Disney Responds to Disability Access Service Lawsuit

| July 13, 2014 | 41 Replies

Disney’s response to the lawsuit alleging Disney’s Disability Access Service (DAS) discriminates against individuals who have some degree of cognitive impairments essentially asserts that the lawsuit has no merit and should be dismissed.  But to be honest, the response is mostly boring, though that isn’t a bad thing, legally.  Monorail_Energy_EllenDSC_6937DSC_6937

Civil lawsuits typically start with the filing of a complaint.   The party sued has several choices if it chooses to respond.  The most popular choices are to ask the court to dismiss the lawsuit or file what is called an “answer” to the lawsuit.  Disney has not asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit outright; instead, it chose to file an answer.  This is what happens in most lawsuits.

Disney’s answer is unsensational.  While complaints alleging discrimination often include sensational allegations, as this one does, few sensational answers are filed.  An answer simply needs to respond to the allegations in the complaint and set out any “affirmative defenses” (more on this, shortly).  Formally, the answer need only admit, deny or say there isn’t sufficient information to respond to the allegations in the complaint.  The answer does not need to “set the record straight.”  This isn’t a hard rule.  In fact, when I prepare an answer, I often try to include a paragraph which explains my client’s position.  But this is contrary to what is drummed into lawyers by law schools (or so I recall), and it’s not surprising that Disney’s lawyers did little more than admit or deny the allegations.

MK Town Square TheaterDSC_2162DSC_2162But “little” isn’t nothing and Disney’s answer demonstrates it isn’t rolling over.  For example, I mentioned the affirmative defenses.  Disney’s answer includes over thirty affirmative defenses, a good number, even for a complaint spanning over 175 pages.  Technically, these are allegations the defendant intends to prove which will defeat the claims in the complaint.  (One example of an affirmative defense is the argument that the lawsuit was not timely filed.)  In practice, however, “affirmative defenses” include a lot of unnecessary allegations because lawyers find security in redundancy.

Not surprisingly, Disney asserts that its “conduct was legally permissible.”  Nor is it surprising that Disney argues that the “claims are barred to the extent that Disney was not required under federal or state law to provide unlimited, repeated, immediate access to its rides and attractions as the only available accommodation for purposes of reasonably accommodating Plaintiffs’ alleged disability.”   Elsewhere, Disney denied DAS was “in any way deficient” because it does not authorize “repeating the ride over and over again without waiting.”

Of more interest is the assertion that Disney “accommodated Plaintiffs’ alleged disability by providing services via alternative methods other than those demanded by Plaintiffs.”  The latter point reflects the doctrine that the ADA requires Disney to make “reasonable modifications” to its normal practices but a modification can be reasonable even if the change isn’t what the plaintiff wants. In essence, Disney is saying DAS is a reasonable modification to Disney’s existing practices while the parents who filed the lawsuit are saying it may be a modification but it isn’t reasonable for their children.  But as I have said, it isn’t clear to me what the parents want Disney to do except provide them with “prompt” access to the attractions.

I’m going to diverge from Disney’s answer for a moment.  In my first blog post about the lawsuit, I remarked that the “complaint incongruously states that the plaintiffs are not looking for “priority” access but, in the same sentence, says the plaintiffs “have a special need for near-immediate access.”  Oddly, the assertion that the parents want “near-immediate access” has now been dropped in a newly refiled complaint.  It’s complicated, but essentially, the court dismissed the first complaint because its rules prohibit a lawsuit from being filed electronically when the lawsuit is being filed by parents on behalf of their children. (Under California law, I think, the courts appoint a guardian before a lawsuit can be filed by a minor. So, the parents refiled the complaint with a slew of petitions asking the court to appoint the parents as guardians.)  The refiled complaint is largely the same as the original complaint but it omits the “near-immediate access” assertion.  It asserts (as did the original complaint) that the parents “have never sought either immediate access or ‘priority’ access.”  The refiled complaint again criticizes Disney for saying the DAS card does not provide “immediate” access but the tact it adopts is to say the parents want MagicBands which will provide them with “prompt access to all rides, or to specific rides.”

Disney’s answer makes a few other points, albeit rather subtly.  Disney asserts that “reasonable use of Disney’s procedures would have prevented the harm that Plaintiffs allegedly suffered.”  This seems to be a response to the numerous allegations in the complaint that “Disney no longer provided individualized attention to persons with cognitive impairments” and that “Disney expressly trained its Guest Relations employees not to acknowledge any individual special needs and not to provide any individualized accommodations. As the DAS card provides on its cover, no matter what the special need, the ‘accommodation’ is the same.”  Disney seems to be sensitive to these kind of allegations because a recurring theme in its answer is that Disney “works individually with guests with disabilities to provide assistance that is responsive to their circumstances, and specifically denies the implication that the DAS system changed that fact.”  Disney also denied “any implication that cast members do not work with guests individually to assess their request for assistance.”

MK-CC-Fireworks_DSC_3597DSC_3597

I was rather interested to see how Disney would respond to the sensational allegation that Disney was influencing the news media to create adverse publicity about “rented invalids” so it could roll out DAS and get rid Guest Assistance Cards (GAC).  Disney’s answer, however, didn’t say much more than that the “GAC program resulted in abuse and fraudulent misuse which was widespread and continuing” and deny without comment the allegations about the publicity over abuse of GACs.

Disney’s answer won’t trigger any action by the court (other than to schedule future hearings).  An answer essentially serves to focus the issues that are in dispute.  A trial date will be set but it is too early to say when this might be.

I have to say that it is a little hard for me to define the exact dispute here.  Clearly, the parents do not like DAS, alleging that Disney imposed DAS on them without considering their individual needs.  They also, clearly, want GAC back, at least GAC as it was apparently applied to them.  Disney, on the other hand, goes to some length to deny DAS changed Disney’s practice of working “individually with guests with disabilities to provide assistance that is responsive to their circumstances” and given the strong statements about GAC abuse, it doesn’t seem as if Disney is going to return to that program willingly.

I can’t help but think that, if the parties could get past the sensationalized allegations and hurt feelings caused when Disney implemented DAS, they might come to an understanding that could resolve the parent’s concerns.  Disney says it has no obligation to provide “unlimited, repeated, immediate access to its rides and attractions” (and I doubt a court would order Disney to do so) but it isn’t clear this is what the parents wants.  After all, there is no dispute that Disney has a long history of “admirably accommodating” (as the parents allege) guests with cognitive impairments.



Tags: , , , ,

Category: Disney World, Disneyland, News

  • beerman42

    Sounds like the lawyers are only ones winning.

  • Cheryl Kvalvik

    The first time we used DAS we were asked pointed questions on my husband’s health issues. This last time the service agent seemed shocked and said we didn’t have to say what was wrong with him. I have wondered why no one has sued over Disney requesting personal and private health info. (not that I would).

  • Christina

    What is it, specifically, that the parents are requesting? Are they seeking monetary damages for a “ruined vacation”?

    Some people’s children.

    • Mer

      Parents want their kids to be able to go to the front of EVERY line at ANY time, whether or not the child is the one that needs the new system. Many adults that used to utilize the GAC card allowed their children to use it without them, and there was nothing wrong with the children. Their excuse? “My kids have a disabled parent so they deserve to have a better vacation than children who’s parents have no health issues because of everything they’ve had to go through in their lives.” Disney offers a tour guide service at over $300/hr, and those people get to go to the front of every line. If they really demand that service, they can still pay for it.

      • Christina

        I should have clarified my question, sorry…I am familiar with the old GAC; what I’m wondering is what it is in the suit the parents are requesting. It’s been a while since I took a legal class, but I believe the general requirements of a suit to be standing, actual harm/damage inflicted (not necessarily physical injuries), and statement of proposed remedy. I haven’t read the very lengthy suit, so I’m trying to ascertain what remedy they are seeking. I’m assuming it’s twofold–both monetary damages and the institution of a FOTL pass for anyone who states they have a disability. Or perhaps they’re just asking for money, with the knowledge that if Disney pays out over this, they are likely to return to the free-for-all enjoyed by GAC-holders. The author seems to be a fairly definitive source, so I thought I’d ask for a better legal understanding of the suit.

        Thank you, though, for taking the time to answer my question :)

        • http://blog.wdwinfo.com Jack Burgin

          I would like to answer your question but an honest answer has to be that I’m confused myself. As to money damages, the statutes on which they rely don’t allow for anything more than small damage awards. Florida and federal law does not provide for any damage award. California allows up to $4k per violation. Even with “free” dining, a money award isn’t going to influence Disney. They also ask for injunctions but here is where they confuse me.

          I know a judge who delights in watching attorneys be unable to answer his simple question: what do you want me to do? What exactly do you want me to order them to do? An injunction has to be 1) lawful and 2) not be unduly broad.

          Even if the parents don’t want “near immediate” access to attractions, they will want accurate, iron clad return times. Their complaint criticizes DAS for saying it doesn’t guarantee immediate access and they do not like that their actual access time might be longer than stated. I’m just not sure how Disney could be ordered to do anything different.

          How can a judge order Disney to provide return times that provide for near immediate access to the ride, at least not without ordering Disney to make fundamental changes to how attractions load guests. That said, the parents best hope is to persuade Disney to do something positive. Disney settled with up with the Segway folks by agreeing to do something a court was not likely to order Disney to implement.

          Disney’s biggest hurdle is convincing the court that it still takes an individualized approach. The complaint sets out a good bit of unhelpful comments allegedly made by guest relations employees. I’ve said before that, if the alleged comments were made, Disney may need to do some more intensive training on the proper way to resolve requests for modifications.

  • Mer

    Disney did the right thing. When I was working there in 05-06 the GAC card was still available and was SO abused. You’d see an adult sitting in the smoking section for hours just hanging out in their wheelchair and their kids would just take their card and run through the attraction over and over again. If you mentioned that the card holder needed to come with the kids to use the GAC they’d either complain to a manager or wait til rotation came around and someone else was manning the gate. People have changed to much since I started coming to Disney, it’s all “Me Me Me” with no thought to the fact that someone else is enjoying a vacation of a lifetime, while annual passholders with GAC cards are making wait times increase exponentially just so their family can use their card while they (sometimes) aren’t even in the park that day. Good job Disney, you aren’t causing problems, just making things more fair. Some people ruined it for everyone, and unfortunately, Disney is responding. I hope they stick to their guns. It’s not like the new system doesn’t allow 6 FP+ at one time. Heaven forbid they only get to go to the front of the line once an hour instead of as often as they can.

    • William Stewart Jr

      Agreed .
      I’ll go a step further, if I can . I believe that as long as Disney keeps trying to make everybody in the world happy at their parks, there will always be somebody, somewhere trying to wind up entering the parks on a witch hunt to try to ruin it for everyone which is actually raising a bigger issue that has always been there .
      It`s called ” crowd congestion ” . But that problem will wind up solving itself overtime as people are finding themselves digging deeper into their pockets for theme park admission .
      With that said, thank you for your time and dedication to making magic in the parks .

      • Megan K

        you said it exactly, on how people ruin things for other people…
        Kudos!!

        • William Stewart Jr

          Thanks, Megan K .
          That’s ok . As I said, these people who come to Disney, getting into things that are built for disabled folks, etc ., ruining things for everyone, Let that theme park admission pricing catch them, as the years go by. My only tip for Disney is keep growing and adding on new and better experiences . All of these witch hunters trying to sneak into the parks to ruin people’s fun are going to find themselves with some pretty holey pockets , all because they wasted their time and energy spending hundreds, or thousands of dollars in angry money .

  • Diane

    I feel for the parents in the suit who “may” have been misled and will be on the hook to pay all of Disney’s legal fees if they prevail. I am sure it took quite a large amount of time just to write the reply. Maybe they will realize this and let it go.

  • Niccole Ann Mize

    As a parent of a kiddo with special needs and utilized the old SAP, I am happy to hear that Disney is not standing down in this frivolous lawsuit. Disney has complied with ALL ADA rules for accommodation. The pass is privilege that they offered and it was abused; the consequence is taking away the privilege.

  • Dolly

    As a parent with 2 aspie kids I have one complaint ( and I am not sure this still stands) that is that you can only hold one return time on the new assistace card. We have been going to disney for years- go for 3 weeks to help accomadate my kids time/ spacial needs- we are lucky. The old card was great for days you just never knew when a meldown would occur but times change. Thankfullly my kids are older and easier in lines or wait times elsewhere . Again just worried ….if the mine train wait return will be 3 hours snd we won’t get on anything else because we can only have one return time at once. Disney is doing a good job with trying to change things for the positive. We shall see

    • McClainIsAScam

      The DAS still works that way, and it should work that way.

      People without a DAS can’t wait for more than ride at a time, so why should DAS users? That waiting time can be used to wait in short standby lines or to ride using FP+. That’s something that non-DAS users can’t do.

  • jayneaves

    As a parent with special needs children, I have never used either service but that is just a point of principle for me personally. However, I find this lawsuit baffling in so many ways. It seems to me that it is about disgruntled parents who are upset that THEIR immediate access has been taken away. They are totally unclear about what they want because they know what they want will not fly in court. What they want is immediate access and preferential treatment and I’m sorry that isn’t fair. Disney makes accommodations that are fair to all of their paying guests. Everyone waits their turn. My kids may have autism but that doesn’t mean they have a right to get on an attraction at will at the cost of someone else. That line these people want to skip includes cranky toddlers, elderly folk, amputees, etc. Everyone has a legitimate reason to want to access the attraction quickly, ask that cranky 3 year old if he wants to wait his turn! The DAS is a fair compromise and I think this lawsuit gives all parents with special children a bad name!

    • William Stewart Jr

      Agreed, @jayneaves:disqus .
      I believe that this is also about disgruntled parents seeing the GAC Card as a boulevards to over plan and try to over do their day at the parks .
      They act like the GAC was a pass that allowed them the path to cram everything in the park(s), in one day .
      That’s is what is really causing them to explode over the DAS card change .
      Hey, They are just going to have to get over that hump, especially for the sanity of their disabled ones, or else their will always be an issue with crowd congestion as far as waiting in the queue lines .

    • Entitlement Problems

      I agree 100%! Everyone struggles in some way or another–that’s just life. Your life (not your life, Fanciful–I am addressing the opponents of the new DAS program) may be complicated and negatively affected by the fact that you have a child with a disability (be it physical, emotional, cognitive, etc.) but who are you to say that your life is so much worse or harder than someone else’s? Consider, for example, a mother whose child has died; a child whose parent was murdered; a victim of sexual or physical abuse; etc. We all have crosses to bear and claims that those without a sick family member have it any easier are sometimes totally inaccurate.

      I have yet to hear of a situation (among all of these sob stories) wherein a physical/emotional/mental ailment cannot be reasonably accommodated by the provision of a “FastPass”-type card that allows guests to wait out the queue in a more comfortable and less crowded location.

      With the exception of an end-stage terminal patient (specifically, a “Make a Wish” participant), a guest’s physical disability should not entitle him/her to a front-of-the-line pass; it should just entitle him or her to reasonable accommodations.

      What’s next, a financially-challenged person skipping the lines because he can only afford to visit Disney World once every 10 years and is therefore owed the opportunity to experience everything during this one visit in order to make up for the fact that he cannot vacation again for a decade? Heck, while we’re at it, let’s let the Blacks and Jews skip the lines too–like the poor disabled Americans, they, too, are/were historically prone to persecution, injustice and unfairness.

      We begin a descent down a slippery slope when we start comparing our trials and tribulations; such topics are, in my opinion, better left to God or no one at all.

    • rose

      That cranky 3 year old your referring to doesnt have autism as you pointed out that your children have. How can you be so cold to other parents like you that have autistic kids on the higher spectrum of autism? They can’t control their feelings as you should be aware! Maybe DL will think differently when autism kids have such a huge meltdown in line it scars the crap out of the people around them and everyone will see first hand what its like to have a child with a disability! Isn’t it bad enough one has to be disabled and live that way; why shouldn’t they be accommodated? These children are everyone’s children not just mine or yours but its our duty as adults to care for them as a community and that means accommodating kids with disabilities so they can have some joy in their life not discarded by DL and people as cruel as you!

  • Kaia

    Some people’s children is RIGHT.
    These parents are using their kids to get more bang for their buck and it’s disgusting. I am glad Disney isn’t rolling over.

    • William Stewart Jr

      Agreed, Kaia .
      That’s gonna solve itself overtime , as those parents find themselves having to pay more bucks to enter Disney’s theme parks .
      I`m glad that Disney is trying to provide more quality accomodations instead of trying to make everybody in the world happy, outside of reason, and fairness.

  • Duckman

    I have read this and many other past complaints with some interest. From the tone of the complaints, it would seem as though Disney was somehow denying access to their park to certain groups (read this as roughly undefined groups, old people, people with disabilities, people with certain disabilities, etc…). After having been a patron for over 30 years, I find that the Disney Parks have been and still are the most accessible of all of the themed park entertainment facilities, bar none. It seems that some people would like to have instant/near instant access to all areas of the parks due to their condition or that of their family member. Disney tries very hard to accomodate this “need” by offering the Guest Assistance or additional Services. I am sorry that some families may have a child with the propensity to “meltdown” because it didn’t get its way, right away. I see more and more parents today who try to assure that their children have everything they want and right when they want it. Other children see this and want it too, and so on. This is a tidal wave in today’s society and it takes adult supervision to overcome it. Sometimes we just have to wait for things and it is up to us as adults and parents to teach this to our children, or at least to address it by changing the scenery – e.g. go to another attraction for a while, and let things cool off and come back later on when everyone is calmed down.

    • William Stewart Jr

      Good idea , Duckman .

    • rose

      Your exactly whats wrong with Disney! So kids with severe autism are faking their meltdowns cause their spoiled! You are an ignorant asshole! I hope you don’t reproduce; but if you do you better pray they don’t have any disabilities!!!

  • Chris

    Honestly, as someone who needs the assistance, I think the DAS is an improvement, but still needs some work. Why for an example should I have to go to the ride or kiosk to get a return time, then come back to the attraction?

    Why can’t they either provide the option to get a return time from any attraction for any other attraction or allow me to use my mobile phone to get a return time.

    Alternatively, they could do away with return times and make you wait the length of the line before the card is valid for use again.

    This is the one part where I say the accommodation is definitely not equal. Yes, there is usually a sight wait upon returning to the attraction, but they already try to account for this part.

    • PapaJohn

      I think that is the direction and intent of the fastpass+/magicband system, currently at WDW you don’t need to physically visit the attractions to obtain and manage a fastpass which also works via smartphone app. I can’t imagine that it would be too far of a stretch for them to implement a DAS exception program to work with faspass+.

  • nunya

    Seems to me this writer didn’t even bother to ask for comments from
    those who have been affected by the change but are not a part of the lawsuit. The “implication” that CMs
    don’t work with guests is REAL for many families with disabled
    members. I know – it’s happened to us twice at Epcot and have received
    comments from others in the same boat, especially adults who have
    physical disabilities that really DO prevent them from being trapped in a
    long, twisting line that’s virtually impossible to exit if the need arises, especially when using a wheelchair. The first time
    we had to speak to 3 CMs and it took almost an hour of back and forth questions and demands. The second time we
    supposedly had the accommodations already in an account in their
    system, but the CM at Epcot said they didn’t exist. It took 20 minutes
    before we could even get him to seek out a manager – he told us one wasn’t on duty! A couple of months later we went
    back to MK and guess what? The accommodations were there and SHOULD HAVE
    BEEN in Epcot’s system, too. Instead, we were once again reduced to
    explaining a disability and medical conditions they had no business to know, especially in a
    room full of strangers.

    • JustAsk

      If you’re asking for accommodations, you should expect to have to explain your needs. Not your diagnosis, but your needs.

      The standard is that those in wheelchairs can use the accessible lines. If you have reasons why you need to wait completely outside of the line using the DAS, then it’s up to you to explain those needs.

      What isn’t reasonable is expect special accommodations without explaining why you need them.

  • Megan K

    I’m not 100% sure on what theme parks HAVE to have in place for people with disability, but in my opinions Disney doesn’t HAVE to offer any perks. It was their generosity to give people with disabilities a few extra perks, but unfortunately people were taking advantage of them. i’m not cold hearted but I’m glad that Disney decided to withdrew their “generosity” perks. Sure they have to have some thing for disabled people to enter and exit rides/attractions, but they don’t HAVE to allow people to get in front of the line.

    When it comes to this lawsuit & issue at hand I’m with Disney 100% of the time.

    • Disney Baker

      They had what was called a guest assistance card or GAC, it was for people that were help the “disabled” person line cutting ability, but as people do, people with money discovered they could “rent” a disabled person either at Disneyland or Disney World. The “disabled” would just sit and wait while the sponsor family would get to jump the line. I was behind a disable Korean War vet in the fast pass line with his son and grandkids, I told him about the card, they said we don’t want to abuse it it’s for people that really need it

  • No name

    On a Disney related board (google Unoriginal Dis Trouble), there is a long thread regarding this situation, with links and quotes from people on FB who are involved in this suit. It’s a long read, but if you are looking for more information about how all this came about, check there.

  • susan

    why is this even going to trial??? Why wasn’t this thrown out of court? As long as Disney follows ADA rules, which they are, this complaint holds no merit.

  • Joy

    My son has Muscular Dystrophy as well as Autism and I’m just grateful for any accommodation to help in the Disney experience. My biggest complaint is Disneyland has no Family bathroom from what I can tell and it makes it very “weird” to have to take my Teenage son to a women’s restroom when I don’t have a man with me. I even witnessed the opposite this last time and a grown man wheeled his wife’s wheelchair into the ladies room.
    My daughter also worked at Disney World for a year at Space Mtn and she got her earful with parents of special needs when the GAC line was “too Long”. And was accused of not being sensitive.

    • No name

      There are family bathrooms in each park, and they are marked on the map.

  • steve_ga

    I am also the parent of 2 Autistic children and I agree that the GAC card was abused and I do not support suing Disney , however, I do have two major problems with Disney. The first is they seem so dug into what they have done with DAS they don’t want to seem to work with parents to fine tune the system to work with our kids which may really only need to include more flexibility in scheduling FP+. Without introducing anymore process or special cards in exchange most parents like myself are more than willing to provide physician verification or documentation pre-visit. I know this sounds like privilege to normal kid parents and it may be to a small extent, but most of us are just asking for a little help not cart-blanche, to have our kids to have a shot at experience the same magic and fun normal kids do and to give us caretakers just one less problem to deal with on vacation. My second problem is that Disney is now doing exactly what the GAC abusers were, selling front of the line deals. Funny that when the GAC gets discontinued disney all of the sudden introduces VIP tours for an extra $300/person where you cut to the front of the line, there is a thrill ride version and a family ride version. They also are pushing there $350/hour VIP hosts service which to me just seems like they realized that the crooks are making a buck let’s boot them and take over their enterprise for ourselves and let the legitimate disabled folks suffer. I know this is also practice at other theme parks, but the timing is just rotten and looks fishy and it’s not what you expect from Disney.

    • kcthecookiemonster

      The problem is that Disney cannot legally request or require that verification you offered to get. Just like they can’t require paperwork proving that a visually-impaired person’s dog is a certified service animal. All they can ask is if you have a condition that requires a reasonable accommodation, and what accommodation you require. This is what opens up the system to abuse. Even though you have a real need to request an accommodation for your child, anyone lacking in morals who wants the ‘perks’ that accommodation brings to a person without a need for it can request it, and Disney can do nothing to stop them.

      That ultimately impacts everyone’s enjoyment of the parks. Especially when it comes to perception. Non-disabled people who pretend to have a disability damage the experience of those who are disabled. While I don’t require a ride accommodation (I go to the parks in the off-season, and pop a Xanax to deal with my crowd anxiety), But I (and my wife) do require a food accommodation due to allergies. The last thing we want to do while on vacation is end up knocked out on huge doses of Benadryl, or worse, go into anaphylaxis. People who claim to have a food allergy to something they dislike and then try a bite of someone else’s dish when the server is watching impair my ability to get safe food by reducing the severity of an allergy in the server’s mind. If I get a sandwich with a slice of tomato on it, they need to remake the whole sandwich, not just pick it off and re-serve it. I could still go into anaphylaxis just from the remaining contamination.

      But, Disney only has the responsibility to provide me equal access, not equal enjoyment. Meaning (in food allergy terms), that if I go to a restaurant and half the menu has raw tomato that cannot be removed from the dish, but has 3 dishes available to me that are safe to eat, they have not violated my rights under ADA. There is safe food available to me, even if I really want the cucumber salad, not the caesar.

      When it comes to Autism Spectrum disorders and such, Disney is not required to provide a child with equal enjoyment or equal experience. Just equal access. In short, Disney is not limiting the child’s enjoyment of the park; the child’s disability limits their enjoyment of the park. As unfair as that may be, that’s life.

  • Jeanne

    perhaps what the parents bringing the lawsuit (along with their lawyers) are really hoping is that Disney will just pay them off to make them go away in order to avoid the negative publicity…doesn’t sound like that is happening this time…Thanks goodness, as that would mean many more “copycat” lawsuits of the same nature!

  • RONNIE SNIDER

    I just visited the park last week. I along with my family we
    have enjoyed the park for many years. Stood in the lines and have spent
    hundreds and thousands of $$ at Disney. Every dime well spent in most cases.
    After a long career in the military, I found myself not able to stand for very
    long periods at a time. My legs go numb and it slowly works its way up my back
    (2 surgeries and counting) making it very hard to stand for long periods at a
    time. I do not want to use a wheel chair (Ever). The new disability changes to
    the park make it very difficult for me to attend now. If you get the fast, past
    you are waiting in two lines the one you want to ride and the ride you go to
    waiting on the first one. What gives? I had a park employ tell me “They are
    just evening the playing field with the new rules”. Can someone tell me what
    that means? Does this mean we do not want us at the parks anymore? If this is,
    the case may be the handicap parking and cards are not needed if we are judged
    as a group now. We should not be grouped as all of the above covered by the new
    rules. Someone needs to fix this. The people that were misusing the privilege needs
    to be worked with may be (who knows) then someone has to judge again? What to
    do. Booootttthhhher……..

    • Disney Baker

      Thank you for your service

  • Disney Baker

    If the fat lazy people didn’t ruin it for truly disabled people this wouldn’t even be an issue, when we went to Disneyland last year, I took my 8 year old on soarin, upon exiting the ride at disabled entrance at exit their was 2 fat women obviously just sitting on their motorized wheel chairs talking while the 11 kids ran past us, the fat lazy ladies that got the handicap pass should go on the ride too not just their 11 welfare scrubby kids that didn’t need not to wait in line

    • rose

      And you^^ Are EXACTLY the reason for this law suit you ignorant and discriminating bitch! So apparently if your fat then yiu can’t possibly have any other disibility going on and further more if you’re fat, you and your kids must be on welfare?? You shoukd be ashamed! You are an example of whats wrong with DL!!

  • Disney Baker

    If the people hired at member services had brains, you can tell if someone is going to need guest assistance cards or not. If there is a fat person on their personal hover round with 8 teenagers in tow, and that person isn’t going to fit in a expedition Everest ride car, they don’t need the card, on the other hand, if you have a person in a wheel chair missing a leg, then they will probably need a card so they can be helped on the ride