This thread just reminded me of a recent incident involving a wheechair-bound guest and his family attempting to board Pirates of the Caribbean. The attraction's standby line was approx 30 minutes, but the SAP line was nonexistent (which is unusual).

I was working the stager position, at which CMs are supposed to assist the handicapped guests. I reserved two rows of a boat for the wheelchair-bound man and his family. When it was time for them to board, however, the man said, "You mean, I have to transfer? I can't stay in my wheelchair?" I told him that in order to ride Pirates, guests must leave their wheelchairs. He then started to get upset and complain that Disneyland was violating the ADA because he couldn't ride in his wheelchair. I also told him that his family had to wait in the standby line in order to ride, because according to Disney policy, parties of guests who use the backdoor entrance must be accompanied by the guest in the wheelchair. He also complained that that violated the ADA.

Now I'm no expert on the ADA, but I'm pretty sure that even if it requires theme parks to reduce or eliminate wait times for disabled people, it doesn't require the same for their children/siblings/friends.

Also, on a ride like Pirates of the Caribbean, the ride vehicles cannot be configured to allow guests to ride in their wheelchairs. What is Disney to do? If the necessary changes cannot be made, and disabled guests who cannot transfer from their wheelchairs cannot ride, what is Disney to do? Is is supposed to shut down the ride altogether? Should 99 percent of visitors have to miss out on Pirates just because the other 1 percent can't ride it?

It says on the bottom of the SAP that it is good for the guest and 5 other members of the party. So that time you were in the wrong.

Also, all over the park maps it shows which rides you must be able to trasnfer from, so in that case the guest didn't bother to look.

The ADA also doesn't require theme parks to reduce or eliminate waits for disabled people. It requires equal access. Disney does a courtsey by allowing the remainder of the party to use the SAP enternace with the disabled member of their party.

thamnarestan, obviously that guest didn't read the book for guests with disabililties or he would have known he needed to be able to transfer, as for the ADA, it doesn't require theme parks to make the wait shorter for anyone, just make the rides that are realistically able, to be handicapped accesible, pirates doesn't fall into those guidelines like small world or the carousel due to the drops and the ADA has already gone thru the park with a fine tooth comb and made the recommendations to Disney about what needs to be done rest assured, so the next guest that tries to shove the ADA down your gullet just smile and wish them a Disney day. And anyone who reads the SAP's it says the guest that has the pass MUST be one of the party riding the attraction....

Originally posted by HB Tigger Fan
It says on the bottom of the SAP that it is good for the guest and 5 other members of the party. So that time you were in the wrong.

Depends on how you read what thamnarestan wrote, which I do think was ambiguous. If the man in the wheelchair ended up getting out of his wheelchair to go on the ride, then yes, his party could accompany him. If the man in the wheelchair instead chose not to go on the ride, his party would not be able to use the SAP line without him and would indeed need to wait in standby or use Fastpass.

The SAP is good for the person and 5 other people, but only if the person to whom the SAP is issued is one of the people going on the ride.

If the guy in the wheelchair really could not transfer, then the family would *technically* have to go through the standby line because the disabled guest is the one that needs accomodation... I think this is a judgement call by the CM, given the situation, the line, etc..

The Guidebook for Guests with Disabilities clearly shows which rides require transfer. It would be good if the information was posted someplace visible, at the attraction.

The regular Guide Maps do have symbols that show which rides are wheelchair accessable, and another symbol that shows which rides you must transfer out of your wheelchair to ride (It shows a person rising out of a wheelchair), they even have a symbol that shows which rides don't allow Electric wheelchairs, and that you must transfer to a traditional wheelchair......

Originally posted by Darkbeer
The regular Guide Maps do have symbols that show which rides are wheelchair accessable, and another symbol that shows which rides you must transfer out of your wheelchair to ride (It shows a person rising out of a wheelchair), they even have a symbol that shows which rides don't allow Electric wheelchairs, and that you must transfer to a traditional wheelchair......

Unfortunately, there are people out there that either might not look at these symbols or might not even know what they mean. Politely explain the information to the guest. That really is about all you can do. Some people might not even look at the guidebook before they get to a ride.

Why do handicap (disabled) parking spots show someone in a wheelchair? Obviously it has gone beyond that. The signs should read "If you are in a wheelchair, can't breathe, can't stand in line for more than 5 minutes, you are fat, or just plain lazy, please park here"...

Originally posted by Thomas
Why do handicap (disabled) parking spots show someone in a wheelchair? Obviously it has gone beyond that. The signs should read "If you are in a wheelchair, can't breathe, can't stand in line for more than 5 minutes, you are fat, or just plain lazy, please park here"...

Assuming you are asking a real question, it is because this is the international symbol for persons with disabilities, and it is the most recognizable one.

However, I'm going to guess that you weren't really asking a question, now were you? Just because someone doesn't use a wheelchair does not mean they do not have a legitimate disability. And, in the case of the off-duty cast member I saw racing a rented wheelchair down Main Street yesterday, using a wheelchair is also not always a sign that you have a legitimate disability.

As someone who is married to a person with a non-visible disability, your attitude is quite appalling. Would you prefer that Tony strap a copy of his MRI to his back to "prove" his disability to you, some random person on the street? Or do you assume that he's "just plain lazy" because you can't see the lesions on his spinal cord.

AVP

Originally posted by AVP


Assuming you are asking a real question, it is because this is the international symbol for persons with disabilities, and it is the most recognizable one.

However, I'm going to guess that you weren't really asking a question, now were you? Just because someone doesn't use a wheelchair does not mean they do not have a legitimate disability. And, in the case of the off-duty cast member I saw racing a rented wheelchair down Main Street yesterday, using a wheelchair is also not always a sign that you have a legitimate disability.

As someone who is married to a person with a non-visible disability, your attitude is quite appalling. Would you prefer that Tony strap a copy of his MRI to his back to "prove" his disability to you, some random person on the street? Or do you assume that he's "just plain lazy" because you can't see the lesions on his spinal cord.

AVP

My point was only to say that many people abuse the handicap privilege. It is appaling when you see someone get of a car that obviously does not need the placard. The California laws governing this have become so lax that almost anyone can get one. If a person has a problem breathing, why would they get a disabled spot. They are not using a wheelchair and are going to be walking around DLR which is a lot of walking. Is somehow parking closer going to help this problem? I also have someone in my family that is permanently in a wheelchair so I do take personal offense to someone who uses these spots when they should not be. I did not mean to offend anyone, so please do not take it that way.

I also feel that they should come up with a new international symbol. My uncle is who permanently in a wheelchair feels it is a slap in the face to say someone who has a disablility where a wheelchair is not necessary holds a symbol of someone in one and says they are the same. I for the life of me would never wish anyone to be "sentenced" to a life in a chair and I hope it never happens to me.

I wasnt accusing you. I just forgot to mension it on my previous post.

Thomas, you may not have "meant" to offend, but your comments and tone did sound inflammatory.

You can't see my disability, and unless you observe or talk to my son you can't see his disability. We have been subjected to verbal abuse and harassment on several occasions, by people who *assume* they are confronting cheaters when in fact they are not. I have read dozens of posts and e-mails from people with hidden disabilities who have been subjected to harassment, rude remarks, staring, even physical confrontation by strangers who assumed that they were cheating or taking advantage of the system, when all they were doing was trying to get a much-needed vacation.

I understand frustration about cheaters, but you need to ask yourselves if the tone of the rhetoric is maybe just a bit too harsh... and more importantly, if you are venting your frustrations on the wrong people.

Originally posted by Thomas
My point was only to say that many people abuse the handicap privilege. It is appaling when you see someone get of a car that obviously does not need the placard.

Was it "obvious" that the person wasn't disabled because he/she was doing somersaults while getting out of the car, or was it obvious because he/she didn't "look" or "act" disabled?

Originally posted by teri
If the guy in the wheelchair really could not transfer, then the family would *technically* have to go through the standby line because the disabled guest is the one that needs accomodation... I think this is a judgement call by the CM, given the situation, the line, etc..

The Guidebook for Guests with Disabilities clearly shows which rides require transfer. It would be good if the information was posted someplace visible, at the attraction.

According to that same guidebook, families of disabled people must be accompanied by that disabled person if they want to use the "auxiliary entrance". You are, of course, right in that we CMs may choose to ignore that policy. And indeed I have allowed some families to board the ride while their disabled relative or friend waited behind. But in that case, when the man was getting upset and trying to ram the ADA down my throat, there was no way I was going to let his family ride.

One thing I'd like to bring up here, long ago, if you went thru the gate in a wheelchair or with a cane/crutches or other 'visible' assistive device, the CM's automatically offered you the little booklet that explains access to each and every ride in Disneyland, when DCA opened I called and asked for one and they sent one along eventually that said it was a "rough" draft, I hadn't thought about it until this particular thread but the last 3 years not one CM has asked if we needed the book, not at the gate nor in City Hall when we pick up our SAP's, it might help out the CM's out in the park if the City Hall CM's started automatically including that little book of information when they issue SAP's, for those of us who have read it several times we can decline graciously but for those first time guests who aren't aware of the different things involved it could help quite a bit with information/confusion....just a thought

thamnarestan, I hate it when that happens. Nobody wins.

May all your future encounters be smooth and hassle-free. :)

Thomas, I appreciate that you have a family member in a wheelchair for life (I have had two--an uncle and my grandma), so I think you are sincere in your concerns. Your statement though, was offensive the way it was written.

I know some families (I used to teach Special Education) who have "handicapped parking" placards in their family vehicles because their child has a disability. Some of these kids had quite visible disabilities--used a wheelchair or had visible braces--while others had less visible disabilities--rare skin conditions, braces worn under their clothing, severe autism, cancer, blood disorders, tumors, or even severe ADHD.

At one time or another, most of these families came under attack from well-meaning people who were concerned about cheaters taking advantage of parking placards. I too have felt discomfort around people who look completely healthy jumping out of a car parked closer to a store than me. But I don't judge. I don't get upset. Sometimes I wonder, but I know better than to assume anything.

One of my best friends takes care of her husband's elderly aunt who lives with them. My friend once took advantage of that parking placard in front of a store I was coming out of. The aunt wasn't with her and she still used that spot. Now her, I ripped apart! ;) She knew better than that! She says that whenever she's tempted "just to run in the store, ya know," she remembers the public reaming I gave her in front of the only grocery store in our little town and hasn't done it again! :)

Anyway, my message is that we all need to stop assuming so much about the person standing next to us and start focusing on ourselves.

Aren't I deep?:eek: :rolleyes: :)

Originally posted by Thomas


My point was only to say that many people abuse the handicap privilege. It is appaling when you see someone get of a car that obviously does not need the placard. The California laws governing this have become so lax that almost anyone can get one. If a person has a problem breathing, why would they get a disabled spot. They are not using a wheelchair and are going to be walking around DLR which is a lot of walking. Is somehow parking closer going to help this problem? I also have someone in my family that is permanently in a wheelchair so I do take personal offense to someone who uses these spots when they should not be. I did not mean to offend anyone, so please do not take it that way.

A couple of months ago while I was on jury duty, I was approached by three police officers asking for proof of my disability because I don't look "disabled." It took me a second to pull out my proof of my placard. I get looks all the time when using the disabled parking. Usually I can walk fine for a short bit after sitting in the car but not for long distances....SO how do you know that a person is using a handicapped placard doesn't need one? A person does need a doctors statement to get one, by the way.

Same point, how do you know that someone doesn't need an SAP or a wheelchair? Just because they can walk for a bit doesn't mean they don't have a legitimate reason for using a wheelchair or SAP pass.

My ex-husband came home one day to tell me what he had just seen at the supermarket. A woman parked in the handicapped stall, and was approached by one of the supermarket's employees because the woman looked perfectly able-bodied. At that point, the woman leaned up against her car, bent down, and yanked her prosthetic foot off of her leg!

Originally posted by lani
My ex-husband came home one day to tell me what he had just seen at the supermarket. A woman parked in the handicapped stall, and was approached by one of the supermarket's employees because the woman looked perfectly able-bodied. At that point, the woman leaned up against her car, bent down, and yanked her prosthetic foot off of her leg!

Still, if this woman was going to walk all through the supermarket, why did she need the handicapped parking space? It seems to me like she was abusing the system. People who have no trouble walking, say, a quarter mile inside of a store should have no trouble walking the extra 100 feet from their parking stall to the store entrance. The same could be said for those using wheelchairs. It seems like these handicapped stalls aren't necessary at all. Do we provide them only out of sympathy? Maybe the system should be eliminated altogether.

That is a valid question.

Some days, some folks with disabilities are doing great. Some days, we are doing not-so-great. Little injuries and mis-steps that able-bodied people can easily brush off can really screw up a disabled person's compensatory mechanisms. Many of us don't know from morning to afternoon how well we will be doing. Also, many people with disabilities must pace themselves throughout the day in order to make it all the way through -- if they use up their energy and physical reserves, then they crash later and can't take care of business.

The handicapped parking spaces are not just closer, they are also usually smoother, wider, and free of obstacles and trip-hazards. If they could do that for all parking spaces, everyone would benefit.

I don't use a handicap placard myself, I just don't go out or shop if I can't find a close spot on a bad day. I melt in the heat... if they ever make a "shady parking spot" placard available, sign me up. ;)

My uncle who had MS would have up days and down days. A cold could literally make him unable to walk, a really warm day would do the same thing. He could get halfway from the parking lot to an air conditioned store and practically collapse in the parking lot. But once in the a/c store, he would be fine. So yes, that difference of a few feet seriously meant a lot to him and his family. His wife used to drop him off in front of the mall with the kids and he would run into the A/C and she'd have to find a spot if there were no handicapped spots avail. And in Yakima, WA, which has a lot of elderly (my grandma included) folks, that happened quite a bit. Again, you don't know. You really shouldn't assume that a few feet doesn't make a difference. I think of one family I worked with that had twins with autism. By the time they were four, they ran in different directions at the same time. Too big for a stroller, though, and even though life was difficult, it was still this woman's life. She was not one to just hang out at home because it was too hard to go to the store. But having to walk 20 feet to the "safety" of a store, rather than possibly 150 feet of parking lot where either or both of her sons could get hit by a car? I'd say that placard and that closer parking spot is well worth it and I'd give up my space any day for these people.

Originally posted by thamnarestan


Still, if this woman was going to walk all through the supermarket, why did she need the handicapped parking space? It seems to me like she was abusing the system. People who have no trouble walking, say, a quarter mile inside of a store should have no trouble walking the extra 100 feet from their parking stall to the store entrance. The same could be said for those using wheelchairs. It seems like these handicapped stalls aren't necessary at all. Do we provide them only out of sympathy? Maybe the system should be eliminated altogether.

Because maybe she could walk a short distance for a short amount of time. (such as my case). See additional walking when someone is already disabled can cause serious problems. Using a handicapped placard for going out is not an abuse. It's a matter of being able to get around. I know before I got the disabled placard, parking at Disneyland was a nightmare with the new garage.

If she was going shopping she's likely to be buying stuff. Why should she have to carry grocery bags to a further away car? I know I would have a difficult time getting bags of groceries to my car if I didn't use the disabled parking. If I do see a space that is within a car or two away that isn't disabled, I will use it. But if I am having difficulties that day, I will use the disabled parking spot.

It's also a matter of conserving energy. If the person has to walk a distance to and from their car, they might not be able to make it through whatever they need to do during their time at the place, whether it's simply grocery shopping or gettting to the trams at DL.

Originally posted by thamnarestan


Still, if this woman was going to walk all through the supermarket, why did she need the handicapped parking space? It seems to me like she was abusing the system. People who have no trouble walking, say, a quarter mile inside of a store should have no trouble walking the extra 100 feet from their parking stall to the store entrance. The same could be said for those using wheelchairs. It seems like these handicapped stalls aren't necessary at all. Do we provide them only out of sympathy? Maybe the system should be eliminated altogether.

Most stores also have electric carts available. You never know if she was walking the 20ft. into the store and then would get an electric cart to use while shopping.