New DAS System at Walt Disney World 2024

[photomatt]

No way should DAS be granted to anyone who can prove a disability. You reference Universal and Six Flags, but Universal doesn't grant DAS-type accommodations to everyone who proves a non-mobility disability.

Why in the world would Disney grant DAS to people who don't need it, since we know that not everyone with a disability needs a DAS. And I think you're overestimating Disney's legal issues here - I have no doubt that they are on firm legal ground. As for the bad PR, it's no worse than when GAC was eliminated in 2013.

My suggestion is that Disney should remove themselves from the decision-making process. Then, once IBBCES verifies a disablity, DAS should be granted using the same guidelines that existed prior to the date the new process went into effect.

In simplest terms, a disability that qualified for DAS before would qualify again. The change is that IBBCES does the verification.

 

[NotTheOne]

My suggestion is that Disney should remove themselves from the decision-making process. Then, once IBBCES verifies a disablity, DAS should be granted using the same guidelines that existed prior to the date the new process went into effect.

In simplest terms, a disability that qualified for DAS before would qualify again. The change is that IBBCES does the verification.

Conditions were never supposed to qualify, it was needs.

Disney is on the right track here, they just need to get the attraction CMs properly trained and not back down in the face of all of the howling masses.

 

[photomatt]

And I think you're overestimating Disney's legal issues here - I have no doubt that they are on firm legal ground.

What is this based on?

As for the bad PR, how do these new changes compare with the changes in 2013? The difference then was the removal of front-of-the-line access. The changes now involve complete removal of access to the DAS system.

 

[Chi84]

I apologize if this has been posted before. There are 404 pages of posts. I have read many of them, but I admit I have not read them all.

I have discussed the following idea with several people who have DAS. Although my sample size is small, they all agree that the following idea is fair and it would work.

We already have the reservation system on both coasts. That's here to stay. Yes, APs in FL don't have to make reservations on certain days, but the reservation framework is still in place.

Disney should make the following changes:

1. Disney should remove itself from deciding who qualifies for DAS. They should do what Universal and Six Flags do, which is to have a third party verify disabilities (IBBCES). If a disability is not solely mobility-related, Disney should provide the DAS service as it existed prior to the recent changes. No changes should be made other than letting a third party verify a disability. This will eliminate some fraud. It won't eliminate all of it, but it will have an effect.

2. Disney should create a new reservation bucket that includes DAS. For example, there would be a certain number of DAS reservations for one park per day tickets, park hopper tickets, and AP tickets. People staying at hotels would be guaranteed DAS access during their visit. This would be a HUGE motivator for people with DAS to stay on property during their visit, which means more $$$$$ for Disney.

Here's how this would work. Guests would need to go through IBBCES to get their disability access card. Disney would grant DAS access to everyone who had this card, unless the disability was mobility-related, which is what they did prior to the changes. Once a guest had DAS access, they would need to make reservations on days that included DAS availability if they wanted to use DAS.

This would not prevent anyone from going to the parks. People with DAS could still go to the parks on any day a reservation was available. The change is that if they wanted to use their DAS, they would need to go on a day where a DAS reservation was available.

If Disney implemented this, they would avoid their current PR, and soon-to-be-legal, nightmare. Disney could provide a better experience for everyone with DAS by limiting the number of DAS reservations available on any given day and park. They would completely avoid the mess they created for themselves with this new system.

My idea is 100 percent legal. Companies are NOT required to have unlimited accessible parking spaces in their parking lots. Stadiums are not required to have unlimited space reserved for people with disabilities. Companies are only required to provide reasonable access to their services. It's 100 percent reasonable to limit the number of people that have access to DAS on any given day.

I'm certain that Disney already thought of this. Disney knows they can do it, but, as usual, they have chosen poorly and they have created a mess for themselves. It was completely unnecessary.

How would IBBCES know the disability is mobility related? They can’t ask for a diagnosis, just a note stating what accommodation is needed.

 

[NotTheOne]

What is this based on?

As for the bad PR, how do these new changes compare with the changes in 2013? The difference then was the removal of front-of-the-line access. The changes now involve complete removal of access to the DAS system.

GAC wasn't front of the line access, it was unlimited access to the FP+ lines.

As for what my opinion is based on, first, that Disney legal is no doubt three steps ahead of anyone thinking they have grounds to sue, and second the basis upon which Disney won the GAC-to-DAS lawsuit.

 

[photomatt]

How would IBBCES know the disability is mobility related? They can’t ask for a diagnosis, just a note stating what accommodation is needed.

IBCCES Accessibility Card

IBCCES created the Accessibility Card (IAC) as a free resource for individuals who need to request accommodations or assistance at amusement parks and attractions.

accessibilitycard.org

Their purpose is to determine and verify that a disability exists. The guest then presents the card to the theme park, and the theme park determines the accommodation.

 

[NotTheOne]

What conditions should qualify, and what should they qualify for? Are you basing your answer on your personal opinion, or are you each and every patient's doctor?

Please provide two examples where Cast Members are consistently "properly-trained". If you can provide examples, please provide the dates you personally witnessed this.

Conditions shouldn't qualify, needs should. Why? Because not every person with the same condition/diagnosis has the same needs.

 

[peter11435]

What conditions should qualify, and what should they qualify for? Are you basing your answer on your personal opinion, or are you each and every patient's doctor?

Conditions never qualified. Qualification or denial for new DAS or old is/was not based on specific conditions or diagnosis but rather the individual needs expressed.

 

[WDWTrojan]

Disney should remove itself from deciding who qualifies for DAS. They should do what Universal and Six Flags do, which is to have a third party verify disabilities (IBBCES). If a disability is not solely mobility-related, Disney should provide the DAS service as it existed prior to the recent changes. No changes should be made other than letting a third party verify a disability. This will eliminate some fraud. It won't eliminate all of it, but it will have an effect.

Do you have any idea how many people would get a doctor to sign a medical note for any condition? Even once such a note is signed, the onus is on Disney to provide some kind of accommodation. They have found DAS to be a burden on their park operations, creating a worse experience for nearly everyone except those who have DAS. Therefore, they are offering a number of other options such as RTQ, rider swap, etc. These ensure everyone is accommodated for their various medical needs without going through any cumbersome process of requiring medical documentation, etc.

Disney should create a new reservation bucket that includes DAS. For example, there would be a certain number of DAS reservations for one park per day tickets, park hopper tickets, and AP tickets. People staying at hotels would be guaranteed DAS access during their visit. This would be a HUGE motivator for people with DAS to stay on property during their visit, which means more $$$$$ for Disney.

No. The whole point is to give disabled people visiting Disney roughly the same experience as those who are able bodied. Why would you want to tell a kid with autism they are unable to visit that day because of their disability? That just doesn't work. Plus, whether some people on this thread want to hear it or not, there are people who absolutely need something like DAS to experience the parks, while many others with IBS, POTS or whatever illness can have a fine day in the parks with some kind of minimal accommodation (short of DAS).

Disney is offering several new options to ensure everyone can be accommodated and nobody is being turned away. Other than people with developmental disabilities or the very rare cases where someone needs to be under constant care, nobody has yet to give a valid reason why return to queue, rider swap or the other new options won't work for them, except that it's not as convenient as DAS, which really just isn't a valid complaint.

 

[lazyboy97o]

My idea is 100 percent legal. Companies are NOT required to have unlimited accessible parking spaces in their parking lots. Stadiums are not required to have unlimited space reserved for people with disabilities. Companies are only required to provide reasonable access to their services. It's 100 percent reasonable to limit the number of people that have access to DAS on any given day.

Not even close to legal. Minimums are not maximums.

 

[Chi84]

IBCCES Accessibility Card

IBCCES created the Accessibility Card (IAC) as a free resource for individuals who need to request accommodations or assistance at amusement parks and attractions.

accessibilitycard.org

Their purpose is to determine and verify that a disability exists. The guest then presents the card to the theme park, and the theme park determines the accommodation.

Right, but you said Disney should distinguish services based on whether or not the disability is mobility related. How would Disney know that?

 

[flynnibus]

My idea is 100 percent legal. Companies are NOT required to have unlimited accessible parking spaces in their parking lots. Stadiums are not required to have unlimited space reserved for people with disabilities. Companies are only required to provide reasonable access to their services. It's 100 percent reasonable to limit the number of people that have access to DAS on any given day.

So... rather than make their accommodations better fit guests needs and allow the 'one size fits all' model to be retired.. you want to protect that 'one size fits all' model and instead force guests to compete against each other for limited capacity.

This reeks of people just wanting to be selfish and not care that others are excluded as long as they get theirs... A common thing... until they are the ones who find themselves on the outside and their tune will change.

You are correct a company doesn't have to provide unlimited capacity for a service - but giving DAS reservations capacity guaranteed to on-property folks would likely invite scrutiny under discrimination claims. That scenario that people can't get access to the service unless they buy other bundled products would draw scrutiny. That bundling would likely get torn up in court.

Such a cap strategy would also open the company to a court interpretation of how much capacity is reasonable for them to allocate.. without any prior guidance.. that is a risky proposition. Lawyers and policy makers don't like untested waters...

 

[photomatt]

Not even close to legal. Minimums are not maximums.

What is this based on?

Please provide a case in state or federal court where any company was required to provide unlimited access to an unlimited number of people.

As one example, please explain how Disney is violating any law by not having an unlimited amount of accessible seating during every performance of the American Adventure in EPCOT.

Please explain how Disney would be prohibited by improving the guest experience for everyone by limiting the amount of people who could use DAS on a given day. Please provide a court case, not just your opinion. I certainly respect your opinion, but random opinions are not law.

 

[Chi84]

Whatever policy existed prior to the change should be reinstated. The difference would be the third party verification.

They could have done this but don’t want to. Maybe you should go back and read more of the prior posts. Much of what you’re saying has been covered.

 

[Angel Ariel]

AQR, rider switch, & return time have all been mentioned as options for accommodations in lieu of receiving a DAS, and I personally can't see why people are getting so wrapped around the axe handle on which one will be offered at which attraction

#1 AQR and Rider Switch should be offered at all attractions, no one should have to wonder where it will be offered and where it won't. And, as the procedure for rider switch is clear for all attractions, so should the procedure for AQR be clearly provided (by individual attraction if it differs so significantly attraction to attraction).

#2- rider switch is currently still only listed at WDW as an option for attractions with a height requirement. If it is to be part of the disability accommodations offered, it should be available for all rides.

#3- the rider switch language requires that there be someone who cannot/will not ride the attraction. So someone in the party is expected to miss the attraction entirely by the current wording (see photo) - so this isn't really an accommodation for a party where all want to ride the attraction (even if they're OK doing so in two different parties).

#4 - RTQ is the only one that should be somewhat up in the air based on the indications it's to be used sparingly outside of its typical usage for wheelchair/mobility access when the line isn't accessible.

 

[photomatt]

You're welcome to that opinion, but Disney doesn't have to provide DAS to everyone with a disability - that's just a simple fact.

I don't consider it a "whim" to think things through ahead of time - your mileage may vary though.

Again, I repeatedly clarified that they should provide DAS access to the people who has access before. I keep typing it. It's there.

And I do think things through ahead of time. That's why I discussed this idea at length with several groups of people prior to posting it here.

 

[lazyboy97o]

You're welcome to that opinion, but Disney doesn't have to provide DAS to everyone with a disability - that's just a simple fact.

I don't consider it a "whim" to think things through ahead of time - your mileage may vary though.

I didn’t say anything about having to provide DAS.

You can’t think things ahead when you are refused information. Having to wait and find out what you are dealing with until you get to every attraction at the discretion of who is working that moment absolutely does mean that things are happening and changing on a whim.

 

[photomatt]

They could have done this but don’t want to. Maybe you should go back and read more of the prior posts. Much of what you’re saying has been covered.

Why don't they want to? Has anyone provided an internal document that shows their justification?

I get it. They don't want to use a third party. That's a huge mistake, in my opinion. What they are doing now is inconsistent. It makes no sense.

 

[photomatt]

You can’t think things ahead when you are refused information. Having to wait and find out what you are dealing with until you get to every attraction at the discretion of who is working that moment absolutely does mean that things are happening and changing on a whim.

I think we agree on this. Guests should know exactly what to expect before they get to the park. They should not have to rely on the discretion and judgement of a random CM at a ride entrance.

 

[Chi84]

What is this based on?

Please provide a case in state or federal court where any company was required to provide unlimited access to an unlimited number of people.

As one example, please explain how Disney is violating any law by not having an unlimited amount of accessible seating during every performance of the American Adventure in EPCOT.

Please explain how Disney would be prohibited by improving the guest experience for everyone by limiting the amount of people who could use DAS on a given day. Please provide a court case, not just your opinion. I certainly respect your opinion, but random opinions are not law.

It doesn’t matter. There are lots of goofy ideas that are legal, but completely inappropriate.