No exemption to mask policy.

[KPeterso]

Interesting idea. The only ride I know of is Pirates of the Caribbean. Wait-what about Rise of the Resistance, Flights of ? in Pandora?

Pretty sure Frozen Ever After is another one that cannot accommodate a wheelchair and someone has to step down into. Mickey and Minnie's runaway railway (like Rise of the Resistance) is another that a person must step up into the ride (no way for a wheelchair to be tied down).

 

[paw1968]

I have read thru many pages of debate and maybe I missed it but where did it state that the parents provided and attempted to secure a proper DAS pass? Seems to me the issue should have been addressed prior to going to the park.

 

[SirDuff]

I have read thru many pages of debate and maybe I missed it but where did it state that the parents provided and attempted to secure a proper DAS pass? Seems to me the issue should have been addressed prior to going to the park.

The DAS has nothing to do with masks.

 

[ladyjubilee]

How did those people (harmed by wearing a mask) get to wear clothing, wear a seatbelt, shoes, etc? And could you please post a link where someone doesn't have to wear a seatbelt by law (not NH) as i wasn't able to find anything that stated that? (But I did find a lot about seatbelt extenders)

never mind - I found one - https://iowadot.gov/mvd/medical-exemptions-from-safety-belt-use

Seems like if they can't wear a belt, they should be in the backseat though. And it states that they shouldn't be driving at all. Never heard about it being a risk to wear a seatbelt if you are pregnant, so I think a little less of Iowa right now.

Our state offers an exemption and even just a cursory search showed a Maine application, my guess is other states have them too, as do the UK, Australia and parts of Canada (who knew.)

I also think the issues with clothes are a little underestimated. Some folks do have extreme issues clothes (to the point of stripping down "inappropriately"), but there are a lot options, and most people can find some cut or texture that works. But under WDW those kinds of modifications are excluded. (I do wonder how they handle ladies in burka. Do they have to raise the veil to prove they have on a multi layered mask underneath?)

As far as the union deal...I really have to question whether we'd accept an employment contract overriding ADA for other disabilities. If the Union contract says members should not be exposed to the risk of being bumped, hit and run over by an ECV, would you be ok with refusing users from the park? After all, we all know quite a number of people, including CM have been injured. Public safety and all.

Ultimately our opinions on what WDW is requiring doesn't matter, and even if a case was filed, it would be years.... Yet I'm still disheartened. If people who have been there done that so easily advocate for the exclusion of others based on disability. ..well, its no wonder some of my son's peers have never even eaten at McDonald's let alone gone to an amusement park.

 

[marikujawa]

Our state offers an exemption and even just a cursory search showed a Maine application, my guess is other states have them too, as do the UK, Australia and parts of Canada (who knew.)

I also think the issues with clothes are a little underestimated. Some folks do have extreme issues clothes (to the point of stripping down "inappropriately"), but there are a lot options, and most people can find some cut or texture that works. But under WDW those kinds of modifications are excluded. (I do wonder how they handle ladies in burka. Do they have to raise the veil to prove they have on a multi layered mask underneath?)

As far as the union deal...I really have to question whether we'd accept an employment contract overriding ADA for other disabilities. If the Union contract says members should not be exposed to the risk of being bumped, hit and run over by an ECV, would you be ok with refusing users from the park? After all, we all know quite a number of people, including CM have been injured. Public safety and all.

Ultimately our opinions on what WDW is requiring doesn't matter, and even if a case was filed, it would be years.... Yet I'm still disheartened. If people who have been there done that so easily advocate for the exclusion of others based on disability. ..well, its no wonder some of my son's peers have never even eaten at McDonald's let alone gone to an amusement park.

I’ve read most of the comments here, and it seems insulting to say posters are easily advocating for the exclusion of others based on disability. Unlike your example of an ECV coming at you, this virus is invisible and highly contagious. The implications of contracting it are more far-reaching than an employee being bumped by an ECV. Disney CM’s go home to their own families at the end of their shift and risk passing the virus on to a parent or other family members.

I understand that Covid has everyone on edge, but suggesting that it’s no different from other risks and that people are simply dismissing the rights of the disabled seems unfair.

 

[Allison Joy]

How did those people (harmed by wearing a mask) get to wear clothing, wear a seatbelt, shoes, etc? And could you please post a link where someone doesn't have to wear a seatbelt by law (not NH) as i wasn't able to find anything that stated that? (But I did find a lot about seatbelt extenders)

never mind - I found one - https://iowadot.gov/mvd/medical-exemptions-from-safety-belt-use

Seems like if they can't wear a belt, they should be in the backseat though. And it states that they shouldn't be driving at all. Never heard about it being a risk to wear a seatbelt if you are pregnant, so I think a little less of Iowa right now.

Before you think less of Iowa, if you read the explanations, the conditions they list aren't actually a list of conditions that qualify for a medical exemptions. For pregnancy they state exactly what you do... That there isn't a risk, and therefore, it is NOT a valid exemption. So the list is more a list of conditions that others may consider to be a valid reason for an exemption, but may or may not actually be a valid exemption.

In fact, for most of them, they give ideas for workarounds, rather than saying it qualifies for an exemption.

 

[rigs32]

I'm a lawyer have have been practicing in the same specialty for over 12 years. I still need to do research on a regular basis to substantiate my arguments.

The following is not intended to be commentary on any posters, just my observations.

I have often needed to respond to motions/arguments of pro se litigants. Very rarely is the cited case law controlling and usually it is not even persuasive. This is mainly as a result of a lay person misinterpreting the holding of a case or latching on to one piece of dicta (statements within the written decision that help inform the court's thought process but are not part of the actual holding).

 

[marikujawa]

I'm a lawyer have have been practicing in the same specialty for over 12 years. I still need to do research on a regular basis to substantiate my arguments.

The following is not intended to be commentary on any posters, just my observations.

I have often needed to respond to motions/arguments of pro se litigants. Very rarely is the cited case law controlling and usually it is not even persuasive. This is mainly as a result of a lay person misinterpreting the holding of a case or latching on to one piece of dicta (statements within the written decision that help inform the court's thought process but are not part of the actual holding).

I reviewed pro se briefs as part of my career with a state appellate court, and I've seen many examples of what you described. Another common error is assuming the applicability of the law being cited. I remember one poster here who did extensive research into whether the fourth amendment covered hotel rooms to support his argument that Disney was violating the constitution by instituting security room checks.

 

[Evita_W]

Q. Does the ADA allow public accommodations to take safety factors into consideration in providing services to individuals with disabilities?A. The ADA expressly provides that a public accommodation may exclude an individual, if that individual poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others that cannot be mitigated by appropriate modifications in the public accommodation's policies or procedures, or by the provision of auxiliary aids. A public accommodation will be permitted to establish objective safety criteria for the operation of its business; however, any safety standard must be based on objective requirements rather than stereotypes or generalizations about the ability of persons with disabilities to participate in an activity.
(bolding added by me)

So, aside from no face covering whatsoever, what appropriate modification to the no mask/no entry policy would anyone suggest?

Many theme parks have made exemptions and allowed face shields as an alternative for those with disabilities and I think that is reasonable, especially since it has been shown that face shields are actually more effective than face masks anyway because they block everything and force it straight down vs masks can still allow some spread out.

Some theme parks and zoos I have personally seen the exemptions made at are:

• Dollywood
• Silver Dollar City
• San Diego Zoo
• Knott's Berry Farm

Some that I have not directly observed, but states they will on their applicable websites:

• SeaWorld and related parks
• Universal Studios
• Legoland

Additionally, there is currently no proof that the person with a disability would pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others. Wording is important here, the fact that they might (more than likely not) have a virus that is contagious and not know about it would not qualify as a direct threat. Them saying they have to hold a baseball bat in their hands and twirl it constantly due to a disability would be a direct threat.

Now where things get tricky with this is what about those who are deaf and rely on being able to read lips? You can see where that is problematic to have other people wearing face masks.

There really are no perfect answers here, but we can and must do better by those with disabilities.

 

[marikujawa]

Many theme parks have made exemptions and allowed face shields as an alternative for those with disabilities and I think that is reasonable, especially since it has been shown that face shields are actually more effective than face masks anyway because they block everything and force it straight down vs masks can still allow some spread out.

Some theme parks and zoos I have personally seen the exemptions made at are:

• Dollywood
• Silver Dollar City
• San Diego Zoo
• Knott's Berry Farm

Some that I have not directly observed, but states they will on their applicable websites:

• SeaWorld and related parks
• Universal Studios
• Legoland

Additionally, there is currently no proof that the person with a disability would pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others. Wording is important here, the fact that they might (more than likely not) have a virus that is contagious and not know about it would not qualify as a direct threat. Them saying they have to hold a baseball bat in their hands and twirl it constantly due to a disability would be a direct threat.

Now where things get tricky with this is what about those who are deaf and rely on being able to read lips? You can see where that is problematic to have other people wearing face masks.

There really are no perfect answers here, but we can and must do better by those with disabilities.

A direct threat is a significant risk of substantial harm to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated or reduced by reasonable accommodation. Significant means something sufficiently great or important to be worthy of attention. "Direct" does not mean certain or even probable.

If Covid does not meet these definitions, why were nonessential businesses and schools closed for months to stop the spread? Why are restaurants and bars still closed or required to meet stringent safety precautions involving masks and social distancing?

I don't think you can underestimate the fact that we're dealing with a pandemic in assessing whether a contagious virus that can be spread by those with no symptoms would qualify as a direct threat. Nor can you ignore the nature of a theme park, which brings thousands of people together in the same place at the same time.

Businesses are in a tough place now. Employers who have not enforced mask mandates or other precautions are being sued by employees who became ill. For every person who says they will not shop at a place that requires masks, there is another who says they will take their business elsewhere if mask-wearing is not required.

Disney doesn't have to follow the choices made by other theme parks. As long as it is acting reasonably, I think it's on solid ground.

 

[OurBigTrip]

Many theme parks have made exemptions and allowed face shields as an alternative for those with disabilities and I think that is reasonable, especially since it has been shown that face shields are actually more effective than face masks anyway because they block everything and force it straight down vs masks can still allow some spread out.

Some theme parks and zoos I have personally seen the exemptions made at are:

• Dollywood
• Silver Dollar City
• San Diego Zoo
• Knott's Berry Farm

Some that I have not directly observed, but states they will on their applicable websites:

• SeaWorld and related parks
• Universal Studios
• Legoland

Additionally, there is currently no proof that the person with a disability would pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others. Wording is important here, the fact that they might (more than likely not) have a virus that is contagious and not know about it would not qualify as a direct threat. Them saying they have to hold a baseball bat in their hands and twirl it constantly due to a disability would be a direct threat.

Now where things get tricky with this is what about those who are deaf and rely on being able to read lips? You can see where that is problematic to have other people wearing face masks.

There really are no perfect answers here, but we can and must do better by those with disabilities.

Not sure where you saw that shields are more effective than masks, but that’s certainly not what the CDC is saying.

 

[Simba's Mom]

I suspect that Disney's concern is really with the concept of "opening the door" if they allow any exemptions-where do they draw the line? So at this point, they're keeping the exemption door firmly shut.

 

[maxiesmom]

Not sure where you saw that shields are more effective than masks, but that’s certainly not what the CDC is saying.

I'm not sure where they are seeing that either. Everything I have seen says shields are only effective when used along with a mask. Not alone.

 

[maxiesmom]

I suspect that Disney's concern is really with the concept of "opening the door" if they allow any exemptions-where do they draw the line? So at this point, they're keeping the exemption door firmly shut.

And that is pretty smart of them. I work retail in Michigan. At first it was Please Wear a Mask. At first the majority of people did. And then less, and less, and less. I feel much safer at work now that a mask is necessary to enter any public place.

 

[backformore]

I suspect that Disney's concern is really with the concept of "opening the door" if they allow any exemptions-where do they draw the line? So at this point, they're keeping the exemption door firmly shut.

Absolutely!
WHen I first took my kids to WDW, in the days before fast pass, several people told me that I should get a doctor's note, and we would get "right to the front of the line on everything". this was because I have one kid with ADHD, and one who had, at the time, a physical disability requiring him to walk with braces on his legs. We never considered trying to do this, because I didn't think it necessary for my kids, who are capable of learning to wait in line.
I think that with Fast Pass, people's expectations became more realistic. But I still hear people say it - a doctor's note gets you to bypass all lines, especially if you have a child with autism. We pretty much know that this isn't exactly true, but the belief is out there.
DIsney does not need the word to get out that "you have to wear a mask, unless you have autism, or anxiety, or sensory processing issues, or other issues that make mask-wearing difficult, as long as you have a doctor's note." That would be a nightmare
Disney is saying - wer a mask. if you can't wear a mask, then come at another time.

 

[marikujawa]

Absolutely!
WHen I first took my kids to WDW, in the days before fast pass, several people told me that I should get a doctor's note, and we would get "right to the front of the line on everything". this was because I have one kid with ADHD, and one who had, at the time, a physical disability requiring him to walk with braces on his legs. We never considered trying to do this, because I didn't think it necessary for my kids, who are capable of learning to wait in line.
I think that with Fast Pass, people's expectations became more realistic. But I still hear people say it - a doctor's note gets you to bypass all lines, especially if you have a child with autism. We pretty much know that this isn't exactly true, but the belief is out there.
DIsney does not need the word to get out that "you have to wear a mask, unless you have autism, or anxiety, or sensory processing issues, or other issues that make mask-wearing difficult, as long as you have a doctor's note." That would be a nightmare
Disney is saying - wer a mask. if you can't wear a mask, then come at another time.

Could Disney even ask for a doctor's note under the ADA?

 

[backformore]

Could Disney even ask for a doctor's note under the ADA?

WHo knows? My point was that the myth had been "a doctor's note gets you to the front of the line". disney wants to avoid the myth being "a doctor's note gives you an exemption to the mask rule".

 

[marikujawa]

WHo knows? My point was that the myth had been "a doctor's note gets you to the front of the line". disney wants to avoid the myth being "a doctor's note gives you an exemption to the mask rule".

I understand and agree, but I think it’s even worse for Disney because I don’t think they can require a note. As I understand it, a business can’t require documentation of a disability under the ADA right now. If someone has a disability that prevents them from wearing a mask, I believe they would just have to verbally request an exemption and possibly answer some questions.

 

[keishashadow]

Searched but don’t see a specific thread that answers this Q.

Just trying to be proactive here, not skirt the mask mandate.

Other than sitting down to dine/drink, are there any designated mask-free relief areas in the WDW parks where one can regroup for a short bit, then resume touring wearing their mask? Do believe Universal has this in place, not sure re SW.

FYI Referring to an adult person with medical breathing issues. Manages in more temperate weather but somewhat concerned that sustained high heat/humidity might become problematic for them.

 

[theluckyrabbit]

Searched but don’t see a specific thread that answers this Q.

Just trying to be proactive here, not skirt the mask mandate.

Other than sitting down to dine/drink, are there any designated mask-free relief areas in the WDW parks where one can regroup for a short bit, then resume touring wearing their mask? Do believe Universal has this in place, not sure re SW.

FYI Referring to an adult person with medical breathing issues. Manages in more temperate weather but somewhat concerned that sustained high heat/humidity might become problematic for them.

Don't know if there have been any updates to these areas since this article was published:
https://www.disneyfoodblog.com/2020...at-disney-worlds-no-mask-relaxation-stations/