Disney Agrees to settle disabilities lawsuit

[gilesmt]

I don't think they could limit the shows to a certain time any more than they could tell all people in W/C or ECVs that they must take a certain bus. That isn't equal access.

And I don't understand why there isn't some service animal registry. Even if you trained the animal yourself there still could be some way to register your animal and receive some sort of certification (vest? tags?) that were official in some way. This is sort of going off topic, but I guess no one has an issue with needing to provide documentation when requesting a disabled parking tag, why should we care about needing to provide documentation on other disabilities for other services? Like having to provide documentation to register your service animal, for instance. I know that in order for my child to qualify for services based on need, at school he has to have a "record or history of such an impairment".

I'm sorry but it is equal assess and they do just that for the deaf I believe. Disney does have specific number of shows with specific times that are for hearing impaired, that have interpreters there. Sue or someone may have to correct me if I am wrong, since I have never checked into this, but it does have them and when you call they will tell you when they are, if you can not make that show, than my understanding is you have to request a specific show and time and they will do it, but they first try to accommodate all hearing impaired with say one show a week. So if you are going to see Aladin, and you call for an interpreter, they will say, we have an interpreter on Tuesday,Wednesday and Saturday at the 11 am show, if that does not work for you then they try to accommodate but it is not a definitely. This to me is equal access. They try to make it available to those who are there several different days a week. But just like early enterence, if you sleep in late on those days you can't just ask for them to let you stay in the park late at night, they try to accommodate at other times but it is not a guarentee.

I think the problem with ADA and service dog requirements, is that it is an official state agency who has laws and doctors on staff when you ask for a disabled parking placard. And you are asking for it. When it comes to the general public, there are so many opinions and biasis, they feel keep it general, and I use to agree many years ago, but more and more Americans are claiming that there pet dogs are service animals. Also, HUD as a federal agency did great to allow pets in housing, but they confused the issue in saying that they need only a doctors note and they can't be charged pet fees. I'm sorry but mist doctors would not argue with a 90 year old women who wanted her cat without a $500 pet fee and just write her a note, which as I say I am not arguing, I believe elderly and disabled need pets, but when does a doctor say no, is it to the 65 year old, or to the 45 year old. Once the 65 year old gets to keep her pet in the apartment, others want to, which again is great, but then one by one they go out into the community, the animal in the mind of the person is special because they after all have a doctors note stating they need the animal, so can the lay person who drives a bus, or the part time worker at subway, or the greeter at Walmart say no, no they can not legally, all they can ask is if the pet is for a service animal, what work does it do. The execs at Walmart may be able to tell if the answers are true, but they tell the workers to just let go, because they can't train there people who themselves are older to spot the difference. People today can go online and order vest for service dogs, there are web sites that will send you a paper that states your dog is certisfied, that is why as a guide dog user, if asked for documentation, I refuse to give it, since by law it is no allowed to ask for, but anyone with it to me would have an uncertified dog since ADA states you can not be asked for it and they probably just got it off line.

When DOJ opened it up three years ago, I wrote in, I wanted just some simple standards, all service dogs must be altered, to me a dog not altered can not work effectively, what good is a female dog in heat, even if she behaves, others dogs will still be chasing her. I wanted all services dogs to pass basic good citizen award training. I would have liked to see specific breeds, not allowed as service animals, sorry I know it is not there fault it is mankind, but even the best pit bull can turn on a person, I don't think they should be allowed to be used in public. But those are my opinions and DOJ must have had both sides weighing in strongly because basically they left it all pretty much the same way, except a service animal is a dog, it is no longer a monkey or a horse.

To me it is still a mess and they will eventually need to regulate it, which I think will help me, but I still feel bad for those with disabilities that service animals cost a fur tune, like some autism dogs, although the school I went to are now using dogs that are rejected as guide dogs and training them as autism dogs, and they are free, I want to shout what at the schools that charge $10,000 for these dogs, I know it is expensive but come on, insurance won't cover it like w/c's and they are needed medical expense, why charge a family $10,000 for the dogs. The school that trains guide dogs have now taken on the cause and are starting to help families with children with autism. I hear they just placed the 33rd dog.

 

[buffettgirl]

Since the original thread was about the settlement and since we've ventured specifically into parades, here is what the settlement says:

a. Within six months after the Effective Date, Disney will
update its relevant Operating Guidelines to provide that disabled parade viewing
areas are available to all guests with disabilities, including guests with visual
impairments, who require preferential viewing as a result of their disability. Disney
will continue to make these viewing areas available on a first-come, first-served
basis.

To me it sounds like Disney was NOT allowing everyone into the disabled viewing areas and now they are. Not just w/c or ecvs. They're admitting that there are other guests with needs who are allowed to be in those areas. (but not limited to guests with visual impairments) Now, sure, people are going to complain. And yes, we all know that someone, somewhere is going to imply that someone deserves the spot more than someone else and someone is going to imply that someone is abusing it. But the benefit for everyone is that Disney is making these spots available to all guests with disabilities.

I really can't see what the argument is here.

 

[Talking Hands]

I'm sorry but it is equal assess and they do just that for the deaf I believe. Disney does have specific number of shows with specific times that are for hearing impaired, that have interpreters there. Sue or someone may have to correct me if I am wrong, since I have never checked into this, but it does have them and when you call they will tell you when they are, if you can not make that show, than my understanding is you have to request a specific show and time and they will do it, but they first try to accommodate all hearing impaired with say one show a week. So if you are going to see Aladin, and you call for an interpreter, they will say, we have an interpreter on Tuesday,Wednesday and Saturday at the 11 am show, if that does not work for you then they try to accommodate but it is not a definitely. This to me is equal access. They try to make it available to those who are there several different days a week. But just like early enterence, if you sleep in late on those days you can't just ask for them to let you stay in the park late at night, they try to accommodate at other times but it is not a guarentee.

For the deaf and hard of hearing Disney does have a specific schedule for those who use interpreters. For WDW it is M & Th for MK, T & F for Epcot, W & Sun for Studios and Sat for AK. They will add to the schedule if they are contacted in advance (2 weeks notice min) and they will do other special tours and events when requested in advance. We can't just drop in at the last minute and decide we want to see a show and get an interpreter.

 

[SueM in MN]

Until now Disney's policy would be to sit me where w/c's go. Well that does not always work for a visually impaired person. I have not been to bugs life or muppets in years since they routinely sit me in the middle row, when I ask for front row, they give the same excuse, this is where all GAC accommodations go, now I am speaking more about DL and DCA since I have been there more.

I don’t know about DL and DCA since my experience is mostly WDW, but there are many places where guests with wheelchairs are all in the back row.
That does not meet the needs of everyone using a wheelchair. There are situations where someone with a wheelchair also has needs that make them need to sit up front.
For example, we have been to Turtle Talk many times, but the last time was the first my DD really enjoyed it. Why?
Because she was in the front row with no one in front of her.
Spots for guests using wheelchairs are in the ends of the most rows in the theater. She sometimes ends up in one of the back rows and most often ends up near the front, but with a larger adult seated in front of her. Because she is short, she can’t see over them. Because she is in a wheelchair and has seat supports that keep her in one position, she can’t shift at all to see around them.

There are other shows where all the wheelchair seating is in the back. Because my DD also has some visual field deficits and has attention deficit disorder, these back row seats are all that is available. But, she can’t see from those.
WDW has improved with newer theaters, but the older theaters in general, do not do a good job of meeting needs for people who have multiple disabilities/needs.

We have also seen times at WDW where a person with a visual disability was arguing with the CM who tried to direct them to somewhere other than where guests with wheelchairs were being directed to go. This has happened specifically in theaters where guests with wheelchairs are waiting in a separated out area, which leads ONLY to the back row when the door to the theater opens. The arguing has kind of gone like this -
Guest: We have a right to be with the guests in wheelchairs.
CM: When they enter the theater, they will be in the back row. You want the front row.
Guest: I know my rights. You have to let me wait with them.
CM: The area they are waiting in leads only to the back rows. You can’t get to the front from that area.
Guest: I know my rights. You have to let me wait with them. If you won’t, I want to see your manager right now and make a complaint.
CM: You can wait there, but you will not be able to get to the front row.

And, then when the doors open:
Guest: I can't get to the front row. I need the front row.

For shows where it is appropriate, we have often seen guests without mobility devices waiting to enter the theater with us. This has included guests with autism, walking guests with service dogs and guests who have obvious visual disabilities. A few specific situations I can think of where this happened were Laugh Floor and Mickey’s Philharmagic at MK, Turtle Talk and American Adventure at Epcot, Muppets 3D at the Studio and Festival of the Lion King at AK. Those guests entered with us before other guests when the doors opened and they were allowed to choose seats where they wanted.
This was not just recently (so not because of the lawsuit), but we have noticed it over at least the past 10 years.

Sue, Walmart frustrates me because if you read the law, it states they are allowed to ask questions if not apparent!!! My dog is in harness, it has been with me every week, my first dog 7 years, this dog 6 months. I believe WA marts policy of asking every person with a dog is harassment and would love to see someone sue them over it. Unless they are going to stop allowing the companion dogs, therapy dogs and pets into the store, than they should not be asking at all. This is against ADA, because it states you can not point out an harass persons with disabilities, if there is a question, like a dog for autism or PTSD because I am told some of them do not wear vest because it would inerfer with the work, but the law states that no questions should be asked it it is clear to the observer that the dog is a service dog. WA marts policy clearly, discriminates against me, since my dog is clearly in a harness, with the name of the school clearly visible on the harness and I clearly frequent that establishment enough for the greeter to know me and my dog by name, but I am still asked every time. As a disabled I feel like Walmart is announcing over the loud speaker, blind person with dog in store.

Yes, I am very aware of the law. That was why I mentioned that it should be very obvious that DD’s dog is her service dog - girl in wheelchair, holding leash of black dog that is wearing a bright red service dog dog vest with the words “Service Dog” printed in black in 2 inch high letters on the red vest. It’s hard to get any more obvious that that.
I believe that Walmart does it either to make it easier for their greeters - just ask everyone - or to avoid someone with a dog that is not obvious complaining that they are inconsistent (i.e. - “You questioned my dog, but you did not ask that person.”)
I agree it is against the law for them to ask with an obvious service dog and I agree they are probably just letting in ANY dog when the person says it is a service dog.

I think you should make a complaint to the ADA if you have not already. You have a perfect case - obvious disability, greeter knows you and your dog by name, but still ask.
If you have not done anything yet, I would at least send the store manager a letter explaining what is happening and a copy of this summary of the changes to the ADA regarding Service Animals.
http://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm

I can’t wait to hear what happens when Walmart gets their first Service miniature horse visit (the greeter will probably ask if it is a service dog!)

Should we be simply sitting on a curb (and you all know how pushing and shoving it gets even when you stake out your spot) he gets nervous because even if we step back a few spots to let other kids sit he doesn't know where we are once those lights go down. I can see him, but he can't see us. So in this situation, having a controlled area to sit (like the roped off area) would do a lot to make him able to watch the parade. It's not that he can't see the parade while sitting on the curb, but it's that the darkness around him and the fact that he can't see us is the bigger issue. Picture sitting in a dark space and then not being able to figure out the people around you - is the guy next to you your dh or not?

A good further explanation of what I posted a page or so back.

Also, I have n ever been to the CP, but someone mentioned in another thread (or maybe it was PM to me during a discussion of vision issues) that sometimes the front row - or the assigned seats for visual impairment - are not the most appropriate seats. For instance, my son has bilateral peripheral vision loss, on the upper corners of his eyes. So if he were to sit low and try to look up that will be right where his vision is missing. So this other poster explained that it's ok to ask for a different location if the 'front' just doesn't work (and after she told me this it was like ahha! that's so true, it wouldn't work for my child).

That is what a lot of front row seating is like.
I don’t have time to make a list, but a few attractions like that are Beauty and the Beast at the Studio, Nemo the Musical at AK and American Adventure at Epcot. The stage floor in all of those is actually above the front rows. Nemo front seats are actually limited view because of how the stage juts out into a walkway.

More disturbing, there have been cases where someone with a visual disability entered the theater along with us before the rest of the guests. They chose seats in the middle of the 3rd or 4th row in the theater. When other guests came in, we could see guests who were purposely making more or an effort to get by them than they needed to (even stepping on feet). I have seen posts where people say they purposely stomp on feet of people who "stop in the middle of the row” because they feel it is rude to stop there.

I'm sorry but it is equal assess and they do just that for the deaf I believe. Disney does have specific number of shows with specific times that are for hearing impaired, that have interpreters there. Sue or someone may have to correct me if I am wrong, since I have never checked into this, but it does have them and when you call they will tell you when they are, if you can not make that show, than my understanding is you have to request a specific show and time and they will do it, but they first try to accommodate all hearing impaired with say one show a week. So if you are going to see Aladin, and you call for an interpreter, they will say, we have an interpreter on Tuesday,Wednesday and Saturday at the 11 am show, if that does not work for you then they try to accommodate but it is not a definitely. This to me is equal access. They try to make it available to those who are there several different days a week. But just like early enterence, if you sleep in late on those days you can't just ask for them to let you stay in the park late at night, they try to accommodate at other times but it is not a guarantee.

There is a difference - for guests who need sign language interpretation, they know that there is a need for a trained interpreter.
To get that, they may need to go to a different show/time than they planned.

I believe people with visual disabilities would complain - there is just a need for seats, so designating certain shows as those where they would be allowed in early is kind of an artificial restraint.
Having a certain number of seats designated for guests with visual disabilities would be similar to wheelchair seating. There are limited number of wheelchair spots for many shows. If we get there and all are already taken, we wait for the next show.
One difficulty I can see with designating spots for guests with visual disabilities is that there is no specific spot that fits all needs.

I think the problem with ADA and service dog requirements, is that it is an official state agency who has laws and doctors on staff when you ask for a disabled parking placard. And you are asking for it. When it comes to the general public, there are so many opinions and biasis, they feel keep it general, and I use to agree many years ago, but more and more Americans are claiming that there pet dogs are service animals. Also, HUD as a federal agency did great to allow pets in housing, but they confused the issue in saying that they need only a doctors note and they can't be charged pet fees. I'm sorry but mist doctors would not argue with a 90 year old women who wanted her cat without a $500 pet fee and just write her a note, which as I say I am not arguing, I believe elderly and disabled need pets, but when does a doctor say no, is it to the 65 year old, or to the 45 year old. Once the 65 year old gets to keep her pet in the apartment, others want to, which again is great, but then one by one they go out into the community, the animal in the mind of the person is special because they after all have a doctors note stating they need the animal, so can the lay person who drives a bus, or the part time worker at subway, or the greeter at Walmart say no, no they can not legally, all they can ask is if the pet is for a service animal, what work does it do. The execs at Walmart may be able to tell if the answers are true, but they tell the workers to just let go, because they can't train there people who themselves are older to spot the difference. People today can go online and order vest for service dogs, there are web sites that will send you a paper that states your dog is certisfied, that is why as a guide dog user, if asked for documentation, I refuse to give it, since by law it is no allowed to ask for, but anyone with it to me would have an uncertified dog since ADA states you can not be asked for it and they probably just got it off line.

I agree that one of the problems is there is no specific agency.

When DOJ opened it up three years ago, I wrote in, I wanted just some simple standards, all service dogs must be altered, to me a dog not altered can not work effectively, what good is a female dog in heat, even if she behaves, others dogs will still be chasing her. I wanted all services dogs to pass basic good citizen award training. I would have liked to see specific breeds, not allowed as service animals, sorry I know it is not there fault it is mankind, but even the best pit bull can turn on a person, I don't think they should be allowed to be used in public. But those are my opinions and DOJ must have had both sides weighing in strongly because basically they left it all pretty much the same way, except a service animal is a dog, it is no longer a monkey or a horse.

I agree it would be good if all service animals had to be altered. That makes sense. You don’t want a female dog in heat being distracted and pursued.

The new guidelines DID allow miniature horses in some situations though.

Since the original thread was about the settlement and since we've ventured specifically into parades, here is what the settlement says:
To me it sounds like Disney was NOT allowing everyone into the disabled viewing areas and now they are. Not just w/c or ecvs. They're admitting that there are other guests with needs who are allowed to be in those areas. (but not limited to guests with visual impairments) Now, sure, people are going to complain. And yes, we all know that someone, somewhere is going to imply that someone deserves the spot more than someone else and someone is going to imply that someone is abusing it. But the benefit for everyone is that Disney is making these spots available to all guests with disabilities.

I really can't see what the argument is here.

That has not been our experience. We have been in the handicapped viewing areas with guests who are not using mobility devices. The most recent few were guests who had children with autism. This was not just recently, but as long ago as 10 years.
The guests with non-visible disabilities did have GACs and were told that the front row was for guests with disabilities in most of the viewing areas.
An exception was Frontierland, where some of the area is only one or 2 people deep.

 

[buffettgirl]

..snipped...
That has not been our experience. We have been in the handicapped viewing areas with guests who are not using mobility devices. The most recent few were guests who had children with autism. This was not just recently, but as long ago as 10 years.
The guests with non-visible disabilities did have GACs and were told that the front row was for guests with disabilities in most of the viewing areas.
An exception was Frontierland, where some of the area is only one or 2 people deep.

so that then leads me to wonder what brought on the lawsuit. Doesn't it? And I know you have a ton of experience (and years) using these locations, so if you say it already is allowed then I am apt to believe you (more than disney) so makes me then scratch my head and wonder what specifically happened that parade areas were included, specifically, in the settlement . I can't imagine that they'd include it in the settlement if there were no basis, right? If Disney said "well, wait, we already do this.....it's already our policy, so we don't need to change anything."

so I'd love to know what brought it all on in the first place. Wouldn't you?

 

[SueM in MN]

I think it is inconsistent for one thing.
I also think there may be more difficulty at Disneyland.

Some of it has me scratching my head. One of the specific things in the settlement is a complaint that the characters at Crystal Palace at MK in WDW.
The complaint states that the characters refused to pose with the dog, the character handler said they are not allowed to pose with service animals, the guest went to Guest Relations and complained, but was told they are not allowed to pose with service animals.
There has to be a "no, but ...." in there somewhere since there are many pictures posted on the DIS and other sites not only showing characters posing, but going above and beyond to pose. So, it makes you wonder what they asked the character to do that was not allowed.

Some of the things they demanded and claimed were required under the ADA (free ticket for companion and place to kennel dog during rides) are nice, but not required.

This is not to say there is no merit in the lawsuit or nothing that could be done better, just that some of the claims are strange.

 

[buffettgirl]

I think it is inconsistent for one thing.
I also think there may be more difficulty at Disneyland.

Some of it has me scratching my head. One of the specific things in the settlement is a complaint that the characters at Crystal Palace at MK in WDW.
The complaint states that the characters refused to pose with the dog, the character handler said they are not allowed to pose with service animals, the guest went to Guest Relations and complained, but was told they are not allowed to pose with service animals.
There has to be a "no, but ...." in there somewhere since there are many pictures posted on the DIS and other sites not only showing characters posing, but going above and beyond to pose. So, it makes you wonder what they asked the character to do that was not allowed.

Some of the things they demanded and claimed were required under the ADA (free ticket for companion and place to kennel dog during rides) are nice, but not required.

This is not to say there is no merit in the lawsuit or nothing that could be done better, just that some of the claims are strange.

well, the more we talk it over, it sure does seem strange to me as well.

The whole "companion ticket" had me totally scratching my head.

 

[gilesmt]

so that then leads me to wonder what brought on the lawsuit. Doesn't it? And I know you have a ton of experience (and years) using these locations, so if you say it already is allowed then I am apt to believe you (more than disney) so makes me then scratch my head and wonder what specifically happened that parade areas were included, specifically, in the settlement . I can't imagine that they'd include it in the settlement if there were no basis, right? If Disney said "well, wait, we already do this.....it's already our policy, so we don't need to change anything."

so I'd love to know what brought it all on in the first place. Wouldn't you?

Here is a couple of thoughts that come to mind and I could be way off.

First, I think the new ADA laws brought up a lot of good qualities that blind individuals can sue about because they are now clear. Ex. Before it stated alternative format, so many things came in Braille. Well less than 10% of blind, but now it specifies a few things like audio, or call and read, and many other things.

Second, Disney's policies have changed wildly over the passed 10 years. There was a time that I got lots of help, then GAC cards came out and I will guess here but maybe from 5 to 7 years back, every time I asked for a GAC I was told no my cane would get me in the "back door". Then finally blind persons got there own stamp, but for the next two years almost no one knew what the stamp ment, so for more than a year my stamp got me front of the line access to soaring, which I never asked for, I would walk up show my card and be escorted down to the next flight boarding. But it gave me back row seating with w/c persons in many cases. Then the last few years I was separated from w/c persons and giving my own spot usually up front. This is mainly Disney land. With all these confusions and a public mentality what difference does it make if I can't see upset enough to finally say let's sue.

Third I think what ADA also did was broden the definition for blindness to include visually impaired this time, although this is a read between the lines kind of thing, not specifically stated. In medical world and disability world you can be partially paralyzed and disabled, but if you are partially sighted or blinded in one eye you were never disabled before. This is not an argument, just stating what is true in terms of disabilities. If blinded in one eye you can still see and still drive if your sight is good in other eye so no one sees you are disabled. In the world of social security you to be disabled under legally blind you must be not legally blind but statutorily blind. To claim blindness on a tax return you must be legally blind. I think the new ADA brought out the words visually impaired to show there are some in-between vision problems. It was easy to see someone with a limp as having a problem even if not paralyzed, ADA new laws bring up visual impairments other than blindness, can't see in dark, can read unless up close. Disney always tried to accommodate blind, very poorly but did try, but the way they tried was to put us in with endurance and w/c persons, since in there mind my problem with me in the park is, I would need a cane, so treat me like a crippled, I would move slower on and off rides, so treat me like a crippled and I would have a companion and or a service animal, so in there minds they tried to accommodate me by giving me the same access as a w/c or an endurance person. This is not what blind individuals need, but even more this is not what visually impaired persons need.

I think the law suit was just one of many that will come out of the new ADA, some went into effect last March some this march. We also need to remember that this was three individuals who sued, not an organization for blind, so the reasonable accommodations are more for visually impaired, rather than blind, because I say, if truly blind under law or even more strict under social security rules, Disney could not accommodate me at a parade to see, they would have to put it on a 60 inch screen tv with me sitting 2 inches away and every piece of the parade up close. Then maybe I could see it. But to accommodate me with space for me and my dog maybe they have addressed the issue. I need my dog to be able to see things coming so he can walk around them, unlike another type of service animal, who the person in a w/c would move the dog out of the way, my dog has to move me out of the way.

Like I said, just my thoughts and I have to wait and see what comers in reality from this. My question is like the kennels. Are they cleaned after each use. As stated in this thread and others, not so legitimate dogs are going on vacation with human partners who do not qualify as service dogs. There is no law to check on these because you can not ask for documentation. So for me, I would not use a kennel, even though I love the idea, why, well let's say that not so legitimate service dog goes into the kennel before me, well I know my legitimate dog has all the right shots, I know my legitimate dog has monthly meds for heart worm, I know my legitimate dog has frontline monthly for fleas and ticks. How do I know that not so legitimate dog has that and I put my dog in the kennel. At least in the regular kennels on site they have to show short records to stay, these would not be in the kennels, these are create at the beginning or end of rides, how are they going to insure my dogs safety. I really am concerned with there. How often will they be cleaned, once a day, or after each use.I can see a lot of kennel cough at least going around if not other problems with this.

 

[A Mickeyfan]

Now, as for the seating at the Candelight Processional. I didn't read the OPs statement the way you're all reading it. I read it as she was told there was no "vision" section yet eventually she was led to the "hearing" section (not the "section for all people with disabilities) and was just speaking in amazement that the CM didn't seem to think that there was a need for her to sit there. I'm not sure since she hasn't been back, but that's how I read her statement. Not that she didn't want to sit in the "hearing impaired" section and not that she felt that there needed to be a separate "vision impaired" section, but that the CM didn't immediately direct her to the appropriate section. Also, I have n ever been to the CP, but someone mentioned in another thread (or maybe it was PM to me during a discussion of vision issues) that sometimes the front row - or the assigned seats for visual impairment - are not the most appropriate seats. For instance, my son has bilateral peripheral vision loss, on the upper corners of his eyes. So if he were to sit low and try to look up that will be right where his vision is missing. So this other poster explained that it's ok to ask for a different location if the 'front' just doesn't work (and after she told me this it was like ahha! that's so true, it wouldn't work for my child).

so...unless I'm totally misreading the post about the CP (which is what I think started the discussion) I think it was simply that there was no assigned seating for this OP and she was questioning why.

You totally understood what I was saying... Here Disney has a wheelchair section and a section for the hearing impaired but nothing for the vision impaired. I didn't mind sitting in with the hearing impaired. It got me up to the front where I needed to be for night fall, the only thing that was bad was that I was on the side. When night falls, my peripheral vision isn't very good. So sitting on the side of the theater put me at a disadvantage, but I dealt with it. I was there early enough to be allowed to sit in any other section toward the front center rows, but the CM didn't put me there. My GAC states front row(s), at first he wasn't doing that for me either. Yes, you understood what I was saying, there are sections for other impairments but not vision.. that was my point. That is why I am so happy that this has happened to Disney. Maybe now they will take the visually impaired a little more serious.

 

[A Mickeyfan]

And what was wrong with the section for the deaf and hard of hearing. It is in the front. They normally use that area for both. Honestly there isn't that much of a need to see at Candlelight Processional as there is no drama. The only time I even look at the narrator is if Marlee Matlin is narrating. Otherwise I focus on the sign language interpreter. While I can hear the orchestra music I cannot distinguish the words being sung.

Nothing is wrong with it.. my comment was made to show that there are sections for wheelchairs and hearing impairments but not vision impairments. After having to so say to the CM "well this is a theater isn't it?" and then pointing to my stamp and telling him it clearly states I should get front row access. I was there early enough too. They started seating from the back sections and why they did that was beyond me. He was a bit annoyed he looked around and said follow me. He took me down to the section for the hearing impaired. I actually enjoyed watching the signing. You above all people should have understood my post.. Disney doesn't have accommodations for the visually impaired.. they have more for the totally blind than the impaired. They have really nothing for us. When there is dim lighting and you cannot read a menu, they don't read it to us, and Braille won't help us because we don't read Braille .. Disney doesn't turn up the lighting to help us they don't accommodate us. The seating for the parades/fireworks, where do they put us.. nowhere. We aren't to go where the wheelchairs go.. we are to be in a massive crowd of people in the dark. we cannot see the people (or make out their faces) of who we are with, we cannot see the curbing on the ground, these are all hazards to us. Disney does nothing for us. No offense to anyone, but you can have someone with a broken foot and their family of 10 in the wheelchair section, but those with low vision are left to fend for themselves.. that is the point I was trying to make with my post.. Disney doesn't have anything for us.

 

[A Mickeyfan]

I'm trying to think of a way to ask my questions without coming across as arguementative because I'm honestly just trying to understand. Please take my questions as genuinely trying to understand and be supportive because that honestly is where I'm coming from.

Is there a reason why you can't watch the parades from anywhere else along the route? Anybody can stake out a spot along a curb on a bench along the route. Is something wrong with these areas? Is there a reason why you can't see as well from other areas along the parade routes?

As for the Candlelight Prcessional, is your chief complaint that there isn't an area specifically called visual impairment seating? I definitely understand your complaint that you had to argue about getting accomodated. Those types of arguements do get old (the whole point of the GAC is so that we can GET needed accomodatios and I think all of us who use them get frustrated when we have to argue to get what we need). I just don't understand why the hearing impaired section didn't meet the accomodation. Is this area not close enough (I honestly don't know where the area is; I'm just making the assumption that it's close to the front)? I would think that it would need to be close in order for hearing impaired people to be able to clearly see the signers. Does that not meet your needs? What do you need that wasn't met by that section?

if you really read my post, you would have gotten the point I was making.. there are no accommodations for the visually impaired.. I didn't complain about sitting with the hearing impaired, I complained there was no visually impaired seating. What is my problem with parades, nothing during the day if you read my post, I can sit anywhere.. but when night falls it is a different story.. sit on the curb.. I have a problem seeing the curb at night, never mind trying to sit on it when there are massive crowds of rude people. My vision drops drastically at night. Try putting a a black stocking over your head then putting on sunglasses and walking into a dark room filled with people. That is me. You cannot see who is around you. You cannot see if your family or friends are still next to you or did some rude guest separate you (which has happened to me). Then when the fireworks/parade is over, all the pushing and shoving, I get pushed off the curb. I need to hold onto someone. I hope this clears it up a bit for you. I don't expect many to understand because vision is something that one cannot understand unless it is happening to them or a loved one and they are witnessing what their loved one is going through.

If I can flip this without sounding too petty, why should a person with a sprained ankle (clearly not a real disability) renting a wheelchair have more rights than I do? They don't get questioned but I do and I am told to deal with it in so many words... Disney's solution would be for me to rent a wheelchair.. and no, that is not what I need. This lawsuit is the best thing that could have happened for people like me. My eyes will only get worse, they will never get better. It is not a temporary thing. I will eventually over time get full blown Macular Degeneration. I will become legally blind first and if there are no cures for it by then, I will become blind. I am only 55 years old. My mother had it and was almost totally blind by the time she died (78 years old). She found out about hers at the age of 54. I found out about mine at the age of 50. My uncle (her brother) has it too..

so.. did I answer your questions to help you understand my point of view..

 

[A Mickeyfan]

Which spots are high-visibility? Isn't front row pretty much anywhere on the parade routes similar? I guess I'm not understanding how somebody who has a child too short to see over people has more options for viewing locations than somebody with impared vision. These families don't have other options either. They either get there early to stake out a spot or they don't watch (we're in the don't watch group because my autistic daughter can't cope with the wait; it is what it is). I'm honestly not trying to arguementative. I just don't understand how the accessible are offers better visibility than spots say along main street or liberty square.

I too have been in this group for the longest time.. because it isn't even just a matter of sitting and waiting.. it is what goes on once the crowds start coming, pushing and shoving (and as I explained, getting separated from family or friends) In fact, when I go to Disney alone, I cannot even stay for night fall, I have to leave before it gets dark.. I cannot drive in the dark..

 

[A Mickeyfan]

I'm just a tiny bit shocked that we're debating the need for accommodations for any group of disabled guests. This is a win for everyone.

I am too, but that just proves what I have said all along.. visual impairments are not taken seriously by many.. not by Disney and not by others on this board.. I don't want to get in trouble for anything but I know the comments that were said to me about the HM... They don't get it because they can see.. I really think in order for anyone to completely understand this, they have to have a loved one or be dealing with it themselves... because to most, visually impaired means blind..and what is the big deal, you can't see anyway.. that is their mindset.. so why should there be accommodations... they do not understand it at all...

 

[A Mickeyfan]

Thank you! This is the kind of thing I was asking about. I can see how in your situation with your son, it could be dangerous to sit on the curb with him. The potential for being separated and him not finding you is a real risk. That being said, you are very well spoken and I'm just not imagining you walking up to a CM demanding to be seated in a specific area. I would imagine you would explain that the purpose of your GAC is so that you can be protected from this kind of jockying and being separated due to his inability to find you if you have people squeeze between you with his particular type of vision difficulty. That doesn't mean that EVERY person who has a GAC indicating vision issues needs this. Clearly you can explain your needed accomodation to CMs and should be helped by them. If they refuse then that's horrible. I'm not even trying to say that your situation is the only one that would require an accomodation for parades because obviously there are other situations as well, many I'm sure that I can't think of myself. I'm just saying that some people are coming across as though a blanket disability of vision impairment should automatically mean seating in the accessible area. As the mother of an autistic child, I know that people with the same diagnosis could very easily have very different needs and I DO expect to have to explain my family's need.

Maybe I did misinterpret that person's situation at CP. I think I've read that particular posted making demands in the past that make me shake my head. I could be reading more into the situation than was intended. I HAD read it as though the person was upset that they weren't given an area specifically for vision impairment. If that's not the intention then I appologize for taking up time in this thread for this part of my questions.



OMG, with a service dog I can't imagine sitting by the curb. That would I imagine be very dangerous for the dog.

I do think it's wrong when you're told that the accomodation is black and white you have to sit in a specific area when we all know that the same diagnosis will potentially mean different accomodation requirements for different people. I'm sorry to hear that you have to deal with this. Hopefully this is some of what will be addressed with the changes that will hopefully come about as a result of this lawsuit. You should be able to state what difficulty you have and be accomodated rather than being told "you have to sit in area xyz because that's what we have for all blanket disabilities". That's just wrong.

I do want to mention that issues with balance and needing to not be in crowded areas in order to avoid being bumped should be discussed with Guest Relations. This could potentially require a different accomodation than one needed for visual impairment. From the CMs' perspectives, if they see a GAC indicating visual impairment, they're typically going to thing that the only thing you need help with (whether this is right or wrong) is being close up to shows/screen and that you might need to avoid hazzards. I do see how a person with extremely limitted vision could easily be thrown off balance when bumped but I don't know if CMs will consider this when looking at accomodating vision impairment. I guess you know from your own experience if whatever accomodation you're given for the service dog or if whatever accomodation you're given for your vision issues is enough or not. Just something to think about though.

ETA: I hope I'm not the person who asked what difference it makes if you can't see. I totally get that you want to experience WDW with your family and that you can still enjoy all the other sensory inputs. If I did ask (I can't remember or maybe something I said was misinterpretted) then I'm sorry.

yes, you have read about me making requesting (demanding as you put it) that the Haunted Mansion follow proper guidelines for the visually impaired. Until you have walked in my shoes, please don't put me down for requesting what I need and what my GAC states. I would not do that to you. If you would like a medical history on me.. just ask..

1. mild drusen (start of macular degeneration, must see the Opthamologist 3-4 times a year to check on me)
2. swollen optic nerve ( see a Neuro-Opthamologist for this as the regular one doesn't deal with this condition).
3. loss of peripheral vision in both eyes (have a field visual test 3 times a year to check on loss)
4. loss of night vision (have already had double cataract surgery by the age of 50 & seondary by 52).
5. Arthritis in my right hip & go for cortisone shots (which makes it hard to sit on the curb if you really insist on knowing and you would not want me to stand in front of your child would you? I am considerate and if I see a good spot to camp out at, I don't want to take it from a child due to the need to stand )
6. Arthritis in both hands and entire right arm from wrist up to the shoulder (have had surgeries in both arms) and take meds 3 times a day for this)
7. suffer from Vertigo and Migraines
8. Hypoglycemic (which I must be tested every 3 months to see if it has progressed to diabetes yet, as they feel my sugar has been high the last few testings at the 6 month intervels. My father passed away from diabetes)
9. Asthma (on 2 inhalers)

so complete run down of me.. do I have to sit/stand on a curb in the dark (where I will possibly get bumped away from my party) because I refuse to pay Disney to rent a wheelchair.. I am mobile and can walk. and this is really an explaination that should not be needed as the this was addressed in the lawsuit.. it isn't just me

I understand you are bitter, and I am sorry your daughter cannot enjoy the parades and everything a child should. I am not just demanding these things for "me", I am doing so for others. There are many out there like me. If voices aren't heard, nothing ever gets done. Sure, I am an adult, but there are children who have these vision problems. My cousin was born legally blind.. I am sorry you cannot see my posts for what they are, they aren't selfish for me. If Disney cannot get their act together for the visually impaired they will have many other lawsuits on their hands. Like I said in another post a broken foot, a sprained ankle.. they are not protected under the ADA guidelines yet they get that treatment at Disney. There are some visual impairments that do fall under ADA guidelines (such as Macular Degeneration or any that cannot be corrected by surgery or lenses and will progress), yet Disney does nothing for these people (adults or children. This is the point I am trying to make here.. but it is not coming across.. This is tuning into an a major discussion of who has the "worst" complaint That is not what this is suppose to be about.. it is about supporting each other.. not doubting each other.. Visual impairments are real.. they exist and there are many different aspects to them.. and Disney doesn't seem to help those who are in need of help. You go out to eat there, you can read a menu can't you? Sometimes I can't and I have no one to read it to me.. is this right?

 

[A Mickeyfan]

For those of you who feel it may be "wrong" of us visually impaired to ask for parade viewing, please remember, this was in the lawsuit and it must now be provided.... so this isn't just something that I am asking for.. take a look at the lawsuit.. it was granted too.. that is why I am happy.. and yes, Disney did not allow those with visual impairments to go into the disAbled viewing areas.. now they must.... regardless how some feel about it.. it is going to be ADA guidelines...... it isn't just me..."demanding" it...

 

[A Mickeyfan]

well, the more we talk it over, it sure does seem strange to me as well.

The whole "companion ticket" had me totally scratching my head.

I am on the fence with thisl. I understand that on one hand, why should Disney have to offer a free admission for a companion (but then other places do give companion tickets). However, on the flip side, I am not walking in that persons shoes. I don't know what it would be like being totally blind and having to need someone with me while in the theme parks... and then having to pay for them on top of it. This isn't like just an adult child situation, this can be adult adult situations and without that other adult with you, you just will not be able to do particular things.. such as go to a theme park period. It isn't as if you just cannot do certain attractions, it is not being able to go at all, there is a big difference in that situation.

So until I walk in their shoes, I don't think of this as totally strange. It is hard enough for me with limited vision to walk there at night in the crowds, I cannot do that alone. I cannot imagine trying to get around alone without any sight ... that would be nearly impossible with the strollers, ECV's, wheelchairs and then not to mention the children darting out in front of you (I am not implying stroller & ECV/wheelchair users dart in front of you, only children.. I want to make this clear for some who read into things differently). A cane alone just won't cut it, and having a service dog is just as bad in the massive crowds as we have seen from posters here. Many guests aren't watching out for you, they are expecting you to watch for them.. and they aren't alert to the fact that you may be blind.. as they aren't alert to the fact some have limited vision... So while we sighted (even limited vision) persons may think of something as strange or odd, I don't think I can until I have walked in their shoes. I know with my mother, there were many places she could not go alone and that was with a small portion of sight left.

 

[SueM in MN]

I am on the fence with thisl. I understand that on one hand, why should Disney have to offer a free admission for a companion (but then other places do give companion tickets). However, on the flip side, I am not walking in that persons shoes. I don't know what it would be like being totally blind and having to need someone with me while in the theme parks... and then having to pay for them on top of it. This isn't like just an adult child situation, this can be adult adult situations and without that other adult with you, you just will not be able to do particular things.. such as go to a theme park period. It isn't as if you just cannot do certain attractions, it is not being able to go at all, there is a big difference in that situation.

So until I walk in their shoes, I don't think of this as totally strange. It is hard enough for me with limited vision to walk there at night in the crowds, I cannot do that alone. I cannot imagine trying to get around alone without any sight ... that would be nearly impossible with the strollers, ECV's, wheelchairs and then children darting out in front of you. A cane alone just won't cut it, and having a service dog is just as bad in the massive crowds as we have seen from posters here. Many guests aren't watching out for you, they are expecting you to watch for them.. and they aren't alert to the fact that you may be blind.. as they aren't alert to the fact some have limited vision... So while we sighted (even limited vision) persons may think of something as strange or odd, I don't think I can until I have walked in their shoes. I know with my mother, there were many places she could not go alone and that was with a small portion of sight left.

The big thing with the companion tickets was that the people bringing the suit claimed it was a violation of the ADA to not allow the companion to enter for free.
It is not.
Some businesses choose to offer it, but it is not required. And, some of the places that offer it, offer because a large number of their attractions are not accessible to people with certain disabilities.

There are many situations where a person with a disability requires a companion.
For example, some people may need an assistant to help with transfers. Some need help with a wheelchair pushed because they can’t push it themselves. Some need a person with them because they are not able to be responsible for themselves. Some need to have total care of another person because they need to be fed, taken to the toilet/diapers changed, etc.

It would be a big expense to a business to be forced to provide a “Companion Discount” for anyone who needed assistance in the park. As a parent of a child who needs total assistance, I don’t think it would be fair to push that kind of cost onto Disney.
Will my youngest DD ever be able to travel to WDW without a companion? No.
But, I don’t think that is a reason to force Disney to pay for a companion.

 

[A Mickeyfan]

The big thing with the companion tickets was that the people bringing the suit claimed it was a violation of the ADA to not allow the companion to enter for free.
It is not.
Some businesses choose to offer it, but it is not required. And, some of the places that offer it, offer because a large number of their attractions are not accessible to people with certain disabilities.

There are many situations where a person with a disability requires a companion.
For example, some people may need an assistant to help with transfers. Some need help with a wheelchair pushed because they can’t push it themselves. Some need a person with them because they are not able to be responsible for themselves. Some need to have total care of another person because they need to be fed, taken to the toilet/diapers changed, etc.

It would be a big expense to a business to be forced to provide a “Companion Discount” for anyone who needed assistance in the park. As a parent of a child who needs total assistance, I don’t think it would be fair to push that kind of cost onto Disney.
Will my youngest DD ever be able to travel to WDW without a companion? No.
But, I don’t think that is a reason to force Disney to pay for a companion.

I understand what you are saying, which is why I said I am on the fence with it. I cannot go either way with it because I am not in their shoes.. this is a real hard call.

I will say that in the ADA guidelines there were many things stated that Disney did not follow. I know for a fact I mentioned reading the menu's, and turning up the lighting. If they cannot turn up the lighting for those with the low vision, they are to provide assistance. Yet when I commented on that here, people seemed to have thought I was wrong. So maybe some are really not understanding what exactly they were to provide ... if they cannot provide it themselves, they must have an alternative.. and that alternative would be a free companion pass and the same would go for any other who do need that "true" companion, not just someone like me at night, but someone like your daughter.

People tend to read into posts here, but should be reading into the ADA guidelines... carefully.. there's wording in there that is allowing companies to not follow the guidelines because the individual is not aware..... I cannot speak for any other ADA guideline (at least not yet, but just may be real soon with my DH and his neck/back he may be pulled out of work permanently and placed on Social Security Disability ), but I have read the one for vision many many times.. my mother was the person caught with the no social security disability, but got her tax deductions due to her disability, she had her handicapped tag (even though she was not allowed to drive, we had to drive her) she got her real estate tax deductions, got all her vision benefits such as her special sunglasses where absolutely no light gets in and health insurance had to cover it.. I have learned from what she went through both legally and medically on what is to be expected from me if there are no cures found for Macular Degeneration. ... and if no cure is found.. my eyes are ahead of hers as far as time frame goes.... My biggest fear is loosing my independence.. I have already lost my night driving...hard to deal with at the age of only 55

 

[clanmcculloch]

Wow, you've totally misunderstood me if you think I'm bitter. I've said many, many, many times on this board and I've even said it in this thread that I'm grateful for the accomodations that ARE in place at WDW and that I totally understand that there aren't accomodations for everything. My frustration comes with hearing people hold a company like WDW who goes so much farther than most other companies I've encountered to so much higher of a standard than other companies and then still say it's not enough.

I wasn't putting you down for requesting accomodations. I do get frustrated with your tone though. In so many of your posts, you come across as very agressive and even derrogatory (not necessarily all of your posts, but there have been many). I can't help but wonder if you speak this way to CMs as well. You know the old saying about more flies with honey. The way you describe some of your situations is VERY demanding and hostile. Not being there obviously I can't say if you were different in the actual situations and you're just expressing your frustration here or if you were just as hostile towards the CMs you were encountering. Just something to think about. Maybe a different approach in general would be helpful.

All the issues you've listed that you encounter at parades are issues that I have with my daughter. I know I said we don't sit through parades because of the wait but there's a lot more to it than that. The close proximity to so many people is just not something she can cope with, especially not for prolonged periods of time. It's just her reality. If I plan strategically, I can actually get her a viewing spot that works and we have done that a few times in all of our trips. I just don't see why I should ask for an accomodation for something that I can do myself just like anybody else. Since I can do it, I try to remain respectful of those who have no other options and not take one of their limited spots. You said yourself that you can see the parades just fine during the day. This is just like my daughter being able to cope if I plan correctly and choose a parade time that's not as busy and choose a viewing area that's not as crouded (touring plan services really do help figure this kind of thing out). Yes, we're more limited than the majority of guests, but that's the fault of her disability, not Disney. That accessible viewing area actually is very crowded and will not prevent us from being bumped or crowded into a small space. Oh, and typically they won't allow a large group like you described sit in the accessible viewing area. If you do choose to sit in there and you're travelling with a group, be prepared to be separated from them. That's something that folks with mobility devices who sit in that area have to deal with right now so that will now be your difficulty as well. It's very unfortunate but the seating is limitted and it's the only way to ensure as many people as possible who need the accessible viewing area can use it.

In restaurants, I'm surprised that you've had trouble getting servers to read to you. They work for tips. When I worked in restaurants, I would have gladly read for a guest if asked. Personally, I'd always have a small flashlight to brighten my menu if I couldn't see in dark places but I also wouldn't be shy about asking for my server to read to me. If the server refused I'd ask to be moved to the station of a server who wants to work for their tip. That's what people who work in the service industry who rely on tips are supposed to do, provide service. What a poor server if they refuse.

I don't understand your reasoning for getting upset with people with other disabilities or difficulties that are accomodated. I get that you feel that you're not recieving acceptable accomodations and I'm not you and don't know what you go through. I do see you rant against others though as though you feel if you aren't getting what you need then nobody should. I'm really sorry that you feel this way and are this upset. Others receiving accomodations does not take away from your situation. If others were to lose accomodations that would not help you. You're directing your frustration to the wrong place. Those with other disabilities, whether temporary or permanent, whether fully legally recognized as disabled or merely having some problem that requires help, are not the problem.

I'm curious about something. In hotels around the country, does somebody give you a run down of locations in your room? I honestly can see how this could be immensely beneficial. I'm wondering if it's something that other companies do. Is this something that would really be required under the ADA? Again, I see how it would be really a great thing to do but I'm not sure I see how not doing it would be an ADA violation. The reason I'm asking if this is something that other hotels do is the I believe one of the things in the lawsuit was a requirement that WDW do this (maybe I remember wrong; I don't feel like going back and checking right now).

 

[Talking Hands]

Nothing is wrong with it.. my comment was made to show that there are sections for wheelchairs and hearing impairments but not vision impairments. After having to so say to the CM "well this is a theater isn't it?" and then pointing to my stamp and telling him it clearly states I should get front row access. I was there early enough too. They started seating from the back sections and why they did that was beyond me. He was a bit annoyed he looked around and said follow me. He took me down to the section for the hearing impaired. I actually enjoyed watching the signing. You above all people should have understood my post.. Disney doesn't have accommodations for the visually impaired.. they have more for the totally blind than the impaired. They have really nothing for us. When there is dim lighting and you cannot read a menu, they don't read it to us, and Braille won't help us because we don't read Braille .. Disney doesn't turn up the lighting to help us they don't accommodate us. The seating for the parades/fireworks, where do they put us.. nowhere. We aren't to go where the wheelchairs go.. we are to be in a massive crowd of people in the dark. we cannot see the people (or make out their faces) of who we are with, we cannot see the curbing on the ground, these are all hazards to us. Disney does nothing for us. No offense to anyone, but you can have someone with a broken foot and their family of 10 in the wheelchair section, but those with low vision are left to fend for themselves.. that is the point I was trying to make with my post.. Disney doesn't have anything for us.

Actually when I was at Candlelight last year the CM in that section actually called it the area for the blind and hearing impaired and actually assumed my card was for vision as my speech is very good being late deafened. Actually I have problem with both especially at night. I have night blindness and can no longer drive at night. Fortunately not a problem as my husband does the driving for me most of the time. Btw I was there early and they kept trying to push me to the center to make room for others. I just refused because I am not about to have to keep twisting to see the interpreter plus we had my grandson who was 18 months and we figured we might need a quick exit. We did and hubby removed him quickly.