New DAS System at Walt Disney World 2024

[rtmachine]

3 of the top rides maybe but 10+ is possible in MK

 

[MickeyLuv'r]

Thats interesting, its been repeated here that limiting the use is illegal because non-disabled patrons dont have limited use on their rides.

Pending lawsuit?

Im beginning to think a lot of the aspects of these programs are not actually "illegal", they are just rules that some people dont like.

I can't answer the legality question, and as I said, I've never been to SP. Their version of unlimited Express pass is only $30 though, so I am thinking it is a much smaller park.

SP is owned by Sea World though, so that is another tidbit to consider.

[In other threads, forum members have repeatedly claimed that no theme parks sell EP for less than the cost of G+. SP's unlimited EP is $30, but they also offer a limited EP for just $20. (1 LL use per attraction)]

If ride waits don't exceed 20 minutes, or rarely do, then riders wouldn't even need to use a pass.

I'm also thinking most adults have a limited Elmo tolerance.

 

[MickeyLuv'r]

Doctors usually take the word of their patients regarding symptoms. People can get doctors notes without the doctor having to forge it. They can just lie about their symptoms or the severity of them

That was happening, but then we had the whole opioid crises.

 

[ditzee]

Doctors usually take the word of their patients regarding symptoms. People can get doctors notes without the doctor having to forge it. They can just lie about their symptoms or the severity of them

I meant a cheater forging a doctor's note. In other words, the doctor is not involved at all.

 

[MickeyLuv'r]

Almost none of this has been tested in court. The very few precedents we do have are usually where the person with the disability loses the lawsuit (IE: the GAC lawsuit against Disney). What type of line-skipping system the ADA requires at a theme park, if it even requires any at all, is very much an open legal question.

The legality has been discussed quite a bit in this thread, and that is an important aspect.

There is also the broader matter of public perception. If the change is perceived as reducing fraud, that will improve Disney's image. If the change is perceived in a negative light, public perception could be swayed in the opposite direction.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Thats interesting, its been repeated here that limiting the use is illegal because non-disabled patrons dont have limited use on their rides.

Pending lawsuit?

Im beginning to think a lot of the aspects of these programs are not actually "illegal", they are just rules that some people dont like.

Different venues exist in a different context.

The average park guest only rides 3 rides a day. Any DAS user with 3 DAS passes could easily experience 3 rides with longer lines and a few shorter line attractions.

This is nowhere near close to true. Even when Disney was building the half day parks they were aiming for 7 attractions per day.

That's not remotely what they are saying. Accommodating guests based on their actual needs instead of their wants is not the same as telling people to stay away.

Taking the position that any physical disability can be accommodated with a mobility device is ignoring actual needs.

 

[flynnibus]

Im beginning to think a lot of the aspects of these programs are not actually "illegal", they are just rules that some people dont like.

I think you don't understand that none of these systems are deemed illegal or legal... until they are actually tested in court. That is the foundational issue here for a requirement that is broad, non-specific, and not yet tested in the court system.

This is not a matter of 'the law says this is exactly must be done' - The law sets expectations - and it's intended to be INTERPRETED to decide what is sufficient or not.

 

[phillip9698]

I think you don't understand that none of these systems are deemed illegal or legal... until they are actually tested in court. That is the foundational issue here for a requirement that is broad, non-specific, and not yet tested in the court system.

This is not a matter of 'the law says this is exactly must be done' - The law sets expectations - and it's intended to be INTERPRETED to decide what is sufficient or not.

I understand that, its just that many in this thread were saying "that is illegal" as if it was fact. Turns out its more of a "to be determined", especially since a lot of the items discussed are already in play at other parks.

 

[flynnibus]

The average park guest only rides 3 rides a day. Any DAS user with 3 DAS passes could easily experience 3 rides with longer lines and a few shorter line attractions.

They could probably limit DAS usage to 2 rides per day and have no issue legally.

 

[flynnibus]

I understand that, its just that many in this thread were saying "that is illegal" as if it was fact. Turns out its more of a "to be determined", especially since a lot of the items discussed are already in play at other parks.

There are many angles that are in fact pretty clear with precesdent and guidelines - but there are other areas that are not. I think your issue is when you take a specific situation and jump to broad when people are talking legality. TLDR - context matters when considering if a statement is right or wrong.

 

[phillip9698]

There are many angles that are in fact pretty clear with precesdent and guidelines - but there are other areas that are not. I think your issue is when you take a specific situation and jump to broad when people are talking legality. TLDR - context matters when considering if a statement is right or wrong.

Nope, the issue is people saying specific items are illegal, and turns out those specific items are already implemented elsewhere. Saying "Disney is a different venue" when every venue we are discussing is an amusement/theme park isnt applicable.

 

[Patcheslee]

That was happening, but then we had the whole opioid crises.

And because of that ppl on pain management programs having to submit to testing as often as monthly to monitor levels. If it's outside the parameters they are kicked out and don't get the meds anymore.

 

[flynnibus]

Nope, the issue is people saying specific items are illegal, and turns out those specific items are already implemented elsewhere.

Because until the court rules them legal, they are actually requirements that do go against existing prescedent.

And I believe it is you who brought up legality in response to the Seaseme St example.. which is a SPECIFIC context (X number at that park) not discussed before.... but yet you brought up comments made by other posters about OTHER situations and are trying to apply them here. See the issue?

Limiting access to standby... or limiting access to an attraction... is NOT the same thing as Seaworld imposing a cap on number of total uses in a day. These are DIFFERENT scenarios to evaluate.... because the Seaworld one would be interpreted within the context of limitations on operations at Seseme St and what is reasonable.

What is reasonable at Seseme St may not the same as at a park like Disneyland.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Saying "Disney is a different venue" when every venue we are discussing is an amusement/theme park isnt applicable.

Sesame Place isn’t comparable with Disney theme parks - they are very different venues.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Nope, the issue is people saying specific items are illegal, and turns out those specific items are already implemented elsewhere. Saying "Disney is a different venue" when every venue we are discussing is an amusement/theme park isnt applicable.

Limiting access below what is generally available is illegal. Just being an amusement park doesn’t really matter. How people experience the park is a major factor.

Morgan’s Wonderland doesn’t mention any sort of line accommodation on its website but that doesn’t mean parks don’t actually have to offer anything. It means that a small park aimed at being “Ultra Accessible” is handling visitation and access in a different manner than other larger parks.

Disney giving people 20 anytime Lightning Lane passes per day would probably pass muster because it is well above what most people experience in a day. Giving them less than what most people experience, which is what has been suggested in most cases, would not.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

Taking the position that any physical disability can be accommodated with a mobility device is ignoring actual needs.

Disney hasn't taken that position. There will be a return-to-line option along with Rider Swap options. Pointing out that mobility devices are an option is not the same as saying they are the only option.

 

[Splash4eva]

According to a very recent Attractions Magazine article, Sesame Place in PA just announced new accommodations called Autism Days. On those days they will modify some rides and shows to be less loud/with reduced effects.

Thier general policy is to use the IBCCES card for those with disabilities. In the park, qualified guests are then granted 6 attraction passes, and/or 3 water attraction passes, to be used on 6 different rides or some repeats (repeating a ride = using one of the 6). Guests cannot use the passes at character greets or for shows. The passes are described as granting priority access via a special queue.

The pass is limited to a total of 4 guests, the passholder and 3 additional companions. As with other disability passes, the passholder must be one of the riders.

I've never been there, but it looks like they have a total of 15 rides, and 4 water slides (plus no wait wet options like a lazy river, splash areas, pool.) Looks like they have 3 shows and a parade.

The part I found interesting is the idea that the pass allows a specific number of uses per day.

Not sure when this “change” took place but i was just there for Christmas with 2 autistic friends and there was no limit as to how many rides you can go on…

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

Did the new guidelines mention an option to submit supporting documentation?

I wonder if that's the legal compromise. Limit access to DAS and limit the "benefits" as much as possible. By doing this they deter people who don't actually need it while still leaving the door open to provide access tailored to documented need.

 

[StarBright]

Did the new guidelines mention an option to submit supporting documentation?

I wonder if that's the legal compromise. Limit access to DAS and limit the "benefits" as much as possible. By doing this they deter people who don't actually need it while still leaving the door open to provide access tailored to documented need.

Nope. No documentation allowed or requested.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

Listen i know he said but i think we know he wasnt saying it as verbatim but we also do know these changes are not making it easy for people with legitimate disabilities who have ALwAYS been taken care are no longer gonna be in that situation and the fact that noone knows whats gonna happen and no details are out and noone can even fathom how they will execute this. Its fair to somewhat agree with his sentiment.

We do have some information, though. We know that Rider Swap is available for guests who cannot physically wait in a long queue. For those guests, the benefit is the same: they can wait and do other things if they wish and then return and use the LL when it is their turn to ride. The only change is to the number of people in their party riding together, but since most ride vehicles can only accommodate 2 guests then it's not an unreasonable or unfair change. If they'd rather ride with their entire group or are waiting for a show, the return-to-line feature will be available. We don't yet have the details on how that will work, but it is a far cry from telling disabled guests not to visit. I think it is fair to say that this option will be more than just leaving and returning on your own without any CM assistance. Otherwise, it would be no different than what we have now and not worth mentioning.