New DAS System at Walt Disney World 2024

[Chip Chipperson]

I have no clue, none of us do. But according to some, they clearly think that almost everyone is lying. People keep losing sight of the fact that we are talking about people with disabilities, not just random guests.

The problem is that "weeding out the liars" isn't as easy as it seems. It has yet to be established that theme parks can require proof when considering accomodation requests. Yes, other parks are trying it now but there is also a pending court case that may take years to resolve, so why should Disney step into that mess when there is a chance they would have to backtrack later? There were many issues with the old version of DAS. These changes are trying to fix that while still offering what Disney believes are reasonable accommodations (and seemingly think have a better chance of holding up in court vs. requiring "proof" that still may not prove a need to skip waiting in line).

 

[networkpro]

You don't think that by lowering the group number and actively weeding out the liars that that would have made a difference? What they did was just lazy.

I disagree with your opinion. Let's leave it at differing opinions each with thier own merits.

 

[TrojanUSC]

What % of former DAS users do you believe were liars? Ballpark.

In my opinion, there are three types of abuse:

1) The first were people with legitimate disabilities, but who admittedly didn't need DAS. Countless people had IBS, anxiety, or frequent urination issues which were all legitimate issues but didn't prevent them from waiting in line. They would tell you about their issue with a wink and a nod, seemingly admitting they were abusing the system but, given that they still had to wait some period of time and it was granted by Disney, they didn't feel bad about using the system as intended.

2) People who had legitimate issues that sometimes prevented them from standing in line (eg outdoor queues) but still always used DAS.

3) The outright liars who made up illnesses to get it.

With all these combined, I'd say at least 50%+ of DAS users under the previous system fell into one of these categories. I knew at least ten people personally who did, with none who actually would need the service.

 

[jennab55]

I don't see how this could be looked at as odd.

WDW decided to change the standard for DAS. It was NOT because DAS was being underutilized or wasted. Either because of fraud, abuse, or just overtaxing of the system, it was felt that the impact of people using DAS and LL was too high and changes needed to be made.

So in a situation like this where you have 5 people, only 1 of which requires an accommodation, I would think it should be expected that the new program is going to limit the use of DAS for people who don't need it. Here to the child who needs it, and one custodial parent. The other parent is more than capable of monitoring/handling the 2 other minor children who do not need the DAS accommodation.

Would it be nice to keep everyone together, sure. But the DAS isn't about being nice, or making accommodations for people who don't need them. For the system to really work well, it should provide an accommodation to those who need it, while having minimal impact on operations. Adding more and more people to the system who do not really need the accommodation is what caused the breakdown that they are trying now to remedy.

It’s odd because at one point Disney said it would be for the DAS user plus 3 people, but that there would be an exception for immediate family (parents plus minor children). However, just went to the DAS website and I do not see the exception listed anymore so maybe it is a hard stop at 3 additional people. Although, I’ve seen recent report of people getting an override for all their minor children in an immediate family.

 

[jennab55]

So one of our kids is not a minor. My SD is a in early college. But lives with us full time, is in our room on vaca, etc. So no extended family. It still felt weird to us because it’s our immediate family.

Ah ok, this makes more sense then. I was thinking I’ve seen others get the override for all their minor children. I get it still sucks though as he is still your immediate family. Seems they are cutting off adult children in that count.

 

[Club Cooloholic]

You don't think that by lowering the group number and actively weeding out the liars that that would have made a difference? What they did was just lazy.

I don't think it's an issue of weeding out liars per say. I am sure there is a great percentage of people that feel to enjoy the parks fully, they would need the type of accomodations that DAS supplied otherwise, physically or mentally they could not do it. But some people can't fully enjoy Central Park on a nice summer day either because of noise, crowds or the sheer size of it is too daunting for their bodies physically, but they don't get a free carriage ride or bike rental to get around.
This isn't so much a change to weed out 'liars" as it is a change in criteria for the type of person that gets DAS.

 

[seabreezept813]

Ah ok, this makes more sense then. I was thinking I’ve seen others get the override for all their minor children. I get it still sucks though as he is still your immediate family. Seems they are cutting off adult children in that count.

Ya we’re hoping that they’ll help us out at the parks. We’re easygoing, nonconfrontational, and my daughter will prob need her DAS 2-3 times a day. But we’re not worried about it and are glad she’ll be able to do a few things that would have been harder or unmanageable without it.

 

[Tigger&Pooh]

at one point Disney said it would be for the DAS user plus 3 people, but that there would be an exception for immediate family (parents plus minor children). However, just went to the DAS website and I do not see the exception listed anymore

That wording about immediate family was removed quite a while ago, almost right after it was posted. It wasn’t up for very long.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Not without fundamentally changing the parks. DAS created a tipping point where unplanned hourly capacity was allocated to the detriment of patrons paying the same admission.

Eh, that’s an exaggeration in my opinion. Getting a little stricter on DAS policies would have been a good place to start and then evaluate from there.

But some people can't fully enjoy Central Park on a nice summer day either because of noise, crowds or the sheer size of it is too daunting for their bodies physically

you don’t really wait in lines at Central Park - not sure how that is relatable at all.

 

[Chi84]

Eh, that’s an exaggeration in my opinion. Getting a little stricter on DAS policies would have been a good place to start and then evaluate from there.

I think Disney's goal is to sell its paid system to everyone who wants to avoid standing in lines - and to make an exception only for those who cannot, because of a disability, be accommodated in the standby lines. Getting "a little stricter" with DAS would not have furthered that goal.

 

[Fido Chuckwagon]

It does seem like they are treating minors vs adults differently.

As they should.

 

[Club Cooloholic]

Eh, that’s an exaggeration in my opinion. Getting a little stricter on DAS policies would have been a good place to start and then evaluate from there.

you don’t really wait in lines at Central Park - not sure how that is relatable at all.

Who is talking about lines? I'm talking about experiencing the Park

I don't know how you can get "stricter" and actually improve operations when, those unhappy with the changes want the baseline to simply be stating you have a disability and all disabilities should be treated to the same exact accomodations. Those that want stricter seem to imply that their claimed disability would qualify but others are exaggerating, but then quickly also say we don't know what it's like to be in another's body. How can you get stricter without it turning into a process based on assumption?
The only way to be fair is to have a very clear delineation of who qualifies and who doesn't and have it NOT based on comfort or pain claims as those are impossible to quantify or qualify.

 

[Splash4eva]

As they should.

Oh i totally agree there

 

[Splash4eva]

Who is talking about lines? I'm talking about experiencing the Park

I don't know how you can get "stricter" and actually improve operations when, those unhappy with the changes want the baseline to simply be stating you have a disability and all disabilities should be treated to the same exact accomodations. Those that want stricter seem to imply that their claimed disability would qualify but others are exaggerating, but then quickly also say we don't know what it's like to be in another's body. How can you get stricter without it turning into a process based on assumption?
The only way to be fair is to have a very clear delineation of who qualifies and who doesn't and have it NOT based on comfort or pain claims as those are impossible to quantify or qualify.

What they should and need to do is simply go to a 3rd party verification system. Anyone with a real disability that needs the help would 100% have no issues showing proof

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Who is talking about lines? I'm talking about experiencing the Park

Anybody can experience Central Park any way they want to.

I don't know how you can get "stricter" and actually improve operations

Reduce the number of guests in the party and reduce the return time so standby waits can be accurately posted. There’s a start.

Beyond that moving the line to be a little more restrictive, but not as restrictive as they have gone.

 

[Figgy1]

As they should.

Are you talking about family members or the disabled

 

[Tigger&Pooh]

Getting a little stricter on DAS policies would have been a good place to start and then evaluate from there.

I expect Disney has plenty of data that guided their decision. Making a small adjustment first, then another small adjustment in 4-6 months, then another small adjustment 4-6 months after that... simply drags out the whole process and nobody knows what rules are being used. Ripping the bandaid (so to speak) like they did with the big change is really the only logical way for the company to do it.

 

[NotTheOne]

You don't think that by lowering the group number and actively weeding out the liars that that would have made a difference? What they did was just lazy.

How do you actively weed out liars? And please don't say documentation, because documentation a) can be falsified and b) documents a disability, not the needs.

 

[NotTheOne]

What they should and need to do is simply go to a 3rd party verification system. Anyone with a real disability that needs the help would 100% have no issues showing proof

That does zero regarding accommodations because not everyone with the same diagnosis has the same needs when it comes to accommodations.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

How do you actively weed out liars? And please don't say documentation, because documentation a) can be falsified and b) documents a disability, not the needs.

How are they doing it now?