We all understand the concept, but having it defined would give clarity into its feasiblity. The poster that suggested it would, I assume want their condition to be included in this newly defined acceptable group. Given what they have written, that doesn't leave much room for excluding anyone at all.
If someone is proposing a different "set" of people than the one defined by Disney, it's up to that person to say who should be in that set and who would no longer qualify. My opinion is that Disney has done the best it can to define who is eligible, although I have no idea on how they are handling the DAS interviews to ensure that only those people are included.
This makes a huge assumption that those with significant developmental and neurological disorders have that agency and independence as an adult. For many with these diagnoses, the intensity of need stays the same - or increases - as they age.
Yes but the question then comes down to, why wouldn’t G+ have also worked for those people and the main answer that comes to mind is the cost factor. People didn’t want to have to pay.
It does work for many / most - has that been debated?
What do you mean? FP or G+ didn’t work?
Good point, I forgot about that. I would have dropped that as well unless Genie+ had launched with pre-selects like it should have.
It was moronic on their part… i get the “incentive” but simply should have said going forward DAS needs to be done prior to coming
I would have happily registered online a head of time for nothing. Better than waiting in GS like in the parks or before entering the park!
G+ will work for many / most with disabilities who can’t wait in long lines.
How does Disney charge for wheelchairs that people need to access the park?
It's my understanding that Personal equipment accommodations such as a wheelchair or ECV are covered differently under the ADA, so its not a like comparison to compare that to genie+, which is not a personal equipment accommodation.
Thanks! I honestly wondered how they worked as far as wheelchairs and other mobility devices.
There are some questions on how those accommodations should and will work - I don’t think it’s fair to say “people just don’t like them”
The actual accommodation is accessible queues. What mobility device an individual opts to use (or not) in the accessible queue is up to them. Personal equipment (wheelchair, braces, crutches, glasses, hearing aids, etc.) are an individual's responsibility.
I don't think he made any assumptions, he was very clear to say in his example it was developmentally impaired adults that have agency. I am pretty sure we all know there are adults that need caretakers and would of course be encompassed in the new guidelines.
Yes, there will always be questions but a LOT of people decided right away that these alternative accommodations will not work for them without even trying them first…
I take those reports with a grain of salt due to all the negativity on social media. Yes there have been a few situations where the CM had a big miss (like the visually-impaired woman told to rent an ECV), but I have not seen a single report where such error wasn't corrected with a second contact to the Accessibility Team.
I honestly wonder if that lady was really told that…. It seems others just feed off each others negativity on the fb groups. That and people assume what the CM meant instead of what the CM actually said.
