New DAS System at Walt Disney World 2024

[photomatt]

I'll play devil's advocate here.

photomatt is unnecessarily combative, I agree.

However, his idea would actually allow Disney to continue to accommodate a wider range of disabilities through DAS. They would have to conduct DAS interviews farther in advance, for sure. But if they limited the number of DAS passes per day they could accommodate more disabilities, people would just have to plan ahead.

Combative? I respectfully disagree. I have a right to defend my positions. That's what I have done.

I appreciate that you are publicly agreeing with an idea that would work, even though I readily admit that it would not be popular at first. Once it was implemented, and the queue times were shorter, everyone would say Disney did the right thing. They just need to take the chance and try it. What they are doing now is a disaster.

 

[photomatt]

The LLs at the headliners are 60%+ DAS.

This poster is really underestimating the amount of people with DAS, along with the sheer number of people who claim to need it but could easily be accommodated in other ways. Not to mention the outright liars and abusers.

I'm not underestimating the number of people with DAS. Where did I post any estimate of the number of people in the park on a given day that used DAS?

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

Some who are eligible under the new rules may be able to have an almost normal day using DAS but without it would be able to do next to nothing. If you want to know why PM me as I don't want to put a roadmap out here in public those I don't know the posting history of

I’m not disputing that, but that should also show in the data.

For example if my girlfriends DAS file noted “needs to avoid long exposure to sun and heat do to heart condition and medication side affects” and our use history showed we limited our use to long lines during the day or excessively hot nights it would validate our use, if we were using it 20 times a day on rides with 10 minute lines and after dark in the 60s it would raise red flags.

My niece on the other hand is severely autistic and could never stand in a 10 minute line without giving the people around her heart attacks, her notes would also show that though so it wouldn’t be suspicious at all if she used it on every ride she went on.

I just wish they’d tried to reign in abuse before eliminating it for the vast majority of valid users, they didn’t even try.

 

[Chi84]

I’m not disputing that, but that should also show in the data.

For example if my girlfriends DAS file noted “needs to avoid long exposure to sun and heat do to heart condition and medication side affects” and our use history showed we limited our use to long lines during the day or excessively hot nights it would validate our use, if we were using it 20 times a day on rides with 10 minute lines and after dark in the 60s it would raise red flags.

My niece on the other hand is severely autistic and could never stand in a 10 minute line without giving the people around her heart attacks, her notes would also show that though so it wouldn’t be suspicious at all if she used it on every ride she went on.

I just wish they’d tried to reign in abuse before eliminating it for the vast majority of valid users, they didn’t even try.

I think you may be underestimating the difficulty of what you’re proposing.

 

[Figgy1]

I’m not disputing that, but that should also show in the data.

For example if my girlfriends DAS file noted “needs to avoid long exposure to sun and heat do to heart condition and medication side affects” and our use history showed we limited our use to long lines during the day or excessively hot nights it would validate our use, if we were using it 20 times a day on rides with 10 minute lines and after dark in the 60s it would raise red flags.

My niece on the other hand is severely autistic and could never stand in a 10 minute line without giving the people around her heart attacks, her notes would also show that though so it wouldn’t be suspicious at all if she used it on every ride she went on.

I just wish they’d tried to reign in abuse before eliminating it for the vast majority of valid users, they didn’t even try.

imho the only other way would have gone for something like UNI, as use data doesn't tell the whole story as even those on the spectrum can have different responses to triggers on different days, times of day, same for those still getting it for different reasons and yes I agree a bit of the baby with the bathwater

 

[photomatt]

I know I am coming into this discussion late because I was sleeping when most of this was going on. But it seems a bit like you came on this purposefully trying to stir up trouble. Every Rebuttal post is slightly antagonistic with an air of Requiring overwhelming proof without providing any in return.

I'm not entirely sure what the point of the original post was. Disney didn't ask for your opinion or my opinion. These hypothetical maybe's aren't exactly hopeful to people trying to figure out the current system. What is the point in posting a system that doesn't exist and then argue with people that don't agree if it would work or not?

Please provide an example where I was asked to prove something and then failed to provide the proof, with the one exception of a poster who clearly refused to read the information that I provided.

You're correct. Disney didn't ask me for my opinion, but this is a forum. Forums are a place to discuss ideas. That's their purpose. I had an idea, and I shared it.

You claim that I'm antagonistic, but your post is a textbook example of antagonism. Do you honestly think I'm not going to respond? Do you honestly think that I'm not going to respond to posters who refuse to take the time to understand the idea that I presented? I have a right to respond.

I'm sorry if you confuse antagonism for wanting to have a meaningful discussion instead of merely sharing feelings with no basis in fact. That's clearly what people are used to. They post whatever they feel at the moment without expending a minimum amount of effort to learn the truth and then base their feelings on the truth and not just what makes them feel good.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

I think you may be underestimating the difficulty of what you’re proposing.

I’m sure it would take some manpower but so does individually interviewing every applicant and dealing with individual needs at each line.

If they just did it once a year at the renewal date it would just take a few minutes a year per DAS user. Just the risk of being denied a renewal likely would have reduced use substantially.

 

[Chi84]

I’m sure it would take some manpower but so does individually interviewing every applicant and dealing with individual needs at each line.

If they just did it once a year at the renewal date it would just take a few minutes a year per DAS user. Just the risk of being denied a renewal likely would have reduced use substantially.

I get what you’re saying, but I suspect Disney decided a more drastic reduction was necessary. I’m not saying they’re right, but it seems to be their decision.

 

[Splash4eva]

I'm intrigued...no doubt Disney could dissect the data, but how would they use that data to determine who does or doesn't need a DAS?

Here is my thoughts and before anyone comes at me its just thoughts … considering this process is basically arbitrary. Maybe Disney can be a little more lenient and compassionate for those that are actually taking a vacation vs locals (nothing against them but Disney will still do their best under the new rules) and supply these people with the accommodations thats seem to work when not overly abused. As ive stated the new rules not referring who now qualifies will help ease system already. No more pre books. 10 minute gap which easily will be longer on plenty of attractions reduction of party size. All of these changes make for a better experience. In regards to locals/ap’s they can analyze each case etc and determine it that way. Again just thoughts. Dont want a ton of hate coming back here but i think it would make some sense.

 

[Splash4eva]

What data, specifically, would indicate that a person doesn't need DAS?

I think if you say locals who are coming to the parks and riding 2 headliners and leaving constantly may be a decent indicator? I dont know per say. But im sure they can sense some type of pattern that may raise a flag so to say. Again i truly dontknow. Just thinking out loud.

 

[KrzyKtty]

Here is my thoughts and before anyone comes at me its just thoughts … considering this process is basically arbitrary. Maybe Disney can be a little more lenient and compassionate for those that are actually taking a vacation vs locals (nothing against them but Disney will still do their best under the new rules) and supply these people with the accommodations thats seem to work when not overly abused. As ive stated the new rules not referring who now qualifies will help ease system already. No more pre books. 10 minute gap which easily will be longer on plenty of attractions reduction of party size. All of these changes make for a better experience. In regards to locals/ap’s they can analyze each case etc and determine it that way. Again just thoughts. Dont want a ton of hate coming back here but i think it would make some sense.

I might have read this the wrong way, but would this work with legal logistics? I only ask because right now everybody gets the same thing depending on the need. If any sort of differentiation is made between locals or number of visits, would that create a discrimination issue?

Genuinely curious, So I apologize if it seems to read any other way but that.

 

[Splash4eva]

I'll play devil's advocate here.

photomatt is unnecessarily combative, I agree.

However, his idea would actually allow Disney to continue to accommodate a wider range of disabilities through DAS. They would have to conduct DAS interviews farther in advance, for sure. But if they limited the number of DAS passes per day they could accommodate more disabilities, people would just have to plan ahead.

I just read his suggestions and honestly it does make sense and Disney can bucket it the same way they do with reservations say with certain park tickets so on and so forth. Goes back to my comment i just made about being more lenient on vacationers vs locals. They can say limit how many AP/Locals get access to DAS vs people who are traveling.

 

[Splash4eva]

I might have read this the wrong way, but would this work with legal logistics? I only ask because right now everybody gets the same thing depending on the need. If any sort of differentiation is made Beast on locals or number of visits, with that create a discrimination issue?

Genuinely curious, So I apologize if it seems to read any other way but that.

Legally im sure it be a challenge but again “arbitrary” and in theory noone would know who qualified and for what reasons etc. granted i know that be impossible to keep a secret but again just a thought and yes i do agree it could be considered “illegal”

 

[Splash4eva]

I just got back from a full day at MK and i do have DAS and also purchase Genie+ and ILL for Tron to be able and ride twice… today was on the crowded side compared to Friday which to me felt “empty”. I was able to basically do the entire park using Genie and walk ons. Granted i did use my DAS as well but it was surprisingly done… granted this may not belong here but figured i would share my experience today fwiw

 

[Chi84]

Legally im sure it be a challenge but again “arbitrary” and in theory noone would know who qualified and for what reasons etc. granted i know that be impossible to keep a secret but again just a thought and yes i do agree it could be considered “illegal”

I think it would be imprudent to introduce deliberate arbitrariness into any system of disability accommodations. Not to mention the optics.

 

[jennab55]

I'll play devil's advocate here.

photomatt is unnecessarily combative, I agree.

However, his idea would actually allow Disney to continue to accommodate a wider range of disabilities through DAS. They would have to conduct DAS interviews farther in advance, for sure. But if they limited the number of DAS passes per day they could accommodate more disabilities, people would just have to plan ahead.

I would be mad if I went on my annual (or less often) Disney vacation and was unable to get a DAS reservation because they were “sold out”. People who go often would be at a benefit and understand the system more than those go every once and awhile. What about those who don’t even know about DAS until they are there?

I also feel like people already hated the park reservations and would not be a good idea to add more.

 

[C33Mom]

I might have read this the wrong way, but would this work with legal logistics? I only ask because right now everybody gets the same thing depending on the need. If any sort of differentiation is made between locals or number of visits, would that create a discrimination issue?

Genuinely curious, So I apologize if it seems to read any other way but that.

I think Disney isn’t limiting to X number of DAS users per day (or DAS days per user per year) because it is legally uncertain (and almost certainly going to get challenged as discriminatory, even if they ultimately win), whereas tightening DAS qualification but offering AQR to anybody who can’t handle lines is probably going to be seen as an acceptable accommodation level for most and something judges aren’t likely to force them to litigate all the way through trial.

Having said that, all prior court cases were clear that if DAS use was so high that it significantly impacted park operations (and this includes hurting guest satisfaction by allotting too much capacity to DAS), the program itself can be changed or eliminated. I think Disney now has the data to prove dramatic disruption which is why they are overhauling qualification criteria. If someone with IBS or diabetes challenges DAS only for certain conditions as discriminatory, it is more likely that DAS will go away entirely than that Disney will have to offer it for physical disabilities again…but one other specific option that Disney could ask a court to bless is limiting 5-10% of total LL capacity for DAS— which would (ironically) make DAS more like current Genie+ (hard to get actual useful LL returns for popular rides) or a lottery/first-come first-serve system that only a small fraction of current users could reserve DAS access each day (sort of like handicap parking— you have to make some available but don’t have to make the whole lot handicap parking)—however, I cannot see Disney trying either of those systems unless there is a specific court ruling or directly on point regulation permitting it, because it would be artificially capping accommodations for the groups who truly need DAS.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

I do agree I feel very different about a DAS passholder / regular visitor vs. a once a year family that has DAS needs.

But those are my feelings which are different than legal requirements.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Having said that, all prior court cases were clear that if DAS use was so high that it significantly impacted park operations (and this includes hurting guest satisfaction by allotting too much capacity to DAS), the program itself can be changed or eliminated.

What case other than the GAC case has there been?

And you can’t eliminate disability access. The loading and unloading of wheelchairs “significantly impacts” the wait times on many attractions.

 

[Chi84]

What case other than the GAC case has there been?

And you can’t eliminate disability access. The loading and unloading of wheelchairs “significantly impacts” the wait times on many attractions.

I think the poster is referring only to a system of skipping the physical line, like DAS.