Class-Action Lawsuit against Disney Parks filed - CORRECTION: not class-action

[seidelhd]

Over GAC -> DAS and treatment of guests needing accommodations.

http://www.dogalilaw.com/disney-autism-ada-lawsuit.html

 

[mttmilner]

This should be interesting.

 

[DLgal]

Seriously? Ridiculous. And I say this as a parent of two Autistic kids. Much of the wording in that is extremely offensive to the Autism community by implying that people with Autism, across the board, cannot do this or that. These 16 parents are full of it. I feel badly that their kids have parents who feel they are capable of so little.

Can't go browse in a store? Can't sit down and have a snack? Can't ride a different ride with a shorter wait time? No...not can't...don't WANT to. These kids eat snacks, shop in stores, and wait in lines at other places, like school, the supermarket, etc. They can do it at DL too.

We spent MANY days at DL when our kids were very young. Never even used the old GAC, rather made choices that our kids could manage.

Sounds like a bunch of entitled, bratty parents hiding behind the "warrior" title. So pathetic. I hope the judge laughs in their face.

 

[Coonhound]

It's funny that for years people claimed a GAC wasn't really front of the line access, but, if you read the lawsuit, (and I read the entire lawsuit) they are claiming that the GAC allowed them to have no waiting just ride immediately, and they're not happy with the new DAS card because it means waiting instead of immediately getting on rides. Interesting how people's statements change, isn't it.

I think this lawsuit is going to get laughed out of court. Or, Disney will cave and give them some sort of special golden ticket so they'll go away.

They claim that their kids will annoy others if they have to stand in line. BUT the DAS provides for that, doesn't it- you don't have to wait IN line, you can wait anywhere you like. So while we are all standing in a line for an hour, you can let your child walk around or you can try riding something else or you can even just sit on a bench and play on his phone.
Some have even claimed their child could hurt someone by lashing out if forced to stand in line...not acceptable, if you or someone in your party lashes out at someone they should be removed from the parks.

 

[Maggie'sMom]

Over GAC -> DAS and treatment of guests needing accommodations.

http://www.dogalilaw.com/disney-autism-ada-lawsuit.html

Sorry but this just rubs me the wrong way. As the parent to a child who has multiple disabilities, and autism is the latest diagnosis added to the pile, Disney doesn't owe me an experience where my child doesn't have to wait. The DAS provides access to rides. This lawsuit reads like a big whine. We never used the GAC before. I managed our trips with good touring plans and fastpasses. The first couple trips were really rough. The last two were really good, mainly because I learned from my mistakes and adjusted. I will be getting a DAS this next trip because of the changes to the FP+ system, but don't anticipate using it more than a couple times during the trip.

 

[StitchesGr8Fan]

It's also inaccurate, as the DAS holder doesn't have to go to the ride to get a return time. Anyone in the party can do that.

 

[Disneychick75]

This is interesting and not surprising. I don't think the suit will get anywhere but then I also thought OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony would be found guilty. A couple of their specialties are ADA Discrimination and consumer class action lawsuits so they know the game.
We'll see.

 

[Maggie'sMom]

From the webpage linked:

Disney refuses to tell disabled persons anything about the accommodations which will be provided to them until they arrive at the resort, which deters families with disabled or autistic children from risking the investment of traveling all the way to the parks.

If that's the case, then why is there this available on their website.

 

[seidelhd]

I posted this as an FYI with no judgement. A lawsuit was only a matter of time. I am very disappointed in the wording of the complaint (I have not read the entire 176 page document) for the reasons you all state above. However, only 16 families came forth for the class-action, so it reflects their needs and experiences, not those of the overall population who needed the accommodations of the GAC.

 

[JillyBean1899]

Thank you guys for your posts (especially parents with ASD kids)! I was going to post how absolutely asinine this was, but figured I'd get b/c I don't have a kid on ASD and "couldn't possibly understand".

My initial reaction was "what do you do with your kids when you have to wait other places?" Would you also sue your local hair cut place because yeah, you made an appointment but the stylist got stuck with a demanding customer and you had to wait 10 minutes, so you didn't get "front of the line" access? My second thought (and probably the "ruder" of the two) was "if you don't like it, don't go ... Disney is not an essential service, you won't die if you can't get on rides immediately."

Yes, meltdowns do occur at Disney. But how many of those are due to overstimulation in general, not the waiting time for a ride? Even "normal" kids have meltdowns over the wait times, does that mean that those parents should get front of the line access, too? And I'm sure meltdowns occur in non-Disney situations, so how do those parents handle them then?

But my favorite line:

There was no widespread problem of abuse of the prior system for guests with disabilities. If any abuse really occurred, it was not committed by persons with cognitive impairments. There is no reason to make children and young adults with developmental disabilities collateral damage by withdrawing necessary accommodations.

No widespread problem of abuse? So I guess those stories of people hiring themselves out as "tour guides" because they used a wheelchair were completely made up? Same thing with the teenagers that would rent a wheelchair and take turns being pushed around in it because they knew they'd get front of the line access? Hate to break it to these people, but the ones that services are intended for are typically not the ones that abuse them ... it's the people that the services aren't even for that abuse them. Without having some way to "prove" that you're disabled (which asking is against the ADA), Disney can't restrict the service to only the people that "need" it, so they made it unattractive to people that don't need it. Will people still game the system because they think they're getting some great benefit? Yes. But there will be a lot fewer of them once word spreads.

 

[mttmilner]

I posted this as an FYI with no judgement. A lawsuit was only a matter of time. I am very disappointed in the wording of the complaint (I have not read the entire 176 page document) for the reasons you all state above. However, only 16 families came forth for the class-action, so it reflects their needs and experiences, not those of the overall population who needed the accommodations of the GAC.

The majority of it are the individual families claims about why the DAS doesn't work for them or the bad experiences they have had with it.

The interesting thing though is that there are a few of the 16 who state they haven't even been back since the DAS was implemented and there is at least one other one that states they left after only one ride because they were afraid of a meltdown.

Also the lawsuit claims that Disney has been in the process of implementing the DAS for over 4 years and leaked or made up the abuse of the GAC to provide a reason for the DAS.

 

[ttintagel]

Although I don’t agree with everything in the link, I also don’t believe that it’s been clearly demonstrated that abuse was “widespread” (the plural of anecdote is not data, after all) or that it couldn’t be dealt with by addressing specific behaviors (like advertising one’s services as a front-of-the-line tour guide).

It is an interesting situation; any one diagnosis covers a great multitude of needs, and a system that works well for one group of children with autism may not for others. I suppose it's possible that these particular families truly can't be accommodated under the current system, even if most families can.

 

[Kellykins1218]

I can't believe it was actually filed by an attorney. It reads as though written by a high school student.

 

[Princess Disney Mom]

We had the GAC last summer at DL and it was not front of the line access. My daughter ended up having a meltdown anyway because the people mover had been removed. We took her back to the hotel for the rest of the day so she learns she cannot just have a tantrum. It happens no matter how hard anyone tries and it would never cross my mind to sue anyone.

 

[moon]

So, the lawsuit basically blames people in wheelchairs for the abuse, as if they were the "handicapped for rent" I saw the the news segments reporting the abuse, and IIRC, none of the "rented disabled" where wheelchair users.

It wouldn't be as fun and convenient for these rich abusers of the system to rent a wheelchair user, being that sometimes the wait can be longer (like when waiting for an accessible car) or the inability to ride some rides (like Peter Pan, teacups, etc).

To make the investment worthwhile, the "rented disabled" needed to be ambulatory, with an invisible disability. And that's what I saw reported.

Funny also now they don't mind that wheelchair users have to wait. For them, having the wheelchair users wait in mainstream lines (without the benefit of the DAS, even) is fine and dandy. Just don't take FOTL privileges from them, who cares about the rest of the disabled population!

 

[moon]

Here's a link to the news report on the abuse. Notice that the "Disabled for rent" are ambulatory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrJ7Gr5nxAE

So it is not as the lawsuit claims, that once "people in wheelchairs had to use the mainstream like the problem was solved". This video alone may be enough to dismiss the lawsuit

 

[Cavners5]

We had the GAC last summer at DL and it was not front of the line access. My daughter ended up having a meltdown anyway because the people mover had been removed. We took her back to the hotel for the rest of the day so she learns she cannot just have a tantrum. It happens no matter how hard anyone tries and it would never cross my mind to sue anyone.

i

I absolutely agree with what you did. My DD did the same thing at DL last winter. We told her she could not act that way, and removed her from the park. We did have a DAS and utilized the fast pass system. No it was not front of the line, and yes we had to wait, but we had explained that to her and for her to put her patience hat on. She used her stuffed pillow pet as her hat....LOL, when she started to feel overwhelmed. Yes we did have meltdowns, buy the CM's were wonderful at giving us "quiet locations" suggestions. Upstairs at the Grand Californian was a godsend!!!!

I don't want front of the line access, just a little help, which Disney provided. We planned and were extremely flexible. And it was during the week between Christmas and New Years...EEK

 

[mttmilner]

However:

They've pleaded sufficient factual information in that rambling complaint which would, if proved, form the basis of a valid claim under the ADA.

Sixteen is a significant number of representative plaintiffs in a proposed class action, if they're able to show that their experience is similar to all families with similar disabilities.

While I don't think they can win this suit, I don't think they'll get laughed out of court either.

Should be interesting to watch.

What factual information did they provide? After reading it, all I was able to pick up on was that their children had meltdowns because they were not able to wait.

It was my understanding that the ADA provided equal access not more. The DAS provides equal access. In fact, with the DAS and FP+ couldn't one argue they actually have more access to the park than the rest of us?

And 16 people is a large number, but a handful of them have not been to the parks since the DAS was implemented and a few more left the park after only one ride because they "foresaw a meltdown". It seems like only about 8 of the 16 would have a valid point.

Also, what are the ramifications for those named in the lawsuit. Could Disney ban them or prevent them from coming back while the suit is going on?

 

[Jedana]

What factual information did they provide? After reading it, all I was able to pick up on was that their children had meltdowns because they were not able to wait.

It was my understanding that the ADA provided equal access not more. The DAS provides equal access. In fact, with the DAS and FP+ couldn't one argue they actually have more access to the park than the rest of us?

And 16 people is a large number, but a handful of them have not been to the parks since the DAS was implemented and a few more left the park after only one ride because they "foresaw a meltdown". It seems like only about 8 of the 16 would have a valid point.

Also, what are the ramifications for those named in the lawsuit. Could Disney ban them or prevent them from coming back while the suit is going on?

I don't understand why these parents can't see that teaching your child tat they have to wait their turn is a bad thing. Will they be suing the airlines and airports for making them wait in security lines or for waiting on the airplane for it to take off, while others are loading? What about suing the gas station for them having to wait in line to pump their gas for the drive there; rental car company lines while waiting to get a rental car; the hotels themselves for not having their rooms ready when they drive up, with the hotel keys in an employee's hand as they sweep in the door, so no waiting in line to get the room?


The adults are suing for "emotional distress" after having to deal with their child's meltdowns.


Disney will get receive their names; there will be depositions. So, Disney will know who these people are, even if the general public does not. Disney can ban people from their property for abuse, misuse of property, etc (as long as they are not banning them for being disabled, etc). The question is, will Disney have the fortitude to tell these people "hey, you're suing us because you can't use our DAS system, so you can't use our parks at all." (I hope so ) At the least, they need to have a restraining order in place during the lawsuit, because there should be zero contact between the two parties until the lawsuit is settled.

People who have used the DAS and made it work should contact Disney, at the least, and tell them why/how they did it. Maybe allow Disney to use them as witnesses in the farce of a case.

These people were on one FB page (the person who had that page is a "special needs advocate", that did nothing for advocation, but a lot of complaining). There was a problem with her FB "business" page that they were using, so they made a new page, and the person who made it realized that they were not looking to make things better, but that they were actively looking to cause problems, so she booted them. They are on another FB page now, and have made that one private, so they can plot and scheme without people telling them they are wrong.

 

[CPT Tripss]

Interesting in the case of visually impaired . . . Class members get a few signs and other low cost accommodations and future discrimination complaints by visually impaired people is barred; lawyers get $1.5 million.