ORLANDO, Fla. — A lawsuit and shareholder proposal have been filed against Disney following significant changes to its Disability Access Service (DAS), which previously allowed qualifying disabled individuals to bypass long lines at the company's California and Florida theme parks. Many advocates argue that the new restrictions on the program are overly stringent and unfairly limit access.
Disney's revised policies have sparked debate over who qualifies for DAS passes, with a focus now primarily on guests with developmental disabilities such as autism. Under the new guidelines, applicants must undergo a video interview conducted by Disney staff and a contracted medical professional to determine their eligibility. Critics argue that this process not only complicates access but also places undue judgment on individuals regarding the legitimacy of their disabilities.
“Disney is making determinations about who is disabled enough,” said Shannon Bonadurer, who has faced denials for both herself and her son, citing specific health reasons that hinder their ability to wait in long lines. The company has stated that its adjustments are aimed at curtailing previous abuses of the DAS program, which had reportedly ballooned from 5% to 20% of park attendees over the last decade.
Disney reassures that it remains committed to providing an enjoyable experience for all visitors, including those with disabilities. The park does offer alternative accommodations such as Braille maps, wheelchair transfer devices, and American Sign Language interpreters among other services.
The legal challenge hinges on claims that the revised DAS program constitutes discrimination against individuals who do not fit the narrower eligibility criteria. Advocates argue that such limitations compromise the spirit of inclusivity that is part of Disney's identity. They want Disney to review its disability policies independently and release the findings to the public ahead of its next shareholder meeting.
Responses from Disney attorneys indicate an intent to block the shareholder proposal, arguing it presents a misrepresentation of the facts surrounding attendance decline, which they attribute to external factors such as hurricanes. The ongoing debate encapsulates a broader conversation about accessibility in entertainment spaces and the balance companies must strike between genuine accommodations and preventing abuse of their systems.
Disney's revised policies have sparked debate over who qualifies for DAS passes, with a focus now primarily on guests with developmental disabilities such as autism. Under the new guidelines, applicants must undergo a video interview conducted by Disney staff and a contracted medical professional to determine their eligibility. Critics argue that this process not only complicates access but also places undue judgment on individuals regarding the legitimacy of their disabilities.
“Disney is making determinations about who is disabled enough,” said Shannon Bonadurer, who has faced denials for both herself and her son, citing specific health reasons that hinder their ability to wait in long lines. The company has stated that its adjustments are aimed at curtailing previous abuses of the DAS program, which had reportedly ballooned from 5% to 20% of park attendees over the last decade.
Disney reassures that it remains committed to providing an enjoyable experience for all visitors, including those with disabilities. The park does offer alternative accommodations such as Braille maps, wheelchair transfer devices, and American Sign Language interpreters among other services.
The legal challenge hinges on claims that the revised DAS program constitutes discrimination against individuals who do not fit the narrower eligibility criteria. Advocates argue that such limitations compromise the spirit of inclusivity that is part of Disney's identity. They want Disney to review its disability policies independently and release the findings to the public ahead of its next shareholder meeting.
Responses from Disney attorneys indicate an intent to block the shareholder proposal, arguing it presents a misrepresentation of the facts surrounding attendance decline, which they attribute to external factors such as hurricanes. The ongoing debate encapsulates a broader conversation about accessibility in entertainment spaces and the balance companies must strike between genuine accommodations and preventing abuse of their systems.
