance then join their group.

The overall issue is that most people that got it abused it demanding not to wait like the rest of the paying customers. Going this route, everyone gets to enjoy the lovely process of waiting in lines like the rest.