Disney is facing allegations of discrimination, with a lawsuit charging that modifications to the company’s policy for accommodating people with disabilities at its theme parks violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The lawsuit filed last week by mothers of 16 kids and young adults with developmental disabilities from across the nation accuses Walt Disney Parks and Resorts of failing to accommodate their children’s special needs and of actively dissuading their presence at the company’s theme parks.
The move comes after Disney made sweeping changes to its policy for accommodating park visitors with disabilities last fall. For years, Disney had offered individuals with special needs a pass that often allowed them and their guests to skip to the front of long lines for park attractions.
Now, however, visitors to Walt Disney World and Disneyland can obtain a Disability Access Service Card which allows them to schedule a return time for rides based on current wait times. The system prevents those with disabilities from having to wait in line, but only allows visitors to schedule one attraction at a time.
Disney said the changes — which took effect in October — came after its existing system was “abused and exploited.” In their suit, however, the families allege that there was no abuse, but rather that the company wished to “cleanse its parks of what Disney views as the anti-Magic of such persons’ stimming, tics and meltdowns.”
The 180-page complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California details long waits and unhelpful interactions with employees at Disney parks. Moreover, the suit alleges that Disney won’t discuss accommodations with families until they have invested significant sums of money to arrive at a park.
In the suit, a mother known as M.B. alleges that she waited in line for an hour and a half to receive a Disability Access Card for her 6-year-old with autism who is referred to in court documents as A.B. Even though she offered park officials medical documentation about her child’s inability to tolerate waits, the mother says she was given no choice but to schedule a return time at “It’s a Small World” which A.B. wanted to ride repeatedly. After riding twice, A.B. faced another hour-and-fifteen-minute wait and entered a “full-fledged meltdown,” the lawsuit alleges.
In a separate case, the suit indicates that a mother known as L.C. tried to take her 7-year-old with autism, referred to as J.C., to Disney World several times since the new policy took effect. L.C. said her child has had multiple meltdowns after learning of wait times to ride “Peter Pan” and “Winnie the Pooh,” with J.C. falling to the ground or jumping up and down with arms spinning around. As a result, L.C. is no longer taking her child to Disney parks and does not plan to renew the family’s annual passes.
“Until recently, parents of developmentally disabled children universally adored Disney, because of the way Disney caringly accommodated their children,” said attorney Andy Dogali who is representing the families. “No reasonable mind could ever conclude, after investigating these facts and spending extensive time with these families, anything other than Disney willingly abandoned them.”
The lawsuit also alleges that Disney has a secret offering known as the “Magic List” whereby the company extends to select individuals five passes to gain immediate access to rides without even obtaining a Disability Access Card.
The families are seeking damages and are looking to compel Disney to alter its policies and practices.
In a statement to Disability Scoop, Walt Disney Parks and Resorts stood by their existing policies.
“Disney Parks have an unwavering commitment to providing an inclusive and accessible environment for all our guests. We fully comply with all ADA requirements and believe that the legal claims are without merit,” the company said.
From what I read here I believe they have accommodated these families in a reasonable fashion. The standard is to give an equal experience to all; what they are asking for is a better experience than others.
Yeah its weird, On one hand, You have kids with Autism who dont understand that there are things like waiting. but on the other hand, people abused this to all hell. And eventually the Kids with Autism will have to understand that waits exist.
How many of us saw this coming like, a year ago, when that woman who had her kids pretend to be disabled so she could cut in line got caught being a terrible person. That's why we can't have nice things.
Life; Something terrible people ruin for the rest of us.
I'm with Disney on this. Their new system is perfectly accommodating and is a step up from the previous system which was discriminatory to non-disabled people.
I have the utmost sympathy for the parents of children with autism, and I would normally say that, well, going above and beyond wouldn't really be an undue hardship on such a large company; to give the better experience. I've read quite a bit about the scamming that forced them to change it, so at this point I think, now that a proven and clear business reason exists, the previous system was no longer a reasonable accommodation, and that giving them a set return time, while a lessened experience than previously, is now the reasonable choice in view of the no-longer-feasible alternative options. It's not any accommodation, it's a reasonable one, and that can be a moving target when the situation changes.
I agree with ouze, these families are trying to sue a company for not giving them special treatment instead of fair treatment simply because one of the family members suffer from a disability. Just because your child can't tolerate waiting doesn't mean you can do whatever they want whenever they want.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Yeah its weird, On one hand, You have kids with Autism who dont understand that there are things like waiting. but on the other hand, people abused this to all hell. And eventually the Kids with Autism will have to understand that waits exist.
No, it is up to the parent to schedule when to ride each attraction, which is similar to how the FastPass system works now.
Ouze is spot on with his view; Disney is offering equal accommodations and the plaintiffs are asking for more. There is still the FastPass system and if anyone really wants to skip to the front of the line, that service is available to all patrons through the Disney private guides... if the guest is willing to pay for it.
You dont. Last time I went, you put your ticket in, told to come back at a certain time, usually an hour to an hour and a half and you get hussled to the front. Unless they changed it
I am a former Disney ride operator and people did abuse the old system. The system is not meant to get you a free pass onto the ride without wait, it is meant to accommodate people who can not wait in a crowded area. The fact that these people are upset that they are being made to wait just shows how they wished to abuse the system.
Under the old system, families would often give their able children the pass while they took the disabled children on rides like Winnie the Pooh which never has more than a 5 minute wait. Or people without disabilities lie to receive a card to get in the front of the line. I have also had people showing me passes that are days or months old because they got it from a friend. Offering a return time means people who can not stay in lines will get to avoid the lines and less people will claim to be disabled to try and abuse the system. There is also plenty to do in the park while waiting for your return time so it is still better than having to wait in line. And if your child is really that bad maybe a theme park isn't the best place to take them.
To be honest I don't think this has anything to do with people who have mental disabilities but is a reaction to the people who rent wheelchairs and scooters. Anyone can rent them no questions asked and as many of the older rides in disneyland are not wheelchair accessible this meant that people were often sent to the front of the line to get on. However the wheelchair access is not always faster, Pirates of the Caribbean for example is 20 minutes long and can only have 6 wheel chair guests on at a time because of fire codes. The line for Pirates is usually under 30 minutes but the wheel chair line can take up to an hour and a half. And it is really sad to see people with disney bought wheelchairs taking space up in the line while an actually disabled person has to wait three times as long as they normally would have.
Ouze is spot on with his view; Disney is offering equal accommodations and the plaintiffs are asking for more. There is still the FastPass system and if anyone really wants to skip to the front of the line, that service is available to all patrons through the Disney private guides... if the guest is willing to pay for it.
Private guides do not automatically skip you to the front of the line. You need to file a case and if it is approved you get a pass that lets you skip to the front of the line. Normally this is only reserved for celebrates. A normal guide does offer fast pass services though which is like getting to skip to the front for many rides.
After the scams they went through of some people abusing the system, it's no surprise they're changing things. This is an example of douchebags ruining it for everyone else. Disney isn't to blame.
Just shows people willing to take advantage regardless on how far it makes it for everyone. Next thing you know height requirement are discriminatory against "short" people. IE Tyrion Lannister.....
Legally, this is a really tough law suit. ADA claims require a jury finding that the requested accomodation was reasonable, which I think what the families are asking for goes beyond. As has been stated, they're asking for a return to the old system, which was a huge perk.
Realistically, suits like this are meant to shame corporations. The goal isn't to win, as much as it is to get Disney to settle to avoid news stories about how they hate disabled children. I don't think now is the time. People's sympathy for the disabled and the... "disabled" is at a bit of low point these days.
And having watched people that are obviously healthy walk up and take a spot on a ride you've been waiting 1-2 hours for is something I'd say most park goers have experienced at one time or another. Which only lowers my sympathy for the people involved in this suit. The new system is fair. If you child isn't healthy enough be able to function under it at the new park then sorry, maybe it isn't the place for him/her.
Both sides are correct from what I can see. Disney is at an inability to cope with kids with autism. And from what I know, trips like those are a godsend to those families. Its something that I do feel sorry for with the families.
Yes, disney did away with the system to stop scammers. But the problem with that is why they were "scamming" in the first place. Low income, disability carers.
Sucks to be a disabled kids carer in the states. Especially a single mother.
Yeah, I'm ok with their new policy. Just look at what constitutes "developmentally disabled" these days. According to the CDC, 1 in 6 children in the US have one or more DDs. This includes ADD/ADHD. Sure the story mentions a specific family with a child with Autism but I wonder how many of the plaintiffs include kids who do not actually "need" special services.
This is the society that we live in; one where we create good will and services for special needs and then also create an environment where these things are easily abused due to over-reaching legislation.
Doctadeth wrote: At the same time looking at those people with special needs children who actually need special provision.
While I'm sure a small percentage of cases slip through the cracks, in my experience there are far more children with IEPs, SSI, or other services that don't need them, then those that need them but don't have them.
Disney is completely in the right. In an ideal world they could have maintained the old system but too many scumbags abused it. It takes a particularly wretched kind of individual to pretend to be disabled to gain the "benefit" of not having to wait in a queue.
I hope this goes in Disney's favour.
I wonder if a pre-application for a special type of disabled friendly tickets could be achieved by requiring medical proof of disability. It would be easy for those with genuine disability to apply, but perhaps harder for anybody else that wanted to fraud the system. In saying that it would require a fair amount of man hours and would probably be equally abused and open to more legal issues.
Ouze wrote: I have the utmost sympathy for the parents of children with autism, and I would normally say that, well, going above and beyond wouldn't really be an undue hardship on such a large company; to give the better experience. I've read quite a bit about the scamming that forced them to change it, so at this point I think, now that a proven and clear business reason exists, the previous system was no longer a reasonable accommodation, and that giving them a set return time, while a lessened experience than previously, is now the reasonable choice in view of the no-longer-feasible alternative options. It's not any accommodation, it's a reasonable one, and that can be a moving target when the situation changes.
Totally agree Ouze.
I saw first hand how this was abused 2 years ago when I took my boys (a fething blast, I wanna go back ). Every. Single. Group. That. Skipped. The. Line. In. EVERY. RIDE... Looked like normal kids. They may have valid disabilities... but that disablity doesn't make it "harder" to wait in line like everyone else.
I've been around disable kids all my life (spent most of my elementry education at Special School District) and there's a very small slice of that population who would need help like that (mainly due to physical disabilities).
This phenomena needs a philosopical rather than a legislative solution.
Things will go a lot better if it becomes more clearly understood that you can legislate against discrimination, but you cannot legislate away disability.
As a philosophical point we can explore it further, does a bed ridden paraplegic have the right to be accommodated for every facility at Disney, or anywhere else. Obviously not, you cant expect Disney to make every ride accessible from a mobile bed, Mary Poppins notwithstanding.
Once we have established you cannot cater for absolutely everyone then you have to set realistic thresholds as to what can be achieved. If rides require waiting and some disabilities make waiting intolerable then it may have an unresolvable impasse. Queue removal creates a privilege situation which is inconsistent with equality legislation.
Service providers must have a point at which they can set thresholds for disability inclusion which some unfortunates will remain beyond.
After all if the US government, which has a duty to do more than anyone else to provide access for the disabled; are still after all these years are yet to build even a single wheelchair accessible air-superiority fighter, then why cannot a private company determine a threshold at which it is no longer practical to provide disability support.
Ouze wrote: I have the utmost sympathy for the parents of children with autism, and I would normally say that, well, going above and beyond wouldn't really be an undue hardship on such a large company; to give the better experience. I've read quite a bit about the scamming that forced them to change it, so at this point I think, now that a proven and clear business reason exists, the previous system was no longer a reasonable accommodation, and that giving them a set return time, while a lessened experience than previously, is now the reasonable choice in view of the no-longer-feasible alternative options. It's not any accommodation, it's a reasonable one, and that can be a moving target when the situation changes.
Totally agree Ouze.
I saw first hand how this was abused 2 years ago when I took my boys (a fething blast, I wanna go back ). Every. Single. Group. That. Skipped. The. Line. In. EVERY. RIDE... Looked like normal kids. They may have valid disabilities... but that disability doesn't make it "harder" to wait in line like everyone else.
I've been around disable kids all my life (spent most of my elementary education at Special School District) and there's a very small slice of that population who would need help like that (mainly due to physical disabilities).
Y'know, its funny, in "California Adventure" ever queue has lines wide enough for a wheelchair. This way, they dont have to use those passes, I never saw anyone skip there, but I did seem complaining "Why cant we skip"
It's all about reasonable accommodations. Letting 1 in 6 people skip lines completely is just creating an environment of abuse. I know everyone has to be a special snow-flake but I would just be POd watching a long conga line of people float by when I paid the same price of admission.
Hulksmash wrote: And having watched people that are obviously healthy walk up and take a spot on a ride you've been waiting 1-2 hours for is something I'd say most park goers have experienced at one time or another. Which only lowers my sympathy for the people involved in this suit. The new system is fair. If you child isn't healthy enough be able to function under it at the new park then sorry, maybe it isn't the place for him/her.
This kind of crap annoys the stuffing out of me. How do you know someone is "obviously healthy"? Oh that's right, I forgot, only people in wheelchairs or with obvious deformities are really disabled, the rest are "disabled" as Polonius put it. And yeah, damnit, why can't these crips and nuttos just know their place and stay away from places where normal people go? I mean christ, these autistic types coming along to a theme park and expecting to be treated in a way that mildly inconveniences people so they can have an experience that would otherwise be denied to them, how bloody inconsiderate can you get!
As for the system being "abused", lets see some proof. Not anecdotal nonsense about how that one time, at band camp, you saw a person that could walk normally and didn't have a massive public breakdown within the ten seconds they were within your line of sight skip a queue; evidence. You know what I'll bet? I'll bet that when you look at the statistics, you'll find exactly the same thing you find when you look at social security for the sick and disabled - fraud is a tiny fraction, often costing the system less than is lost through basic paperwork errors, and that the perception people have that the system is groaning under the unbearable weight of chancers, schemers, liars, and cheats all gaming it is a crock, based on the ignorance and biases of the perceiver.
Hulksmash wrote: And having watched people that are obviously healthy walk up and take a spot on a ride you've been waiting 1-2 hours for is something I'd say most park goers have experienced at one time or another. Which only lowers my sympathy for the people involved in this suit. The new system is fair. If you child isn't healthy enough be able to function under it at the new park then sorry, maybe it isn't the place for him/her.
This kind of crap annoys the stuffing out of me. How do you know someone is "obviously healthy"? Oh that's right, I forgot, only people in wheelchairs or with obvious deformities are really disabled, the rest are "disabled" as Polonius put it. And yeah, damnit, why can't these crips and nuttos just know their place and stay away from places where normal people go? I mean christ, these autistic types coming along to a theme park and expecting to be treated in a way that mildly inconveniences people so they can have an experience that would otherwise be denied to them, how bloody inconsiderate can you get!
As for the system being "abused", lets see some proof. Not anecdotal nonsense about how that one time, at band camp, you saw a person that could walk normally and didn't have a massive public breakdown within the ten seconds they were within your line of sight skip a queue; evidence. You know what I'll bet? I'll bet that when you look at the statistics, you'll find exactly the same thing you find when you look at social security for the sick and disabled - fraud is a tiny fraction, often costing the system less than is lost through basic paperwork errors, and that the perception people have that the system is groaning under the unbearable weight of chancers, schemers, liars, and cheats all gaming it is a crock, based on the ignorance and biases of the perceiver.
Unaccompanied minors is a start for an indication there isn't anything seriously wrong with them...Just saying before you get all high and mighty. Also, having spent a significant amount of time with high functioning disabled people it's not hard to spot the difference.
As for numbers do you think Disneyland (one of the most wired places on earth) didn't have those numbers before making the changes it did. It doesn't cost them anything to have people cutting. In fact, the change might cost them money at the expense of real fairness.
hotsauceman1 wrote: And eventually the Kids with Autism will have to understand that waits exist.
Sounds like you have limited experience with individuals with Autism, and certainly don't have any in your immediate family...
WRONG!!!!!
My nephew does, he has it. He hates waiting, but when we went to DL, he learned he had to. Are we going to start accomadating for people who ca tolerate waiting? Is there going to soon be a special checkout counter? Special Lane to Avoid traffic? Waiting is unavoidable, they will have to learn it is part of life. I find it funny people saying "I can only get on 4-5 rides a day" Um hello lady, its the same for normal people too.
Hulksmash wrote: And having watched people that are obviously healthy walk up and take a spot on a ride you've been waiting 1-2 hours for is something I'd say most park goers have experienced at one time or another. Which only lowers my sympathy for the people involved in this suit. The new system is fair. If you child isn't healthy enough be able to function under it at the new park then sorry, maybe it isn't the place for him/her.
This kind of crap annoys the stuffing out of me. How do you know someone is "obviously healthy"? Oh that's right, I forgot, only people in wheelchairs or with obvious deformities are really disabled, the rest are "disabled" as Polonius put it. And yeah, damnit, why can't these crips and nuttos just know their place and stay away from places where normal people go? I mean christ, these autistic types coming along to a theme park and expecting to be treated in a way that mildly inconveniences people so they can have an experience that would otherwise be denied to them, how bloody inconsiderate can you get!
As for the system being "abused", lets see some proof. Not anecdotal nonsense about how that one time, at band camp, you saw a person that could walk normally and didn't have a massive public breakdown within the ten seconds they were within your line of sight skip a queue; evidence. You know what I'll bet? I'll bet that when you look at the statistics, you'll find exactly the same thing you find when you look at social security for the sick and disabled - fraud is a tiny fraction, often costing the system less than is lost through basic paperwork errors, and that the perception people have that the system is groaning under the unbearable weight of chancers, schemers, liars, and cheats all gaming it is a crock, based on the ignorance and biases of the perceiver.
Unaccompanied minors is a start for an indication there isn't anything seriously wrong with them...Just saying before you get all high and mighty. Also, having spent a significant amount of time with high functioning disabled people it's not hard to spot the difference.
As for numbers do you think Disneyland (one of the most wired places on earth) didn't have those numbers before making the changes it did. It doesn't cost them anything to have people cutting. In fact, the change might cost them money at the expense of real fairness.
^this. The biggest indication is indeed unaccompanied minors.
Disney runs a very tight ship... they know their gak.
Hulksmash wrote: And having watched people that are obviously healthy walk up and take a spot on a ride you've been waiting 1-2 hours for is something I'd say most park goers have experienced at one time or another. Which only lowers my sympathy for the people involved in this suit. The new system is fair. If you child isn't healthy enough be able to function under it at the new park then sorry, maybe it isn't the place for him/her.
This kind of crap annoys the stuffing out of me. How do you know someone is "obviously healthy"? Oh that's right, I forgot, only people in wheelchairs or with obvious deformities are really disabled, the rest are "disabled" as Polonius put it. And yeah, damnit, why can't these crips and nuttos just know their place and stay away from places where normal people go? I mean christ, these autistic types coming along to a theme park and expecting to be treated in a way that mildly inconveniences people so they can have an experience that would otherwise be denied to them, how bloody inconsiderate can you get!
You don't see the possibility of having people perpetually occupying seats without rotating out for a while being potentially damaging to the flow of already overbooked rides? I'm all for treating people as fairly as possible, but that includes the hundreds of people in line that now have even moreso increased wait periods.
Consider: Kid is autistic, will probably ride that things for hours if allowed. I'm about to pull numbers out of a hat. Bear with me. Suppose each ride is five minutes, and allows for 10 people to ride at a time. I don't know if those are realistic times, or realistic ride capacities. I don't do these kinds of places. Numbers aside, kid (and mom (and dad?)) ride the ride every possible instance for a lengthy period of time. There's a person who is 100th in line to ride. He would have been on in 50 minutes. Not great, but you expect these things, right? With the mom, dad, and kid, and assuming that there's only the mom and kid doing this on the ride, it now takes him 21 minutes extra to actually get to the ride. If you cut it down to just the mom and kid, it's about 12 and a half extra minutes. I'm not sure the number of people you have that would do this at disneyland (it's enough that they needed to change the policy, apparently), but if you had one of these situations on every ride, suddenly you have a 20-40% increase in wait times across the board, which means that your entertainment value for your tickets reduced by a very not mild amount of inconvenience.
Next time read what you critique rather than just get angsty while skipreading and end up completely missing the point.
No I got your point, but you were using ridiculous examples. Obviously there comes a point where it isn't feasible to include all people in these massive systems, but the examples you give aren't really relevant, appropriate or covered by legislation.
Orlanth wrote:This phenomena needs a philosopical rather than a legislative solution.
Things will go a lot better if it becomes more clearly understood that you can legislate against discrimination, but you cannot legislate away disability.
As a philosophical point we can explore it further, does a bed ridden paraplegic have the right to be accommodated for every facility at Disney, or anywhere else. Obviously not, you cant expect Disney to make every ride accessible from a mobile bed, Mary Poppins notwithstanding.
Once we have established you cannot cater for absolutely everyone then you have to set realistic thresholds as to what can be achieved. If rides require waiting and some disabilities make waiting intolerable then it may have an unresolvable impasse. Queue removal creates a privilege situation which is inconsistent with equality legislation.
Service providers must have a point at which they can set thresholds for disability inclusion which some unfortunates will remain beyond.
After all if the US government, which has a duty to do more than anyone else to provide access for the disabled; are still after all these years are yet to build even a single wheelchair accessible air-superiority fighter, then why cannot a private company determine a threshold at which it is no longer practical to provide disability support.
Sounds like you have limited experience with individuals with Autism, and certainly don't have any in your immediate family...
WRONG!!!!!
My nephew does, he has it. He hates waiting, but when we went to DL, he learned he had to. Are we going to start accomadating for people who ca tolerate waiting? Is there going to soon be a special checkout counter? Special Lane to Avoid traffic? Waiting is unavoidable, they will have to learn it is part of life. I find it funny people saying "I can only get on 4-5 rides a day" Um hello lady, its the same for normal people too.
Sounds like your nephew is pretty high functioning, actually. From what understand, a lot of autistic children completely fall apart for, like, no apparent reason. There's not really any sort of discipline or attempt at modifying behavior that can be done to make much of a difference.
An autistic child is certainly a hell I'd not wish on anyone.
hotsauceman1 wrote: And eventually the Kids with Autism will have to understand that waits exist.
Sounds like you have limited experience with individuals with Autism, and certainly don't have any in your immediate family...
WRONG!!!!!
My nephew does, he has it. He hates waiting, but when we went to DL, he learned he had to. Are we going to start accomadating for people who ca tolerate waiting? Is there going to soon be a special checkout counter? Special Lane to Avoid traffic? Waiting is unavoidable, they will have to learn it is part of life. I find it funny people saying "I can only get on 4-5 rides a day" Um hello lady, its the same for normal people too.
Your glib comments show a shockng lack of understanding then.
I can only hope your nephew doesn't spend a lot of time with you.
And given your attitude, I'd imagine that's the case.
This is going to be perceived by some as an insensitive comment but I'll make it anyway.
There has to be a reasonable expectation for others to enjoy their time out as well, not just those that suffer from disabilities. It's like the person in the back of the theater, holding a screaming baby. The baby can't control itself and I understand that those with severe autism aren't able to either but I won't take a young baby into a theater either. The reason being that my family's enjoyment should not deprive others of the same.
I'm not advocating locking those with such disabilities away and forgetting about them. All I'm saying is that when a system that was set in place to help those affected people starts to be abused, it's time to change the system. Disney seems to have done so in a reasonable manner and if people don't like the change, they can vote with their wallets and not go.
Sounds like your nephew is pretty high functioning, actually. From what understand, a lot of autistic children completely fall apart for, like, no apparent reason. There's not really any sort of discipline or attempt at modifying behavior that can be done to make much of a difference.
An autistic child is certainly a hell I'd not wish on anyone.
I'm going to have to step in for a moment here, but your position on autism and autistic children is not as complete as you might think it is. In fact, to just say "there's no modifying the behavior" is wrong on a whole lot of levels. It is very much what you'd call an elastic condition, in that there is a great deal of variance even in an individual depending on the treatment and therapy they get. To cite my own experience, I worked with autistic children for about 5/6 years (back when I was in high school and college) in a pretty simple program of regular swimming lessons. Was I involved in the medical side of things? Certainly not, I was there as a swimming instructor and found myself as something of a coach to the kids (which eventually became me working directly one on one) that I taught.
The thing of it is that the attention I gave over that course of time, even though it was for an hour or two a week at most, did have an impact on the children I worked with. When I got to working one on one with them, you'd have children who did occasionally break down as you said for no real reason, but after a long stretch of this work, that behavior eventually left. I went from having kids who needed to be walked out the door and monitored constantly to children who, while they still had serious medical issues, were considerably more independent and well-behaved. Am I saying I was the only reason for that? Of course not, after all, my kids were getting more treatment than just me, but I think it is telling that one child's father and doctor both found time to visit me personally to thank me for the help.
I'm not saying that this is some kind of cure for the behavior or autism, but the attitude of "oh there's nothing you can do about it" is largely myth. And a harmful myth at that, as it discourages people from helping.
Curran basically said what I was going to say. Autism is one of those afflictions that greatly depends on the care and learning given. Not that there aren't still hardships or it's a cure all but how it's treated is huge with autism.
Yodhrin wrote: Oh that's right, I forgot, only people in wheelchairs or with obvious deformities are really disabled, the rest are "disabled" as Polonius put it.
Plenty of people try to fake phsycial disabilities, and plenty of people have invisible but legitimate disabilities. Its often hard to tell without a pretty thorough review of the medical record...
As for the system being "abused", lets see some proof. Not anecdotal nonsense about how that one time, at band camp, you saw a person that could walk normally and didn't have a massive public breakdown within the ten seconds they were within your line of sight skip a queue; evidence. You know what I'll bet? I'll bet that when you look at the statistics, you'll find exactly the same thing you find when you look at social security for the sick and disabled - fraud is a tiny fraction, often costing the system less than is lost through basic paperwork errors, and that the perception people have that the system is groaning under the unbearable weight of chancers, schemers, liars, and cheats all gaming it is a crock, based on the ignorance and biases of the perceiver.
Outright fraud is a pretty small percentage. exaggeration, overstatments, learned helplessness, and a desire for free money/services is a pretty big percentage.
I work in Disabillity Adjudication, so I spend hours with files of people, all of whom claim to be disabled. I make a decent living spending most of my time denying people that have some sort of impairment, but nothing that would preclude working.
hotsauceman1 wrote: And eventually the Kids with Autism will have to understand that waits exist.
Sounds like you have limited experience with individuals with Autism, and certainly don't have any in your immediate family...
WRONG!!!!!
My nephew does, he has it. He hates waiting, but when we went to DL, he learned he had to. Are we going to start accomadating for people who ca tolerate waiting? Is there going to soon be a special checkout counter? Special Lane to Avoid traffic? Waiting is unavoidable, they will have to learn it is part of life. I find it funny people saying "I can only get on 4-5 rides a day" Um hello lady, its the same for normal people too.
Your glib comments show a shockng lack of understanding then.
I can only hope your nephew doesn't spend a lot of time with you.
And given your attitude, I'd imagine that's the case.
And that's the essential rub with reasonableness. An autistic kid may need multiple rides to avoid a melt down, but is that an accomodation, or special treatment? People are ok with a small inconvenience to allow a disabled person to enjoy a normal day. A large inconvenience is different.
I'm going to have to step in for a moment here, but your position on autism and autistic children is not as complete as you might think it is. In fact, to just say "there's no modifying the behavior" is wrong on a whole lot of levels. It is very much what you'd call an elastic condition, in that there is a great deal of variance even in an individual depending on the treatment and therapy they get. To cite my own experience, I worked with autistic children for about 5/6 years (back when I was in high school and college) in a pretty simple program of regular swimming lessons. Was I involved in the medical side of things? Certainly not, I was there as a swimming instructor and found myself as something of a coach to the kids (which eventually became me working directly one on one) that I taught.
The thing of it is that the attention I gave over that course of time, even though it was for an hour or two a week at most, did have an impact on the children I worked with. When I got to working one on one with them, you'd have children who did occasionally break down as you said for no real reason, but after a long stretch of this work, that behavior eventually left. I went from having kids who needed to be walked out the door and monitored constantly to children who, while they still had serious medical issues, were considerably more independent and well-behaved. Am I saying I was the only reason for that? Of course not, after all, my kids were getting more treatment than just me, but I think it is telling that one child's father and doctor both found time to visit me personally to thank me for the help.
I'm not saying that this is some kind of cure for the behavior or autism, but the attitude of "oh there's nothing you can do about it" is largely myth. And a harmful myth at that, as it discourages people from helping.
Well, sounds like you're much more of an expert than I am. The adult son of the owner of a company I used to work for was autistic, and that was really the only contact I've had with anyone who was autistic. I base most of my comments off of observations/what the owner had said to me about him.
Well, sounds like you're much more of an expert than I am. The adult son of the owner of a company I used to work for was autistic, and that was really the only contact I've had with anyone who was autistic. I base most of my comments off of observations/what the owner had said to me about him.
Not so much anymore, as I've been out of that group for more years than I care to say now.
But I can see how you come to that position. After all, if all you observe is one case, it is easy to determine that this is how it usually is. I understand that completely. The thing with autism is that it is one of those...hmm....trying to think of the best way to put it here...
It is a condition whose elastic nature means that there is a huge range of behaviors from it. Everything from just a little misbehavior to bona fide physical disabilities. And that in turn really makes handling and managing autism very difficult for any caregiver because it is not a clearly defined set of conditions. It's a very squirrely condition to pin down, as managing it is very much a whole lifestyle approach. Someone who is even seriously autistic can be treated to be quite capable, but it requires more than just a doctor. It requires 'therapy' at all times, and when I say therapy, I mean that there is no such thing as "good enough" for treating it. I hope that makes sense.
Well, sounds like you're much more of an expert than I am. The adult son of the owner of a company I used to work for was autistic, and that was really the only contact I've had with anyone who was autistic. I base most of my comments off of observations/what the owner had said to me about him.
Not so much anymore, as I've been out of that group for more years than I care to say now.
But I can see how you come to that position. After all, if all you observe is one case, it is easy to determine that this is how it usually is. I understand that completely. The thing with autism is that it is one of those...hmm....trying to think of the best way to put it here...
It is a condition whose elastic nature means that there is a huge range of behaviors from it. Everything from just a little misbehavior to bona fide physical disabilities. And that in turn really makes handling and managing autism very difficult for any caregiver because it is not a clearly defined set of conditions. It's a very squirrely condition to pin down, as managing it is very much a whole lifestyle approach. Someone who is even seriously autistic can be treated to be quite capable, but it requires more than just a doctor. It requires 'therapy' at all times, and when I say therapy, I mean that there is no such thing as "good enough" for treating it. I hope that makes sense.
Exactly!
I'll go a bit further and say that unless you have a child or sibling with Autism, or have a job where you work directly with Autistic individuals, it is hard to understand it sufficiently.
I can also say that the lack of understanding and empathy from many in this thread is a bit disturbing and depressing.
Alpharius wrote: I can also say that the lack of understanding and empathy from many in this thread is a bit disturbing and depressing.
That's fair, but this isn't a thread about how much Autism sucks. It's terrible, and the people that work with disabled people are doing a tough job, and deserve a cold beer on society. But that's another question. This thread is a question about reasonable accomodations, and fundamentally that involves drawing a line as a society where we say, "you just have to have this kind of functioning, even with some help, to participate."
If a child (or adult) cannot handle waits, even active waits, between rides, there's little that can reasonably be done to allow them to enjoy the park.
Even if the part could and chose to accomodate it, the question becomes one of other people plussing up their own limitaitons to enjoy it.
I can also say that the lack of understanding and empathy from many in this thread is a bit disturbing and depressing.
I hope my comments were not included within this statement, but knowing my writing style and the internet, if they were, I want to apologize for unintentionally presenting that appearance.
Hulksmash wrote: And having watched people that are obviously healthy walk up and take a spot on a ride you've been waiting 1-2 hours for is something I'd say most park goers have experienced at one time or another. Which only lowers my sympathy for the people involved in this suit. The new system is fair. If you child isn't healthy enough be able to function under it at the new park then sorry, maybe it isn't the place for him/her.
This kind of crap annoys the stuffing out of me. How do you know someone is "obviously healthy"? Oh that's right, I forgot, only people in wheelchairs or with obvious deformities are really disabled, the rest are "disabled" as Polonius put it. And yeah, damnit, why can't these crips and nuttos just know their place and stay away from places where normal people go? I mean christ, these autistic types coming along to a theme park and expecting to be treated in a way that mildly inconveniences people so they can have an experience that would otherwise be denied to them, how bloody inconsiderate can you get!
As for the system being "abused", lets see some proof. Not anecdotal nonsense about how that one time, at band camp, you saw a person that could walk normally and didn't have a massive public breakdown within the ten seconds they were within your line of sight skip a queue; evidence. You know what I'll bet? I'll bet that when you look at the statistics, you'll find exactly the same thing you find when you look at social security for the sick and disabled - fraud is a tiny fraction, often costing the system less than is lost through basic paperwork errors, and that the perception people have that the system is groaning under the unbearable weight of chancers, schemers, liars, and cheats all gaming it is a crock, based on the ignorance and biases of the perceiver.
Unaccompanied minors is a start for an indication there isn't anything seriously wrong with them...Just saying before you get all high and mighty. Also, having spent a significant amount of time with high functioning disabled people it's not hard to spot the difference.
As for numbers do you think Disneyland (one of the most wired places on earth) didn't have those numbers before making the changes it did. It doesn't cost them anything to have people cutting. In fact, the change might cost them money at the expense of real fairness.
As someone who actually has a high-function ASD, and has spent significant time dealing with people using exactly the same arguments you use to justify treating me and those with far more serious versions of my condition that I volunteer with like crap, I'll be as "high and mighty" as I like.
You say "unaccompanied minors" - how old? How long were they visible to you? I've worked with kids as young as 12 who could appear to function completely normally to an observer until something triggered an episode, so how are you able to tell the difference between an "obviously healthy" child, and a child like the one I described with parents who are either A; trying strategies to help their child gain some level of self-reliance(like say, letting them walk past a queue and go on a ride while watching them from the back of the line in case they do trigger), or B; are just crappy parents that don't grasp their responsibilities(which isn't even remotely the kid's fault)? Are you a telepath? I have no doubt whatsoever that some people tried, some successfully, to take advantage of the previous system, but until I see actual statistical evidence I'll treat "well one time I saw..." or "one time my pal told me..." anecdotes with all the seriousness they deserve - none.
As for your Disney points;
A - Giving something away for free doesn't make it free. They were running a specific scheme for disabled kids, now those kids have to use the same "book&wait" service that was already available to everyone, just without paying cash for it - same scheme, same administration system, lower costs for Disney. When you're dealing with the sort of volume Disney do, even a small administrative tweak can save the company millions.
B - Do you think that the UK government didn't have "all the numbers" that told it their massive cuts to and reorganising of the social security system would lead to dramatically increased poverty and a staggering increase in suicides among the sick & disabled before they started? Of course they did, just as Disney doubtless have all the figures at their disposal. In both cases(and before anyone starts, they are equivalent only in the arguments people are using to support their actions and the targets of those actions, I am not equating the UK government's wholesale assault on this country's vulnerable with Disney being less considerate of disabled kids in a themepark on an ethical level), they will have examined the numbers, and the attitudes among the public, and decided that they stand to make a net financial gain from their new policy, and that the public's blinkered, bigoted, ignorant views about the disabled, those with mental disorders in particular, would protect them from electoral backlash/make it likely they would get a jury pool likely to take their side in any court challenge.
You don't see the possibility of having people perpetually occupying seats without rotating out for a while being potentially damaging to the flow of already overbooked rides? I'm all for treating people as fairly as possible, but that includes the hundreds of people in line that now have even moreso increased wait periods.
Consider: Kid is autistic, will probably ride that things for hours if allowed. I'm about to pull numbers out of a hat. Bear with me. Suppose each ride is five minutes, and allows for 10 people to ride at a time. I don't know if those are realistic times, or realistic ride capacities. I don't do these kinds of places. Numbers aside, kid (and mom (and dad?)) ride the ride every possible instance for a lengthy period of time. There's a person who is 100th in line to ride. He would have been on in 50 minutes. Not great, but you expect these things, right? With the mom, dad, and kid, and assuming that there's only the mom and kid doing this on the ride, it now takes him 21 minutes extra to actually get to the ride. If you cut it down to just the mom and kid, it's about 12 and a half extra minutes. I'm not sure the number of people you have that would do this at disneyland (it's enough that they needed to change the policy, apparently), but if you had one of these situations on every ride, suddenly you have a 20-40% increase in wait times across the board, which means that your entertainment value for your tickets reduced by a very not mild amount of inconvenience.
Course, if you want to give up your spot...
"Possibility", "probably", "pull numbers out of a hat", "suppose", "I don't know if these are realistic"...
So what you're saying is, if you invent out of thin air a completely baseless hypothetical scenario which you admit may bear no relation to the facts whatsoever, you can justify modifying my argument to replace "mild inconvenience" with "modest but irritating inconvenience"?
daedalus wrote: Sounds like your nephew is pretty high functioning, actually. From what understand, a lot of autistic children completely fall apart for, like, no apparent reason. There's not really any sort of discipline or attempt at modifying behavior that can be done to make much of a difference.
If that were true, then there should be no expectation that people accommodate them. This is about reasonable allowances, after all, which should preclude expecting businesses to predict - let alone cater to - demands that are by definition unreasonable.
"Possibility", "probably", "pull numbers out of a hat", "suppose", "I don't know if these are realistic"...
So what you're saying is, if you invent out of thin air a completely baseless hypothetical scenario which you admit may bear no relation to the facts whatsoever, you can justify modifying my argument to replace "mild inconvenience" with "modest but irritating inconvenience"?
Sigh, actually, I was trying to use something called math to show how even a seemingly tiny inconvenience applied in a continuous manner can actually turn into a much bigger problem than people accept when they just look at face value. I spend a lot of time working on queuing issues, so this is a situation that is very interesting to me, personally. You should see me in traffic jams. Apparently it's very interesting to you too, because you appear to have some massive chip on your shoulder.
No, I don't have 100% accurate numbers because they don't appear to exist, and when I'm actually putting effort into something, I like to slap caveats on there where appropriate. The beauty of building a model for something like this is so that when presented with the real numbers, you can just slap them in place and see for yourself if its a problem or not. I'm guessing you haven't done that though. I'm guessing Disney has. They seem like the kind of people who would have a vested interest in doing so. I doubt they just rolled a die and "4 plused" it. I bet their model showed that it turned out to be a problem, hence the changes.
If you have facts, I invite you to present them. I'd be happy to model them in some way that would present a more clear and concise picture of whether there is a problem.
daedalus wrote: Sounds like your nephew is pretty high functioning, actually. From what understand, a lot of autistic children completely fall apart for, like, no apparent reason. There's not really any sort of discipline or attempt at modifying behavior that can be done to make much of a difference.
If that were true, then there should be no expectation that people accommodate them. This is about reasonable allowances, after all, which should preclude expecting businesses to predict - let alone cater to - demands that are by definition unreasonable.
Sure, but what is reasonable is both completely unique and unquestionably perfect thinking to every single person who walks through the door. Kinda like common sense.
hotsauceman1 wrote: And eventually the Kids with Autism will have to understand that waits exist.
Sounds like you have limited experience with individuals with Autism, and certainly don't have any in your immediate family...
WRONG!!!!!
My nephew does, he has it. He hates waiting, but when we went to DL, he learned he had to. Are we going to start accomadating for people who ca tolerate waiting? Is there going to soon be a special checkout counter? Special Lane to Avoid traffic? Waiting is unavoidable, they will have to learn it is part of life. I find it funny people saying "I can only get on 4-5 rides a day" Um hello lady, its the same for normal people too.
Your glib comments show a shockng lack of understanding then.
I can only hope your nephew doesn't spend a lot of time with you.
And given your attitude, I'd imagine that's the case.
Nope, I spend ALOT of time with him sense his father left, and I regularly watch over him at Disneyland. His mother agrees, the world isnt going to cater to him, he has to learn.
Jihadin wrote: I'm going to show my lack of knowledge on the ADHD and other similar disabilities.
I can see a kid with a touch of it and can be easily manage going to a park
I cannot see one who highly..lack of words go "skitzo" on a constant basis Almost, to me, like a mental torture
Well, almost nobody has episodes on a constant basis, of any disorder.
There are myriad impairments, all with their own spectums of intensity. Broadly speaking, you're looking mostly at developmental disorders when you talk about children with mental health issues. This is Intellectual Disability (formerly mental retardation), Borderline Intellectual Functioning (IQs in the 70s), and Autism. You also have ADHD, which is generally behavioral in nature. There's oppositional defiant disorder, which closely matches wtih antisocial personality disorder in adults. Some children have mood or anxiety disorders, but they are quite rare.
The question is usually, when looking at functioning in children, to isolate what stimuli cause them to derail. So, for a theme park, being close in with a crowd may trigger an episode.
Keep in mind, the goal with most current treatment is to mainstream children as much as possible.
hotsauceman1 wrote: And eventually the Kids with Autism will have to understand that waits exist.
Sounds like you have limited experience with individuals with Autism, and certainly don't have any in your immediate family...
WRONG!!!!!
My nephew does, he has it. He hates waiting, but when we went to DL, he learned he had to. Are we going to start accomadating for people who ca tolerate waiting? Is there going to soon be a special checkout counter? Special Lane to Avoid traffic? Waiting is unavoidable, they will have to learn it is part of life. I find it funny people saying "I can only get on 4-5 rides a day" Um hello lady, its the same for normal people too.
Your glib comments show a shockng lack of understanding then.
I can only hope your nephew doesn't spend a lot of time with you.
And given your attitude, I'd imagine that's the case.
Nope, I spend ALOT of time with him sense his father left, and I regularly watch over him at Disneyland. His mother agrees, the world isnt going to cater to him, he has to learn.
I give up - you win!
Which, of course, means someone is losing there, but oh well.
YAY, I WIN
But my Nephew somehow looses because he is being taught the world will not cater to him.
I seriously ask you this, what should we do for people who cant tolerate waiting? Let them cut infront of us? give them special treatment
Which, of course, means someone is losing there, but oh well.
To be fair Alph, you aren't really making any sort of point in your posts. You're simply accusing a poster of having a lack of experience, and not even articulating what aspect of his view you find problematic.
You're being confrontational in a way that's easily rebutted, while not actually advocating for anything meaningful.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
hotsauceman1 wrote: YAY, I WIN
But my Nephew somehow looses because he is being taught the world will not cater to him.
I seriously ask you this, what should we do for people who cant tolerate waiting? Let them cut infront of us? give them special treatment
I think the Disney solution of time tickets makes sense. They don't have to wait in one place, they can come and go as they please.
An individual that cannot handle any minor interruption of schedule is probably not going to be able to handle a theme park, I'm afraid.
Weren't you the same person who was in favor of 'special snowflake' treatment in schools, hotsauce? But now you are not in favor of any kind of special treatment?
"LEARN TO WAIT" isn't really going to work for a LOT of people who have Autism.
It just isn't.
And it is a rather ignorant viewpoint to take.
But, you're right - this thread is more about Disney and their policy, and while it does tie in, I can't really see the point of discussing it in here anymore.
Why I even bother with the OT Forum anymore is beyond me, but this thread is a fantastic reminder to...not bother.
curran12 wrote: Weren't you the same person who was in favor of 'special snowflake' treatment in schools, hotsauce? But now you are not in favor of any kind of special treatment?
Waffles are tasty.
As we all both suffer for it, and likely made him this way, I choose to blame the obvious victim here: Dakka.
I think we really need to reel the scale of this issue back in.
Relating this back to a theme park.
I've changed my mind from my original stance, I think Yodhrin has the way of it. While I don't think Disney should be getting sued, they should implement their old policy.
Going beyond the realms of Autism; For all the people that abuse the system your making a disabled Child's experience of Disneyland better and while "regular" people may need to queue slightly longer, you still get to "enjoy" your experience and then leave. These disabilities will effect these kids for life, so perhaps cut them some slack.
I think Disney's stance is more than reasonable. Allowing whole sale line cutting encourages abuse. They can't force people to bring medical files to review without major lawsuit implications. The current system is a balance for both patrons of their park.
If the child can't handle that system then perhaps an amusement park isn't a place they should go.
If we, as people of sound body and mind, can't find it in ourselves to give a tiny bit of our time, even indirectly, to a disabled person then I don't know what to say.
I am with Medium. The argument of "people might abuse it" does not carry much water for me, because that just puts stress and pain on those who do NOT abuse it. I think the policy could be re-done to allow for more analysis and examination, but removing it entirely is not a positive step.
"LEARN TO WAIT" isn't really going to work for a LOT of people who have Autism.
It just isn't.
And it is a rather ignorant viewpoint to take.
But, you're right - this thread is more about Disney and their policy, and while it does tie in, I can't really see the point of discussing it in here anymore.
Why I even bother with the OT Forum anymore is beyond me, but this thread is a fantastic reminder to...not bother.
I think if you'd share more of your experiences, and provide some context for why you're upset, we could talk about it. To a bystander, you just seem really aggravated that people have different views of autism then you.
As for autistic children not learning to wait: That might be true. But it might be appropriate for some people. The whole goal of most Autism therapy, especially for mildler versions or those that are higher functioning, is to try to integrate them as much as possible.
Take a deep breath, and read what you wrote. Hotsauce wasn't making a generalization, he was taking about his experience. Maybe his family is going a terrible job of raising an autistic child, but that's not a suggestion I feel comfortable diagnosing casually.
If a child with disabilities can (or should) learn to wait, Disney is a good place to try that. If they cannot, meaning they cannot handle any delays or other disruptions, then you have to wonder if a theme part is a great place for them.
Still. I am interested in how much this tiny amount of time must be. I mean, surely Disney put some thought behind this, before just issuing new policy.
Medium of Death wrote: If we, as people of sound body and mind, can't find it in ourselves to give a tiny bit of our time, even indirectly, to a disabled person then I don't know what to say.
As far as I understand the issue, the problem is people of sound body and mind being asked to give a chunk of their time to other people of sound mind and body who have taken unfair advantage of the facility offered to genuinely disabled visitors.
"LEARN TO WAIT" isn't really going to work for a LOT of people who have Autism.
It just isn't.
And it is a rather ignorant viewpoint to take.
But, you're right - this thread is more about Disney and their policy, and while it does tie in, I can't really see the point of discussing it in here anymore.
Why I even bother with the OT Forum anymore is beyond me, but this thread is a fantastic reminder to...not bother.
I think if you'd share more of your experiences, and provide some context for why you're upset, we could talk about it. To a bystander, you just seem really aggravated that people have different views of autism then you.
As for autistic children not learning to wait: That might be true. But it might be appropriate for some people. The whole goal of most Autism therapy, especially for mildler versions or those that are higher functioning, is to try to integrate them as much as possible.
Take a deep breath, and read what you wrote. Hotsauce wasn't making a generalization, he was taking about his experience. Maybe his family is going a terrible job of raising an autistic child, but that's not a suggestion I feel comfortable diagnosing casually.
If a child with disabilities can (or should) learn to wait, Disney is a good place to try that. If they cannot, meaning they cannot handle any delays or other disruptions, then you have to wonder if a theme part is a great place for them.
Take a breath?
Is that a something you'd normally say to help diffuse a situation?
And if I sound aggravated here is...because I am.
There's a lot of things being said about autism here that aren't doing many a lot of favors in here.
My youngest daughter (8 years old) is non-verbal autistic.
And she's probably 'mid-spectrum' in terms of where she might fit on some scale that doesn't really exist.
She enjoyed her time at Disney, back when the pass existed that allowed her to go to the front of the line without much waiting - there was still some though!
So, saying that it "isn't the place for her", or "Learn to Wait" - that sounds really ignorant.
Like, still in high school and haven't really experienced much in the world yet level of ignorant.
Then when we start to hear stuff like "Well, maybe it isn't the place for them", where getting close to "Just stay at home"...
Medium of Death wrote: If we, as people of sound body and mind, can't find it in ourselves to give a tiny bit of our time, even indirectly, to a disabled person then I don't know what to say.
We'll probably never know how prevelant abuse of the system was. I'd guess the number is higher than many people expect.
Disabled people aren't any more or less moral than anybody else. And disabilities ride a spectrum. The one thing they have in common is that all disabilities limit a person in some way.
So they start getting support, which for a lot of people is necessary, but for some just makes their life easier. Couple this with disabled people generally having less money due to medical bills and fewer career choices, and you have a class of people that, well... knows how to get what they can.
curran12 wrote: I am with Medium. The argument of "people might abuse it" does not carry much water for me, because that just puts stress and pain on those who do NOT abuse it. I think the policy could be re-done to allow for more analysis and examination, but removing it entirely is not a positive step.
It hasn't been removed. It's been revamped. Special needs people can schedule the time for them to ride. Meaning they don't have to wait in the longer lines. They schedule a ride, come back after riding rides that don't require long waits, and enjoy their ride without the 2-3 hour wait. I'm not seeing what the issue is here or why they should be allowed to walk to the front without any consideration for others.
Basically Disney is making it a little bit harder to walk on to discourage people abusing the system while still leaving the ability for those with special needs to avoid the major issues. I'm not sure why this being in place is other people not giving special needs people a little consideration. They are still being treated more favorably than your standard Disney land attendee.
Medium of Death wrote: If we, as people of sound body and mind, can't find it in ourselves to give a tiny bit of our time, even indirectly, to a disabled person then I don't know what to say.
As far as I understand the issue, the problem is people of sound body and mind being asked to give a chunk of their time to other people of sound mind and body who have taken unfair advantage of the facility offered to genuinely disabled visitors.
As Yodhrin pointed out; Frequently with these issues the abuses are overstated. Are there really queues full of healthy people feigning disability? Perhaps that Theme Parks are anomalies in this regard.
Probably there aren't that many people cheating, but the public perception could be there is enough of a problem to put people off going to Disneyland.
I have no idea what the situation is, however obviously Disney are concerned or they would not have felt the need to change the system.
Medium of Death wrote: If we, as people of sound body and mind, can't find it in ourselves to give a tiny bit of our time, even indirectly, to a disabled person then I don't know what to say.
As far as I understand the issue, the problem is people of sound body and mind being asked to give a chunk of their time to other people of sound mind and body who have taken unfair advantage of the facility offered to genuinely disabled visitors.
As Yodhrin pointed out; Frequently with these issues the abuses are overstated. Are there really queues full of healthy people feigning disability? Perhaps that Theme Parks are anomalies in this regard.
It isn't either fully disabled people who need special treatment or completely healthy people pretending. It's probably a lot more people with slight disabilities that really don't need the special treatment and are taking advantage of the fact that in this day and age they can be considered disabled.
Medium of Death wrote: If we, as people of sound body and mind, can't find it in ourselves to give a tiny bit of our time, even indirectly, to a disabled person then I don't know what to say.
We'll probably never know how prevelant abuse of the system was. I'd guess the number is higher than many people expect.
Disabled people aren't any more or less moral than anybody else. And disabilities ride a spectrum. The one thing they have in common is that all disabilities limit a person in some way.
So they start getting support, which for a lot of people is necessary, but for some just makes their life easier. Couple this with disabled people generally having less money due to medical bills and fewer career choices, and you have a class of people that, well... knows how to get what they can.
I guess it's just down to defining or assessing the limitation. Which would put Disney on a slippery slope, that's why I think that in this instance that they should implement the old policy. We aren't talking about social welfare, we're talking about giving kids a great experience regardless of their abilities at a theme park. Now, arseholes ruin everything, but this is an area where I think people can be allowed to abuse the system as the benefits outweigh the disadvantages in my mind at least.
"LEARN TO WAIT" isn't really going to work for a LOT of people who have Autism.
It just isn't.
And it is a rather ignorant viewpoint to take.
But, you're right - this thread is more about Disney and their policy, and while it does tie in, I can't really see the point of discussing it in here anymore.
Why I even bother with the OT Forum anymore is beyond me, but this thread is a fantastic reminder to...not bother.
I think if you'd share more of your experiences, and provide some context for why you're upset, we could talk about it. To a bystander, you just seem really aggravated that people have different views of autism then you.
As for autistic children not learning to wait: That might be true. But it might be appropriate for some people. The whole goal of most Autism therapy, especially for mildler versions or those that are higher functioning, is to try to integrate them as much as possible.
Take a deep breath, and read what you wrote. Hotsauce wasn't making a generalization, he was taking about his experience. Maybe his family is going a terrible job of raising an autistic child, but that's not a suggestion I feel comfortable diagnosing casually.
If a child with disabilities can (or should) learn to wait, Disney is a good place to try that. If they cannot, meaning they cannot handle any delays or other disruptions, then you have to wonder if a theme part is a great place for them.
Take a breath?
Is that a something you'd normally say to help diffuse a situation?
And if I sound aggravated here is...because I am.
There's a lot of things being said about autism here that aren't doing many a lot of favors in here.
My youngest daughter (8 years old) is non-verbal autistic.
And she's probably 'mid-spectrum' in terms of where she might fit on some scale that doesn't really exist.
She enjoyed her time at Disney, back when the pass existed that allowed her to go to the front of the line without much waiting - there was still some though!
So, saying that it "isn't the place for her", or "Learn to Wait" - that sounds really ignorant.
Like, still in high school and haven't really experienced much in the world yet level of ignorant.
Then when we start to hear stuff like "Well, maybe it isn't the place for them", where getting close to "Just stay at home"...
I don't know, I think it's equally ignorant to expect the world to adjust just for a sub-group of people. I've lived in 3 countries and the US seems to be the only place that treats those afflicted with mild forms of disability as more deserving than those who pay for their services. If by action or omission of action I allow my actions or those under my supervision to greatly inconvenience those around me, I am creating a dissonance in the public harmony. There are times and places for all things and if a person is so afflicted that they impinge upon the ability of the greater whole's ability to access or enjoy services that they pay for then such locations may not be the best place for these individuals. Just like I would not take a screaming baby into a movie theater.
I think that US society has a whole does a great deal to ensure that individuals with disabilities are able to enjoy a fairly high level of lifestyle but to say it is someone's right to inconvenience me is then taking it too far. Sure, I don't mind waiting a couple of minutes to accommodate anyone (disability or not) but when you're creating an environment of privilege for such people, that's where I draw the line. I'm deaf in my left ear and have degenerative disc disease to the point that I cant stand or sit for extended periods of time without intense discomfort but I don't go around screaming to the heavens that I need special accommodations and everyone needs to put seats in the lines for me to sit on while I wait. I could probably avail myself of the provided wheelchairs but would choose instead not to visit places where I would need accommodation because I feel that my honest social responsibility is not to make a bother of myself.
Travel to Disney with a child with autism can be difficult. One of the most challenging feats is due to the fact that autism varies so much from child to child and the types of autism vary so what is good for one child is not helpful for another. Traveling with an autistic child requires a creative and calm parent. We are here to help, especially if you have never traveled to a Disney park before. First ignore criticism from others, every family is different and requires their own special needs. Trying to make something work because someone else has with their autistic child or friend's child could lead to disastrous results.
Below are tips for parents on how to successfully manage their child's behavior:
1 - Understand -- Before you head out on vacation take an inventory of your child’s special needs. Learning to manage your child is knowing them because your child is unique. Know your child’s sensitivities. Is it light, sound or crowds? Does your child crave sensory input? The more you identify helps with planning with times of visit and types of attractions.
2 - Adjust -- Many children with autism struggle to cope with heavy crowds and stimulation. Start small and plan to increase it over time. Disney offers such a wide variety of activities that many families take years to discover it all. A great benefit is that your family can return year after year and your child can gradually learn to expand their world in an entertaining, safe and structured environment. Even down time activities like meal time are so flexible at the Disney Parks. While many autistic children struggle with a table service restaurant meals at the parks and resorts can be modified to fit your needs with quick service meals and eating on a park bench or poolside. Start small and work up to the more structured activities.
4 – Environmental--. Safety is important. While Disney strives to create a safe environment for all, even the safest can pose a challenge for the autistic child. Be prepared. Autistic children can often wonder quietly so stay vigilant. Secure medications or potential hazards out of reach in a locked suitcase or in the room safe. Bring a travel alarm to alert you if the door is opened. Request a room away from potential hazards, especially if your child is attracted to pools or cars. Bring several familiar items from home to make the room more comfortable including favorite toys or pillows.
3 – Identify---List the possible sources of your child's behavior. Most children with autism deal with sensory input differently. Does your child over-respond or crave sensory stimulation? Most often meltdowns are a reaction to sensory overload or sensory deprivation. Know when to expect them as well, not only your child but the entire family can handle stress when not fatigued so aim to do the more challenging activities earlier in the day. Have a backup plan for meltdowns. This can be a challenge when you have other children who want to remain in the park. Prepare by learning about the parks, crowds, potential types of stimulation and it helps to have a partner incase you need to divide the party and bring in order to bring your child to a quieter location.
5 – Decrease sensory input. The Disney parks are filled with excessive stimulation, from crowds, bright lights to loud noises. Know your child and whether it’s vibrations that frighten them or loud booms then plan accordingly. Ear plugs work well with loud noises, avoid parades or watch from a distance. Fireworks can be viewed from a remote location like a hotel room or balcony or beach. Explore the potential attractions for excessive stimulation and plan accordingly, at Mouse-aid, we are here to help with questions and alternatives.
6 – Increase sensory input. A child craving sensory input will be found spinning and climbing. If you find yourself in a situation where you need him or her to calm down then try a huge bear hug or group hug. If you are in a room or in cooler weather if your child is in a stroller or wheelchair then try wrapping them in a blanket to give that sensation of touch and security. Traveling with a familiar item helps too and there are always play areas to let them run around safely for a while such as Pooh’s Thoughtful spot or Tom Sawyer’s Island.
7 - Celebrate success—A Disney vacation is challenging for your child and family. Plan to make special activities, even things like getting popcorn or a Mickey bar a celebration. Plan activities that your child loves for break time even if that is a quiet time in the room. Acknowledge and celebrate activities like making it through a short line or using a fork at dinner.
8 – Have fun---Make sure to find ways to have fun together. Some children with autism struggle to enter our world; but, Disney is filled with opportunities to help the family have fun together. Here the types of autism has an impact on how the family can have fun together and will vary from family to family. Activities can include exploring in Animal Kingdom for Dino bones or walking on the beaches at a resort, playing in one of the many activity areas or just cuddling and watching a parade from a distance. It can be hard to relate fun with autism but a vacation is your family time for the entire family.
Remember that every family is different so each family needs to design a plan around your specific needs and budget. We are here to help. Don’t forget the Guest Assistance Card (GAC) for the more difficult times and crowds. It does help to keep your activities as conventional as possible. Many children do not like to be treated different than others so keep this in mind and use the pass for longer lines. Do take advantage of smaller lines and fast pass to help normalize the family experience.
The opinions and resources provided on Mouse-aid Web site are intended for informational purposes only and are not intended to take the place of medical or legal advice, or of other appropriate services. We encourage you to seek direct local assistance from a qualified professional if necessary before taking action.
No I got your point, but you were using ridiculous examples. Obviously there comes a point where it isn't feasible to include all people in these massive systems, but the examples you give aren't really relevant, appropriate or covered by legislation.
The examples, especially regarding to fighter jets were intentionally ridiculous. Because as a philosophical point you have to establish logical boundaries, which is easier done with simple obvious clear examples. Too many people ignore logical boundaries on a point of dogma, so by presenting inevitable boundaries you establish that boundaries exist and thus can make point that the moral ideal and the moral reality are separated.
A reason why this is relevant. A council in Scotland (wont mention which one) is lumped with a £250,000 annual ill for the education of a single severely disabled child who cannot hope to have an independent life or pursue a career.
The fact that this person can never work is well established, but because local council workers decided he had a 'right' to a full education anyway special tuition was required, even though the pupil was too severely disabled but be properly unaware he/she was even being educated. £250,000 is enough to run a whole school, and many non disabled kids in the borough receive a sub-standard education due to cost cutting. However where a logical approach to disability has not been established, a realistic policy for disability inclusion and ethical division of resources can go out of the window.
There is need for a firm philosophy in place, starting with the obvious, you may say disingenuous, point that some extreme of inclusion are clearly non workable or ridiculous in concept or cost. Thus establishing the firm principle that you cannot legislate away disability, nor can you wish it away with unlimited public spending. This can be put in practice when it comes to difficult cases when it's futile trying to provide practical help, decision makers are thus empowered to make a prudent realistic decision, rather than be morally railroaded into a dogmatic approach to proceed with the 'right thing' regardless-of-cost or waste of purpose.
I don't know, I think it's equally ignorant to expect the world to adjust just for a sub-group of people. I've lived in 3 countries and the US seems to be the only place that treats those afflicted with mild forms of disability as more deserving than those who pay for their services. If by action or omission of action I allow my actions or those under my supervision to greatly inconvenience those around me, I am creating a dissonance in the public harmony. There are times and places for all things and if a person is so afflicted that they impinge upon the ability of the greater whole's ability to access or enjoy services that they pay for then such locations may not be the best place for these individuals. Just like I would not take a screaming baby into a movie theater.
I think that US society has a whole does a great deal to ensure that individuals with disabilities are able to enjoy a fairly high level of lifestyle but to say it is someone's right to inconvenience me is then taking it too far. Sure, I don't mind waiting a couple of minutes to accommodate anyone (disability or not) but when you're creating an environment of privilege for such people, that's where I draw the line. I'm deaf in my left ear and have degenerative disc disease to the point that I cant stand or sit for extended periods of time without intense discomfort but I don't go around screaming to the heavens that I need special accommodations and everyone needs to put seats in the lines for me to sit on while I wait. I could probably avail myself of the provided wheelchairs but would choose instead not to visit places where I would need accommodation because I feel that my honest social responsibility is not to make a bother of myself.
I think your pretty bang out of order to respond to Alph in such a fashion.
Realistically, how does a disabled child at a theme park for children impede your enjoyment? Honestly answer me that.
This one is the best.
agnosto wrote: when you're creating an environment of privilege for such people
creating an environment of privilege for such people
environment of privilege
such people
We are talking about kids at a fething theme park.
You do realise that these kids leave the theme park with these issues and have to interact with a world that, which is clearly evidenced in this thread, is unsympathetic and borderline abusive?
Is it not unreasonable that children with disabilities and their parents be able to have a nice time at Disneyland? If you'd prefer to upset disabled people by putting them a line "like everybody else", which would not only ruin their experience and their parents experience but the experiences of the patrons around them. If you can't handle a few kids skipping the line because they are disabled, maybe you should stay at home? You complain about disabled people or their parents acting self entitled while being massively self entitled yourself.
I hope you stick to your personal code if somebody offers you a seat when your knees are acting up, or refuse to have somebody repeat a question because they spoke into your deaf ear.
Alpharius wrote: Why I even bother with the OT Forum anymore is beyond me, but this thread is a fantastic reminder to...not bother.
The BLM\Bundy thread has taught me to try and be more selective about the threads I participate in going forward. I do believe that there is a useful and meaningful exchange of ideas in here now and then but you need to really pick and choose your threads.
No I got your point, but you were using ridiculous examples. Obviously there comes a point where it isn't feasible to include all people in these massive systems, but the examples you give aren't really relevant, appropriate or covered by legislation.
The examples, especially regarding to fighter jets were intentionally ridiculous. Because as a philosophical point you have to establish logical boundaries. Too many people ignore those boundaries on a point of dogma, so by presenting inevitable boundaries you establish that boundaries exist.
A reason why this is relevant. A council in Scotland (wont mention which one) is lumped with a £250,000 annual ill for the education of a single severely disabled child who cannot hope to have an independent life or pursue a career.
The fact that this person can never work is well established, but because local council workers decided he had a 'right' to a full education anyway special tuition was required, even though the pupil was too severely disabled but be properly unaware he/she was even being educated. £250,000 is enough to run a whole school, and many non disabled kids in the borough receive a sub-standard education due to cost cutting. However where a logical approach to disability has not been established, a realistic policy for disability inclusion and ethical division of resources can go out of the window.
There is need for a firm philosophy in place, starting with the obvious, you may say disingenuous, point that some extreme of inclusion are clearly non workable or ridiculous in concept or cost. Thus establishing the firm principle that you cannot legislate away disability, nor can you wish it away with unlimited public spending. Put in practice when it comes to the cases when it's futile trying to people are empowered to make a prudent realistic decision, rather than be morally railroaded into a dogmatic approach to proceed with the 'right thing' regardless-of-cost or purpose.
Cutting down on tax avoidance and making our wealthiest pay their way could help with that funding. I agree that sending the child to a mainstream school is ridiculous, but it is hardly the fault of one disabled child that the local schools are underfunded, regardless of what the Daily Mail might say.
That money could be used on getting the child to a more specialist environment. It is important to send children with disabilities to school, perhaps not mainstream like your example where it would incur excessive cost, but there are specialist schools. It offers respite to the parents as well.
I don't think that this is costing Disney money though. I'd wager it's coming from a few vocal voices and perhaps staff. Somebody said it might put future visitors off but I'd say that'd be a fairly weird point of consideration if you were heading to Disneyland.
"Hey kids we aren't going to Disneyland because I heard some disabled kids get to skip queues and some scumbags take advantage of that system. No fun for all!"
Cutting down on tax avoidance and making our wealthiest pay their way could help with that funding. I agree that sending the child to a mainstream school is ridiculous, but it is hardly the fault of one disabled child that the local schools are underfunded, regardless of what the Daily Mail might say.
This story was not from the Daily Mail, I know one of the councilors who voted when the council decided to spend the money. I disagree of course, but it Scottish local taxation so, up to them...
That money could be used on getting the child to a more specialist environment. It is important to send children with disabilities to school, perhaps not mainstream like your example where it would incur excessive cost, but there are specialist schools. It offers respite to the parents as well.
Never stated or implied my example was in mainstream education. The child requires a specialist solo environment for the education, hence the £250,000 costs.
Bit of respite for the parents, at a cost of a quarter of a million, sorry no. Other parents of disabled kids have to settle for less.
It unfortunate that severely disability is part of this world, and that the parents and child have to suffer this burden. But you can't throw mega-money at everything.
I don't think that this is costing Disney money though. I'd wager it's coming from a few vocal voices and perhaps staff. Somebody said it might put future visitors off but I'd say that'd be a fairly weird point of consideration if you were heading to Disneyland.
"Hey kids we aren't going to Disneyland because I heard some disabled kids get to skip queues and some scumbags take advantage of that system. No fun for all!"
These are separate arguments, but establishing a sound philosophical foundation holds true for the OP also, hence why I brought up the topic.
Once one has established that you cannot legislate away disability, then its easy to come to an understanding that companies shouldn't have to jump though excessive numbers of hoops to cater for more serious or difficult disability cases, then a sensible approach to inclusion can be effected, and frivolous lawsuits safely disposed of.
Disney have a responsibility to do what is practical to accommodate disabled visitors under the aegis of equality, but Disney must also be legally protected when some disabled persons are too hard to accommodate, or if accommodating them unfairly disadvantages other visitors, and thus sacrificing the equality inclusion is attempted to provide.
Anyway, as we don't seem to have one, here's a link to a discussion from when this policy was put in place (last September), and a recap as to WHY it was put in place (from last May).
I was speaking more generally about the respite offered by specialist schools. I find it hard to believe the care costs would have been the same for the child to go into any form of education. My point about the "Daily Mail" ideology is that it places the blame with those at the bottom of the scale, rather than the top where decisions are made.
Nobody is arguing for any excessive cost to be placed on Disney and I doubt the queue skip one was incurring one.
The scheduling thing would perhaps work in practice if they allowed the parents to schedule multiple rides. Like ride x ride at x time, then another ride at y time and so on. It appears they can only schedule one ride and then wait. I would say that the scheduling idea does seem to be a lot harder to implement than their old method.
Perhaps Disneyland wasn't seeing an increase in abuse of the system but in disabled guests as they had created a fairly welcoming environment. Wealthy New Yorkers hiring disabled people aside.
I don't know, I think it's equally ignorant to expect the world to adjust just for a sub-group of people. I've lived in 3 countries and the US seems to be the only place that treats those afflicted with mild forms of disability as more deserving than those who pay for their services. If by action or omission of action I allow my actions or those under my supervision to greatly inconvenience those around me, I am creating a dissonance in the public harmony. There are times and places for all things and if a person is so afflicted that they impinge upon the ability of the greater whole's ability to access or enjoy services that they pay for then such locations may not be the best place for these individuals. Just like I would not take a screaming baby into a movie theater.
I think that US society has a whole does a great deal to ensure that individuals with disabilities are able to enjoy a fairly high level of lifestyle but to say it is someone's right to inconvenience me is then taking it too far. Sure, I don't mind waiting a couple of minutes to accommodate anyone (disability or not) but when you're creating an environment of privilege for such people, that's where I draw the line. I'm deaf in my left ear and have degenerative disc disease to the point that I cant stand or sit for extended periods of time without intense discomfort but I don't go around screaming to the heavens that I need special accommodations and everyone needs to put seats in the lines for me to sit on while I wait. I could probably avail myself of the provided wheelchairs but would choose instead not to visit places where I would need accommodation because I feel that my honest social responsibility is not to make a bother of myself.
I think your pretty bang out of order to respond to Alph in such a fashion.
I disagree, I think agnosto gave a well reasoned and fair response, rather devoid of knee-jerking emotion.
Medium of Death wrote: Realistically, how does a disabled child at a theme park for children impede your enjoyment? Honestly answer me that.
The issue isn't disabled children getting to go on rides, rather it is identifying a flawed system that privileges one group over another. A system which allows for extreme abuses of those perks by people who shouldn't be benefiting from those special privileges in the first place. Peoplehave shown their willingness to game the system, so the old policy didn't work. And if I take my family to Disneyland, shell out the $100+ per-ticket price, and we have to wait much longer for a ride than someone else's family because they are taking advantage of a policy that may not even really be intended for them, then yes, it is impeding my enjoyment of the park by denying me and mine the fun we also paid for. Remember, that is why Disney changed the policy. It wasn't to appease people who hate disabled children having fun (which some of the more emotional posters in this thread seem to be implying is the case), it was because the old policy was flawed.
curran12 wrote: Weren't you the same person who was in favor of 'special snowflake' treatment in schools, hotsauce? But now you are not in favor of any kind of special treatment?
Waffles are tasty.
Education is a gateway to a world where they can function in society.
Let me lay down my fractured logic. I, and many of my peers, needed special education to understand the material. I needed two math classes instead of the normal 1. But it was clear I could understand with some help and go on myself. But a few doors down was the really special ED, those who could never have a normal life. They spent their day running a store for candy and soda the students could buy. Learning about how to make change and other things that are reasonable for them, they where not learning science or how to build something in WoodShop. Im talking about Reasonable accomadations.
Medium of Death wrote: If we, as people of sound body and mind, can't find it in ourselves to give a tiny bit of our time, even indirectly, to a disabled person then I don't know what to say.
I think if it really was just a tiny bit of time tagged onto a minor inconvenience, people wouldn't have a problem with it.
How much time do you think the average Disneyland guest spends in line compared to spent doing everything else at the park? The truth is that Disney has been raising ticket prices because too many people have been visiting the park, to the point that they no longer have an off-season.
I haven't found Disneyland to be 'worth' their outrageous prices in years.
A handful of New York rich families does not a crisis make. I still disagree that the response was well reasoned and fair considering the use of "sub-group" when referring to the disabled is in the first sentence and words like "public harmony". What does that even mean in this context? Quantify the harmony of a theme park full of excited children.
I severely doubt that waiting times at Disneyland were increased greatly because of this. Waiting times already seem ridiculous.
What I assume is that this threatened the Disney VIP pass system, which seems ridiculously expensive, which was probably aimed at the families using this kind of practice. Disney have eliminated the "competition" and secured the future ticket money for their VIP system.
Leave it to a massively wealthy corporation to turn their greed into a story of people turning against the most disadvantaged in society all over a theme park.
I agree the wait times were already ridiculous. However, any perceived increase to the ridiculous can cause real problems. I have two family memebers and a lot of friends who work/worked at Disneyland, and the amount of abuse they experience due to the lines and the sun turning normal people into donkey-caves is unbelievable. My cousin was assaulted (I suppose Battered, in the legal sense) for enforcing a height requirement. Hot sun, long lines, and perceived injustice make a potent mix and have definitely affected public perception of the park here in Orange County.
Ouze wrote: I have the utmost sympathy for the parents of children with autism, and I would normally say that, well, going above and beyond wouldn't really be an undue hardship on such a large company; to give the better experience. I've read quite a bit about the scamming that forced them to change it, so at this point I think, now that a proven and clear business reason exists, the previous system was no longer a reasonable accommodation, and that giving them a set return time, while a lessened experience than previously, is now the reasonable choice in view of the no-longer-feasible alternative options. It's not any accommodation, it's a reasonable one, and that can be a moving target when the situation changes.
"Now, however, visitors to Walt Disney World and Disneyland can obtain a Disability Access Service Card which allows them to schedule a return time for rides based on current wait times. The system prevents those with disabilities from having to wait in line, but only allows visitors to schedule one attraction at a time. "
I think your pretty bang out of order to respond to Alph in such a fashion.
Realistically, how does a disabled child at a theme park for children impede your enjoyment? Honestly answer me that.
Meh. That's fine; I'm mature enough to not flip out when someone doesn't agree with me. At the end of the day, this is an internet forum where people exchange ideas. I respect your opinion even though we may disagree.
I disagree in that the issue here is not about "children" at a theme park for "children". The issue here is an expectation that has developed in society that has resulted in certain conditions being driven to the opposite end of the spectrum from whence they came. We went from a society where those with disabilities were shunned to on where such people enjoy almost a privileged status. I'll go into this in a little more detail later.
You do realise that these kids leave the theme park with these issues and have to interact with a world that, which is clearly evidenced in this thread, is unsympathetic and borderline abusive?
Is it not unreasonable that children with disabilities and their parents be able to have a nice time at Disneyland? If you'd prefer to upset disabled people by putting them a line "like everybody else", which would not only ruin their experience and their parents experience but the experiences of the patrons around them. If you can't handle a few kids skipping the line because they are disabled, maybe you should stay at home? You complain about disabled people or their parents acting self entitled while being massively self entitled yourself.
I hope you stick to your personal code if somebody offers you a seat when your knees are acting up, or refuse to have somebody repeat a question because they spoke into your deaf ear.
You may be talking about kids in a theme park but I'm speaking to the larger issue. We have developed a culture, at least in the US, where if some people choose to go to public places, they will be treated differently than others, some might say that they are given preferential treatment. I think that many people misunderstand the intent and purpose of laws such as IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) which is not to make those that suffer from disabilities "special" but to provide them with supports and accommodations that help them to be treated equally as those who do not suffer from disabilities. Clearly, Disney's previous policy created the "special" rather than the "equal" and the current policy places everyone on a level field.
My point is not to disadvantage those with disabilities, I would never advocate for that; I just feel that those with disabilities and their families need to take responsibility. If your (not "you" personally but the supposed "you") child is going to cause a public disturbance to the point where it detracts from the enjoyment of hundreds of other people, maybe you should be an adult and realize that a theme park isn't such a great place to take them. Anticipate and take into account the needs of the child if they are unable to cope with the realities of a crowded theme park. Don't expect a company and the community at large to be responsible for something that has nothing to do with them. As long as accommodations have been made that will benefit the majority of the affected patrons, move on.
I don't feel self-entitled unless you are referring to the fact that we all feel entitled to some modicum of enjoyment when we pay money to attend some public attraction. Going back to my previous example; I wouldn't tolerate a screaming baby in a crowded theater, why should I put up with a screaming child anywhere else? It's not self-entitlement when it's the societal norm; self-entitlement usually means that you expect more than you actually are, societal, established norms are certainly an entitlement but one that the majority, not just myself, has access to.
Going by your measure, I suppose that I should sue the FLGS that I play at for not making stools available for me to sit on when I play games there. I often end an evening in a great deal of pain but chalk it up to my decision to be there but now I'll have to rethink that and make sure they have proper seating for me.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Medium of Death wrote: A handful of New York rich families does not a crisis make. I still disagree that the response was well reasoned and fair considering the use of "sub-group" when referring to the disabled is in the first sentence and words like "public harmony". What does that even mean in this context? Quantify the harmony of a theme park full of excited children.
I apologize. I work in education and the term "sub-groups" are used by the federal government and throughout education to denote specific groups of students (i.e. IEP, ELL, Disadvanted..etc.) We are often called upon to disaggregate data based upon these populations. Public harmony comes from my time living in Asia where people are expected to be responsible for the effects that their actions may have on the community as a whole while in public.
I was getting a little angry earlier and for that I apologise.
Obviously in wider society these types of special set ups would impede or encroach in to other peoples lives and that's where I'm for a lot of these arguments, and would be more willing to mete out equal policy.
I've tried to make it clear enough that I'm just focusing on the theme park in this instance, as that's whats in the OP. I appreciate the conversation seems to be broadening, but if we go back in to the main point of the OP.
So what I've taken from this so far:
Disney had a policy that allowed disabled people and their families (up to 6 total) to skip the queue or more accurately, form a line in a shorter special queue.
Able bodied, but morally hollow, people start abusing this system.
Disney has a system by which it offers VIP passes for a rather large sum.
This exploitation of their disabled policy is undermining that.
The old disabled policy is removed.
A new, more restrictive policy is implemented.
This new policy, conveniently, no longer poses any particular threat to the VIP passes.
Parents of disabled children are upset by the new policy, enter the lawyer.
Begin the thread.
As an organisation that focuses on children from all backgrounds, should they not be providing for all those children? Now, let's not get things more complicated than they already are. I feel that their old policy was the best way of dealing with it. The only potential negative effect being to able bodied guests in that their waiting times might have been increased, how negative that is really depends on your outlook on life and how long the waiting times are in the first place.
Disney quantifying disability is a complete non starter and even pointless for ourselves when we are talking about this issue. It doesn't matter whether one disability is considered more deserving than the other because the option to "screen" them is completely out the window.
Disney's new policy adversely punishes the children that would benefit from it the most. Seeing as the victims of this change are disabled children and their families trying to have a nice time in Disneyland I feel that the issue has been overblown. Obviously you stop the people cheating the system, but at what cost? Denying a disabled child the experience? I've been to a few themeparks around the UK as a child and a young teenager and I was never personally inconvenienced by a disabled person. Neither have I been inconvenienced by a disabled person in broader society, but that's beside the point.
Within the realm of Disneyland I'd argue that it's better to take the abuses of the disabled system on the chin because for every scumbag that does that you're helping a family have great family time where they might not always be able to.
It might come off as bleeding heart, but within the context of a Children's themepark I don't think it's unreasonable.
How are they denying them the experiance? They can still go to Disneyland and ride what they want, they just cant skip ahead of the line. More fair to me.
Well then... I have zero empathy for the plantiff.
With the set time for those with the disabled pass... combined with utilizing the existing fast pass system and some effort in planning, you can really minimize the wait times.
gak, when I went, I used the fast pass system, plus the real time queue sites... I didn't have that big of a wait.
Ouze wrote: From what I read here I believe they have accommodated these families in a reasonable fashion. The standard is to give an equal experience to all; what they are asking for is a better experience than others.
I went to an amusement park last week with some friends and the waits were insane. Like 75 minutes wait for a ride that lasts 18 seconds. My back still hurts from basically 8 hours of standing in lines, and I got sun-burned on one side of my head. No one has it easy at these places.
IMO they are still getting a waaaaaay better experience. I'd love to just sit in the shade eating ice cream, and be able to take a leak whenever I want, while other suckers queued for an hour. That's living the dream.
Well, and this is where I think Alph's experience could come in handy, is that there might be children that cannot handle even a short wait in line, such as a fast pass would allow.
And that enters into the pretty cold hearted question of the matter. How much do we really try to accommodate special needs children, and almost as importantly, their families.
That's the one issue that kind of has gotten ignored here, is that a disabled child might have siblings that don't have any limitations. Everybody wants to go as a family, I'm sure.
And that enters into the pretty cold hearted question of the matter. How much do we really try to accommodate special needs children, and almost as importantly, their families.
That's the one issue that kind of has gotten ignored here, is that a disabled child might have siblings that don't have any limitations. Everybody wants to go as a family, I'm sure.
My opinion? To the point in which they can go on the rides. Make it accesible for them to get the rides.
Lets put all the disabled kids at the front of the line to punch the people in the face who took advantage of the system and ruined it. Everyone gets to punch those people, but the people who suffer from those asshats get the first lotta punches.
I got stuck in an hr and a half traffic jam leaving Westchester for work today on my way to X-Wing night, so I'm slightly pissed off at jerkoffs and lines in general. So wanting those pricks to get punched is a venting process. Where's Pouncy? I think I need an e-Hug. He's the guy on here who gave those out, right?
It seems to me that queuing for a ride seems fairly unnecessary in the modern world. Giving everyone who turns up for a ride a set time, and letting them spend the subsequent time wandering about and booking/riding other rides instead of standing in queue seems much smarter than making people physically stand in the one spot for potentially hours at a time.
sebster wrote: It seems to me that queuing for a ride seems fairly unnecessary in the modern world. Giving everyone who turns up for a ride a set time, and letting them spend the subsequent time wandering about and booking/riding other rides instead of standing in queue seems much smarter than making people physically stand in the one spot for potentially hours at a time.
It is a bit weird. I could understand it better if they actually charged per ride, but places like Disney already have your money at the door... You have to wonder what the advantage is in making you stand in line when you could be wandering around snacking and spending more money. Also fewer rides would mean less maintenance which would be another saving.
There must be some dastardly reason why they still make you queue?
One is the simple practical reason that on some rides are not continuous, so people can't simply walk on. The difference between a lift and an escalator.
The other reason is that having paid a flat rate at the gate for free access to rides, most visitors want to ride continuously if they can. This obviously is impossible, as each ride has a maximum capacity.
There are two other ways the overall situation could be addressed. One would be to make people pay per ride. The other would be to hand out timed tickets to everyone wanting to register for each ride. This could be done with a smartphone app in the modern world.
sebster wrote: It seems to me that queuing for a ride seems fairly unnecessary in the modern world. Giving everyone who turns up for a ride a set time, and letting them spend the subsequent time wandering about and booking/riding other rides instead of standing in queue seems much smarter than making people physically stand in the one spot for potentially hours at a time.
I bolded the disfunctional portion of your suggestion. Right now, one visitor "blocks" one ride slot at a time (either by standing in line, or the functional equivalent, e.g., a "fast pass" like system with a designated time slot). If you let that same person "block" two slots at a time, you've effectively doubled the amount of time everyone has to wait* (or cut the ride capacity of the park in half), and so on.
*This assumes that every ride is continuously full, which is essentially true at Disney*.
I wouldn't be surprised to see an (eventual) push to do away with lines entirely, much as restaurants are slowly shifting to page-by-text/phone systems to replace the old site-limited pagers (which replaced/supplemented simple lists of names). But it's going to be a while, as (smart)phone penetration is NOT 100%, particularly for int'l visitors.
One is the simple practical reason that on some rides are not continuous, so people can't simply walk on. The difference between a lift and an escalator.
The other reason is that having paid a flat rate at the gate for free access to rides, most visitors want to ride continuously if they can. This obviously is impossible, as each ride has a maximum capacity.
Those are the reasons for waiting times, they are not a reason for a queue. Note the distinction there - a waiting time means they will tell you you can't ride for an hour, a queue is making you stand there until your time is due.
There are two other ways the overall situation could be addressed. One would be to make people pay per ride. The other would be to hand out timed tickets to everyone wanting to register for each ride. This could be done with a smartphone app in the modern world.
What I am thinking of is a timed ticket of some sort. That you go up to the ride (or some kind of central kiosk that can maintain bookings for all rides) and tell them you'd like to ride, and they book you in at the best available time that suits you. You then turn up at that time, being able to spend the hour or more before then doing something other than standing in a line.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Janthkin wrote: I bolded the disfunctional portion of your suggestion. Right now, one visitor "blocks" one ride slot at a time (either by standing in line, or the functional equivalent, e.g., a "fast pass" like system with a designated time slot). If you let that same person "block" two slots at a time, you've effectively doubled the amount of time everyone has to wait* (or cut the ride capacity of the park in half), and so on.
You don't understand. I would book times for various rides. You would book times for various rides. I would turn up at the various rides at my designated times, and you would turn up for your rides at your designated times.
As long as the system has some basic measure of some common sense and doesn't let one person book on the same ride over and over again, or on different rides at the same time then it is basically no different to queuing up - you still have to wait until the next available spot in the queue, you just don't have to physically wait there in a line.
Medium of Death wrote: As an organisation that focuses on children from all backgrounds, should they not be providing for all those children?
I don't know, what's the most profitable approach? Because that's the thing you're missing in your analysis. Disney isn't a charity, they're a for-profit business. They have a legal obligation to provide a minimum level of assistance to disabled people (wheelchair ramps, etc), but that does not include "give my child whatever they want because they have to be happy". And the current system provides exactly that: an option to avoid standing in the actual line for a long time, but without getting more rides than any other customer would get.
Disney isn't a charity obviously, I was just wondering about exactly how much the old policy was actually costing them. I doubt it was costing them anything at all.
If they were worried about people queuing up again after the had been on a ride they could have had a policy for when there was excessive queue that those in the shorter line couldn't ride again until the current waiting period for the ride was over.
As long as the system has some basic measure of some common sense and doesn't let one person book on the same ride over and over again, or on different rides at the same time then it is basically no different to queuing up - you still have to wait until the next available spot in the queue, you just don't have to physically wait there in a line.
This set up would have been better than the one currently implemented. Only allowing one ride to be booked doesn't really make a lot of sense. It would be even better if they rolled out this kind of system for everybody.
If you implemented the system for everyone, and didn't restrict it to only a single ride at a time, then everyone would be in every line. That system will fall apart rapidly when the wait times are hours long for every ride.
The rides have a known throughput capacity and timing. The engineers can guarantee for example (made up) that the Space Race ride can accommodate 24 people at 10 a.m., another 24 at 10:15, and so on. Except in case of an unexpected problem like a breakdown.
This being the case, why cannot Disney issue 24 tickets for the 10 a.m. departure, and so on? Some people are probably stupid enough to take two tickets for different rides at the same time, or two rides that are too far apart to move between them in the time available. A software booking system could avoid this. You could also allow people to queue physically and take seats that failed to be filled by the people allocated a timed ticket.
This kind of timed ticket system is quite widely used at museums and National Trust properties in the UK, where there is a problem of demand being higher than supply.
Medium of Death wrote: If we, as people of sound body and mind, can't find it in ourselves to give a tiny bit of our time, even indirectly, to a disabled person then I don't know what to say.
Not getting your hostility here.
Does the policy exactly aid those with disabilities by providing them a method to avoid lines? Yes.
Does the policy provide greater expense to the those with disabilities or harm them in any way more then any other patron? No.
Family friends are deaf and have a (now teenager) who's both deaf and nearly blind. They've been to Disney world and this would be very helpful. I have bad knees-burned out from a lifetime of being chased by hordes of beautiful wimminz (its a burden). Some days I'm fine. Some days I can't stand for more then about ten minutes. I've been to Disney and this would be very helpful.
So whats your problem and why are you screamingly violating #1?
hotsauceman1 wrote: And eventually the Kids with Autism will have to understand that waits exist.
Sounds like you have limited experience with individuals with Autism, and certainly don't have any in your immediate family...
WRONG!!!!! My nephew does, he has it. He hates waiting, but when we went to DL, he learned he had to. Are we going to start accomadating for people who ca tolerate waiting? Is there going to soon be a special checkout counter? Special Lane to Avoid traffic? Waiting is unavoidable, they will have to learn it is part of life. I find it funny people saying "I can only get on 4-5 rides a day" Um hello lady, its the same for normal people too.
Your glib comments show a shockng lack of understanding then.
I can only hope your nephew doesn't spend a lot of time with you.
And given your attitude, I'd imagine that's the case.
Ouze wrote: From what I read here I believe they have accommodated these families in a reasonable fashion. The standard is to give an equal experience to all; what they are asking for is a better experience than others.
I went to an amusement park last week with some friends and the waits were insane. Like 75 minutes wait for a ride that lasts 18 seconds. My back still hurts from basically 8 hours of standing in lines, and I got sun-burned on one side of my head. No one has it easy at these places.
IMO they are still getting a waaaaaay better experience. I'd love to just sit in the shade eating ice cream, and be able to take a leak whenever I want, while other suckers queued for an hour. That's living the dream.
Try the lines at a popular ride at a water park. They can be two hours. Fortunately we have the plan down at Schiltterbahn (the largest water park in the world just an hour drive away yea boyyyyyyyyy!!!!). Get there very early on a weekday. Hit the popular rides at the new park first, then go to the old park. About lunch they have a mile long floating water ride. Get a margarita, float for thirty minutes. Get another margarita, float for thirty minutes. get another margarita...
With TBone now being recalled to personally train the Wiener Valkyries for WienerRok, we can again attend and will be going back, but this time with 3-8 teenage girls. I wonder if they'll let me bring my Mossberg for escort purposes...
Medium of Death wrote: I was speaking more generally about the respite offered by specialist schools. I find it hard to believe the care costs would have been the same for the child to go into any form of education. My point about the "Daily Mail" ideology is that it places the blame with those at the bottom of the scale, rather than the top where decisions are made.
Evidently you are still having trouble reading plain English.
The blame for £250,000 annual costs for one child are firmly on the officials, not the family of the victim.
Nobody is arguing for any excessive cost to be placed on Disney and I doubt the queue skip one was incurring one.
Nobody is indeed, the relevance of the example is, again, the need for a philosophical approach rather than an emotive one.
A philosophical approach is, again, best established by giving obvious examples that breed obvious general principles, these principle can then can be extrapolated upon for less obvious cases.
If a philosophical approach was used by society Disney would be in a better position. Because it is not yet firmly established that some forms of inclusion are impractical, the carers of those beyond the threshold of inclusion feel empowered to sue.
Without a philosophical approach its a lose lose for Disney. Assuming they changed policy to account for the level of disability of the children on whose supposed behalf the lawsuits were filed, then would slightly more disabled cases as yet uncatered for feel the right to sue.
Where do you draw the line?
The answer is you cannot, however with a philosophical principle established one doesnt need to, it becomes clearly understood that some disabled assessibility is provided, but that it cannot possibly enable everyone, and it is nobodies fault if individuals fall outside the threshold of what Disney can do to accommodate.
sebster wrote: As long as the system has some basic measure of some common sense and doesn't let one person book on the same ride over and over again, or on different rides at the same time then it is basically no different to queuing up - you still have to wait until the next available spot in the queue, you just don't have to physically wait there in a line.
Apparently they do already have this at Disney, it's called Fast Pass, is free, and according to reviews it seems to work quite well. Yet people still queue because I guess they don't do their research...
At some other parks you can pay ten times more for a fast-track ticket that lets you cut to the front of lines. It's possible that since queues create a market for this, parks would have little interest in eliminating them.
With TBone now being recalled to personally train the Wiener Valkyries for WienerRok, we can again attend and will be going back, but this time with 3-8 teenage girls. I wonder if they'll let me bring my Mossberg for escort purposes...
Kilkrazy wrote: The rides have a known throughput capacity and timing. The engineers can guarantee for example (made up) that the Space Race ride can accommodate 24 people at 10 a.m., another 24 at 10:15, and so on. Except in case of an unexpected problem like a breakdown.
This being the case, why cannot Disney issue 24 tickets for the 10 a.m. departure, and so on? Some people are probably stupid enough to take two tickets for different rides at the same time, or two rides that are too far apart to move between them in the time available. A software booking system could avoid this. You could also allow people to queue physically and take seats that failed to be filled by the people allocated a timed ticket.
This kind of timed ticket system is quite widely used at museums and National Trust properties in the UK, where there is a problem of demand being higher than supply.
It's not an individual ride's throughput at issue; it's the park's overall ride capacity.
Right now, you can occupy one space on a ride (any ride) per hour, by standing in line. (Really, a variable length of time depending on day, time of day, which rides, etc., but bear with me.) --Get in line at 9 AM, ride at 10 AM, get in line at 10:05 AM, ride at 11:05 AM, etc.
Fast Pass increases that throughput, in that you are effectively standing in 2 lines at once. (Not quite a doubling, owing to transit between rides, actual time to ride the first ride, etc.) --Get Fast Pass for 10:15, get in line at 9:00 AM, ride at 10:00 AM, ride at 10:15 AM, get new Fast Pass for 11:45 AM, get in line at 10:25 AM, etc.
Unrestrained e-booking could let you queue up for essentially constant rides...except the park doesn't have the capacity to handle the same volume of people (which is their goal) with a greatly increased ride/hour ratio. Remember these parks are already at (if not above) max capacity; there is no improvement in ride-event efficiency for the park by making changes.
So, realistically, the best it gets is they look at their data, see average wait times for certain days & times, and impose mandatory waits between rides that likely coincide with the average queue length. And then they likely allocate only a percentage of seats on each ride event for these pre-bookings, so as not to discriminate against people without the necessary technology, or people who spontaneously decide they want to ride that ride.
And...that almost describes the Fast Pass system as it currently exists, except Fast Pass only lets you block off one ride event at a time; I'm guessing that has to do with not wanting to force people to be there the instant the park opens, or be completely unable to use the Fast Pass system at all.
DO you feel better now that you've gotten that off your chest?
Not really. I just looked at the thread, and I agreed with what has been said. Mostly about the fact that the Parents assume that they have more rights and are ensured better quality products above everyone else, just because their kid is disabled. Which is kind of funny, because that would only allow people who don't have a disability to abuse that system.
Instead it would be better if they instead of bringing disabled kids to have better quality, that they are just brought back up to the normal level. No benefits, just are recognized as disabled and are given special seating. This would avoid a lot of issues. But anyway. Disney will get sued no matter how they do it, because people result to sueing instead of discussing it with the company.
kronk wrote: "Now, however, visitors to Walt Disney World and Disneyland can obtain a Disability Access Service Card which allows them to schedule a return time for rides based on current wait times. The system prevents those with disabilities from having to wait in line, but only allows visitors to schedule one attraction at a time. "
The disabled+family is still able to get in the shorter line at the set time?
Right?
The issue is that the disabled kid+family couldn't do the same ride over, and over again like they did under the old policy?
Well, from my understanding of what kronk is saying: They still have to "wait in line" (if they would have to spend 60 minutes in the line, they get to come back and 'skip' the line in 60 minutes), they just don't have to physically "wait in line".
So an Autistic child still has to wait 60 minutes to get on the ride, same as everybody else, but they can spend those 60 minutes playing with their family/visit Disney characters/walk around/not being cooped up between 100 other people without any ability to move express themselves and making everybody else in line angry because "they can't control their child".
It seems like the most reasonable compromise between "doesn't get to skip in line" and "doesn't have to wait in line".
Not really. I just looked at the thread, and I agreed with what has been said. Mostly about the fact that the Parents assume that they have more rights and are ensured better quality products above everyone else, just because they are parents Which is kind of funny, because that would only allow people who don't have a disability to abuse that system.
.
Fixed that for you. Parents can sometimes be holier then thou in and look for reasons to be it. I bet these are the type of parents that look for pity and admiration because they have a disabled kid. They used them to feel like they are better then those in line. These people dont care about their kids, but their ability to skip lines.
kronk wrote: "Now, however, visitors to Walt Disney World and Disneyland can obtain a Disability Access Service Card which allows them to schedule a return time for rides based on current wait times. The system prevents those with disabilities from having to wait in line, but only allows visitors to schedule one attraction at a time. "
The disabled+family is still able to get in the shorter line at the set time?
Right?
The issue is that the disabled kid+family couldn't do the same ride over, and over again like they did under the old policy?
Well, from my understanding of what kronk is saying: They still have to "wait in line" (if they would have to spend 60 minutes in the line, they get to come back and 'skip' the line in 60 minutes), they just don't have to physically "wait in line".
So an Autistic child still has to wait 60 minutes to get on the ride, same as everybody else, but they can spend those 60 minutes playing with their family/visit Disney characters/walk around/not being cooped up between 100 other people without any ability to move express themselves and making everybody else in line angry because "they can't control their child".
It seems like the most reasonable compromise between "doesn't get to skip in line" and "doesn't have to wait in line".
Not quite... everyone has ALWAYS had to get in a line.
In a "fast pass" system: There's already two lines.
One normal line and one "fast pass" line. The fast pass line is almost always MUCH shorter. In order to get this "fast pass", you'd have to get the fast pass ticket about an hour earlier. Obviously, you wont be able to use the fast pass line as there's a Disney worker there waiting to accept the appropriate ticket for that timeslot.
I think you can only have two fast pass tickets at one time. (at least, thats how it worked two years ago). Which isn't a big deal... you just had to plan it out carefully.
Traditionally, those with the Disability Access Service can simply use the fast pass line (also marked with disability signs) whenever they want.... and they could theoretically jump in front of the line (I didn't see that though... the line moved quickly enough anyway).
Now, it seems like they'll have their own special fast pass system... which, if they can use that and the traditional fast pass system, they'll have plenty of rides to choose from in the shorter line.
AduroT wrote: If you implemented the system for everyone, and didn't restrict it to only a single ride at a time, then everyone would be in every line. That system will fall apart rapidly when the wait times are hours long for every ride.
There's a whole world between letting people just a single ride at a time and letting people book unlimited rides. You could, for instance, say that given the average ride queues at the park then in a given day a person usually only rides 8 rides, therefore a person can only book on 8 rides spread over the day, and no more than 2 of the really popular rides. Or some other system control.
But more than the minor details of how this might be applied, I really just don't understand people's mentality that they'll complain about a general idea without ever spending time thinking about how that could be made to work. They note a problem and then just declare the whole system won't work, without ever spending any time thinking about what obvious changes could be made to adjust that system.
I mean, in this case it's particularly odd because as Smacks informs me, Disney already has a system in place for pre-booking rides. So in effect people are saying a system could never work when it already exists. Very weird.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Smacks wrote: Apparently they do already have this at Disney, it's called Fast Pass, is free, and according to reviews it seems to work quite well. Yet people still queue because I guess they don't do their research...
Ah, thanks for the information. My work here is done... or rather was pointless from the beginning
At some other parks you can pay ten times more for a fast-track ticket that lets you cut to the front of lines. It's possible that since queues create a market for this, parks would have little interest in eliminating them.
Yes, and I really don't like that kind of system. We as a species are a funny lot, able to tolerate all kinds of unfairness and accept other people having more than us in all kinds of circumstances, but watching someone walk to the front of the queue because they simply paid more is something that just talks all the fun out of the experience.
I thiiiiiiiiink its actually the samee fast pass system. I know when we went years ago you could only book one ride at a time. But back then we could pass the time by chasing dinosaurs.
Frazzled wrote: I thiiiiiiiiink its actually the samee fast pass system. I know when we went years ago you could only book one ride at a time. But back then we could pass the time by chasing dinosaurs.
Is that what the kids are calling it now? We ussed to call it getting baked.
