DAS changes coming WDW May 20/ DL June 18, 2024

[nighttowll]

From my understanding Disney (and any other theme park) is only required to provide accommodations to the guest with disabilities. That they go above that and allow others (4 before, 2 now if we agree that the DAS guest should be allowed a carer) is another thing imo.

Every single other place were I've been with someone that requires accommodations they've only ever allowed 1-2 extra people with them and if you have more family members or other people in your group they are required to line up normally.

I think we are in agreement. 1 extra person is all I am saying. 2 at most if there were extenuating circumstances such as a caregiver situation with a child involved. Obviously, the caregiver can't leave the person, and the child can't wait alone in line either.

 

[OurBigTrip]

There is nothing in the law that would prohibit a theme park for requiring documentation for a service that provides a benefit greater than that able to be obtained by a patron (either at all or through a paid system). For Disney, the DAS user (and the people attached to that user’s profile for which most of them are not eligible for any accommodations) get accommodations (or benefits) that aren’t able to be obtained by anyone else (even via a paid system since it could be credibly argued that in its current form DAS is a better system than genie+). I can’t understand why the first step for any of these theme parks wouldn’t be verifying that the applicant has a qualifying disability.( I think the system in place at universal and six flags is subpar.) A good verification process with audits built into it and lifetime penalties for providing false information should weed out a good percentage of fakers (if you know that say 10% of applications will be audited then you are taking a big risk for submitting fake information). So then you would be left with people that have verified conditions and can look at real solutions that don’t just rely on diagnosis alone ( because just from this thread we can see that it is more complicated than that). IDK maybe this new process at Disney will at least provide proof of concept that a different way of approaching accommodations is viable. But without requiring any kind of documentation of disabilities I fear (as others have said) that people will still abuse it.

Again, it’s not just abuse, it’s overuse. Guests who could be otherwise accommodated are all being given DAS.

 

[taradelao]

Re: RS for accommodations where the party can swap... Husband brought up a point-- couldn't one argue that "forcing" people with disabilities to split from their families is not reasonable for equal enjoyment because they don't "force" non-disabled patrons to do so? When normal RS is used is kind of optional.

My answer was, well, it could be considered optional in this case, too. You don't HAVE to go on the attraction.

 

[Evita_W]

There is nothing in the law that would prohibit a theme park for requiring documentation for a service that provides a benefit greater than that able to be obtained by a patron (either at all or through a paid system). For Disney, the DAS user (and the people attached to that user’s profile for which most of them are not eligible for any accommodations) get accommodations (or benefits) that aren’t able to be obtained by anyone else (even via a paid system since it could be credibly argued that in its current form DAS is a better system than genie+). I can’t understand why the first step for any of these theme parks wouldn’t be verifying that the applicant has a qualifying disability.( I think the system in place at universal and six flags is subpar.) A good verification process with audits built into it and lifetime penalties for providing false information should weed out a good percentage of fakers (if you know that say 10% of applications will be audited then you are taking a big risk for submitting fake information). So then you would be left with people that have verified conditions and can look at real solutions that don’t just rely on diagnosis alone ( because just from this thread we can see that it is more complicated than that). IDK maybe this new process at Disney will at least provide proof of concept that a different way of approaching accommodations is viable. But without requiring any kind of documentation of disabilities I fear (as others have said) that people will still abuse it.

Read my earlier post about why documentation is no longer required at Disney.

But they have to offer a system where equal access is provided, up until now, the only option has been a DAS, which means it was considered the equal access option. Also, to require proof, it has to be something with a monetary value associated with it that everyone else can buy. There is no monetary value to a DAS, so they can't require proof for that in and of itself. Some examples of what they could require proof for:

• Provide Genie+ for free or at a discounted rate for those with disabilities
• Provide discounted admission for those with disabilities
• Provide free or discounted VIP tours for those with disabilities
• Provide free or discounted admission to after hours parties for those with disabilities

I am sure there are other items as well, but there do still have to be free accommodations that do not require proof of disability.

Additionally, I believe something like this would be legal, but not as sure:

• No proof of disability
  • Accomodations expire daily, so you have to reapply every day
• With proof of disability
  • Accomodations last as long as you admission media does

I am not saying they would ever do that, it that I could see an argument being made that it would be legal.

 

[nighttowll]

My point was the claim that parties would be split up for 82% of the day, which unless one does all day long, start to finish is ride attractions, is not correct.

Once Disney lays out the accommodations, people will make that choice - if it doesn’t give them an experience they feel is worth the cost, they’ll go elsewhere.

Sorry, I wasn't trying to say that they would be split up 82% of their day. I was saying that they would be split up 82% of their ride time which amounts to quite a bit of time. We aren't talking a few minutes here. It would be over 5 hours for the average guest, more during high crowds, so around half or more of your time in the park depending on how long you stay. Choosing to be separated from your group for 5 or more hours every day is one thing, being forced to is another.

 

[AnnaKristoff2013]

Neither WDW nor DLR/DCA have "child swap rooms" or any waiting rooms for attractions. You must be thinking of another park.

Yeah, that’s Universal they are thinking of most likely.

 

[Evita_W]

Again, it’s not just abuse, it’s overuse. Guests who could be otherwise accommodated are all being given DAS.

And that is indeed part of the problem, for example someone with limited vision. Under the old GAC system, there was a stamp that told the CMs that was the issue. Attractions with well lit queues or outdoor queues, especially during the day were not an issue or some queues not an issue until a certain point while other queues were problematic. So, that stamp was applied differently at each attraction and maybe even differently at night than during the day at the same Attraction. For example, in a dimly lit queue, a cast.member would use a flashlight to guide the guest and their party, obviously they weren't going to have the CM go through and wait in the standby queue with the guest and their party, so at those attractions, they would go through the alternate entrance. For the well lit/outdoor queues, they would go through the standard standby queue unless they also had other needs (i.e. avoid stairs) that would prohibit it. When they changed to a DAS system, those with low vision were supposed to simply be able to inform the CM at each attraction of the issue an get accommodated appropriately, unfortunately, this did mean constantly explaining needs throughout the day and many CMs refused to accommodate, so Disney ended up relenting and giving them a DAS because what can you do? This means that now those with low vision have a DAS and are going to be more.lokwly to use it on every attraction, even though it may not be needed on some attractions. Now some with low vision may or may not know which attractions it would be needed on, with the GAC system, the CMs could help with that if they didn't know, with the DAS, not so much, as a result, you end up with the person just being more likely to get a return time for everything to be safe. Please note this comes from DH talking with people who have low vision that have used both systems over the years and greatly preferred the GAC when it functioned as originally intended.

Perhaps they can setup the system where return times can be issued for attractions that the person would need it for, but not allow it for other attractions. For example, if a person needs shady place to wait, then you don't need for attractions where the queues are entirely indoors like Soarin' at EPCOT (at DCA, you still might since a large part of that queue is outdoors), but then there are other queues that are mostly or completely outside where you would need it. A similar concept could be used for those with low vision. I don't know if they will do this, but it could be done and would reduce the number of people coming into the lightning lanes.

 

[Evita_W]

Not going to wade too far into the discussion here, but I found an interesting tidbit in the A.L. v. Walt Disney Parks & Resorts US, Inc. lawsuit that was noted earlier in this thread. In a 2015 or 2016 filing, Disney claimed that 3.3% of WDW guests were issued a DAS pass (or, more specifically, they claimed that 96.7% of guests do not use DAS). The timing doesn't perfectly line up with the claim that there has been a 3-fold increase in the last 5 years (and it's unclear whether the 5-fold increase is in percentage or count), but if there has been a 3-fold increase in DAS usage since that data was collected, then that would mean that almost 10% of WDW guests use DAS now ... which is a lot.

Yes, and a three fold increase would make sense, I mean look at the post I just made prior to this one that explains one of the reasons we have likely seen that increase since the DAS started. It isn't necessarily people abusing the system, but the fact that Disney didn't put in place proper alternatives to a DAS that actually worked for those that needed alternatives.

In the end, this comes down to CMs and training, if things worked at Disney originally intended when setting up the DAS system, the increased DAS usage could have likely been avoided, but unfortunately, CMs failed tondo their part and the constant spraining of needs that don't require a DAS at every single attraction took its toll on people, so the DAS started getting given out to more and more people, even though they could setup better accomodations, Disney chose not to.

Hopefully the new system addresses that, but I still strongly suspect it is more to make a buck off of the disabled community by getting them to buy Genie+ rather than navigate the system due to how difficult it will be to do so.

 

[Angel Ariel]

But the argument that Disney vacation means no one every parts way so they can't be apart doesn't work.

When you're a group of 3 and your child needs assistance from both parents - yes, it does. again, I'd explain further but then it could be info used to exploit the system. But for a variety of reasons, this is an issue for our family when doing vacations or bigger/longer outings.

 

[OurBigTrip]

And that is indeed part of the problem, for example someone with limited vision. Under the old GAC system, there was a stamp that told the CMs that was the issue. Attractions with well lit queues or outdoor queues, especially during the day were not an issue or some queues not an issue until a certain point while other queues were problematic. So, that stamp was applied differently at each attraction and maybe even differently at night than during the day at the same Attraction. For example, in a dimly lit queue, a cast.member would use a flashlight to guide the guest and their party, obviously they weren't going to have the CM go through and wait in the standby queue with the guest and their party, so at those attractions, they would go through the alternate entrance. For the well lit/outdoor queues, they would go through the standard standby queue unless they also had other needs (i.e. avoid stairs) that would prohibit it. When they changed to a DAS system, those with low vision were supposed to simply be able to inform the CM at each attraction of the issue an get accommodated appropriately, unfortunately, this did mean constantly explaining needs throughout the day and many CMs refused to accommodate, so Disney ended up relenting and giving them a DAS because what can you do? This means that now those with low vision have a DAS and are going to be more.lokwly to use it on every attraction, even though it may not be needed on some attractions. Now some with low vision may or may not know which attractions it would be needed on, with the GAC system, the CMs could help with that if they didn't know, with the DAS, not so much, as a result, you end up with the person just being more likely to get a return time for everything to be safe. Please note this comes from DH talking with people who have low vision that have used both systems over the years and greatly preferred the GAC when it functioned as originally intended.

Perhaps they can setup the system where return times can be issued for attractions that the person would need it for, but not allow it for other attractions. For example, if a person needs shady place to wait, then you don't need for attractions where the queues are entirely indoors like Soarin' at EPCOT (at DCA, you still might since a large part of that queue is outdoors), but then there are other queues that are mostly or completely outside where you would need it. A similar concept could be used for those with low vision. I don't know if they will do this, but it could be done and would reduce the number of people coming into the lightning lanes.

Yep, very much like what Sue mentioned earlier. I’ve also seen posters who say their child can wait a long time in certain types of queues, but not others . The ability to customize a DAS so that it’s only available for the queues needed would be great.

 

[Disturbia]

Having just done universal with Dd - there's very little universal could do to make us jump ship. We visited Universal Hollywood for 1 day this year, that was enough. Mostly so DD could see the Wizarding World and we could try Super Mario World.

SMW was pretty to look at, but so difficult for our DD to access - both the powerband games (Too much force required for her to do on her own and she doesn't like being helped) and the Mario kart attraction. For Mario kart, the helmet was too heavy for DD to even wear, so she got virtually nothing out of the whole ride, and while DH and I wanted to love it the VR really took away from the actual physical set designs and effects for us. We rode it twice, using their disability system (so waiting each time) trying to give it a second chance and we all left underwhelmed.
Wizarding World was great. She loved that. She was willing to let us help her with the wand motions because everyone was having to work to learn the wand motions. She could ride both attractions, loved them both. The rest of the park was ok. None of us left with a need to return. We will go to UO so she can do diagon alley, but most of IOA is not very accessible to her as coasters are a big question mark. She just did Space at DLR this year, and only because we can ride side by side in arms reach. She won't ride it at WDW for a long time yet.

The accessibility is what keeps us or makes us jump ship. We won't likely ever be huge Universal visitors because of it. If Disney makes accessibility difficult, that's what will make returns difficult - not epic universe.

We will try Epic world but even our teen loves Star Wars and Avatar movies so we won’t be jumping ship either. The one time we did experience Universal with the premium unlimited pass, it felt like six flags to us. Not as immersive like WDW.

 

[CaliforniaGirl09]

I find this kind of argument so interesting, because here in Europe (including at Disneyland Paris) you provide evidence of your disability or don't get a pass. That simple. And we do not seem to have the issues with misuse that the US does, and I have never heard issues of forged documentation. (I think some conditions that woul qualify in the US, would not easilt here though - there's sort of a threshold of disability...but in exceptional circumstance, there is always the option of a letter from a doctor, that they will look at, no issue.)

Difficulty obtaining documentation is one thing I can understand why it would be tricky in the US, I just think for those who do present it, forgery is not an issue. "Not everyone can get documentation" is a reason for it not to an absoulte requirement, "CMs shouldn't have to deal with medical info" another valid one, but "it could be easily faked" isn't to me, I think that would be exceedingly rare.

With the third party being brought in, I feel like the OPTION to share documentation (with the third party medical professional, to lessen the burden on CMs) would just make sense for those who can provide it and otherwise fear they may not get the right accomodation.

We have been fortunate enough to visit every park with our son who is DD. I was caught unaware the first time at Hong Kong by the "proof" requirement and had to scramble through old emails to find documentation. But from the experience in the international parks, IMO, it is so much better. The CMs were wonderful--it's almost as if the CMs in the US parks are so worn down by the people abusing the system that they look at everyone suspiciously (until DS says something or does something that makes it obvious, which usually takes about two seconds, LOL). So I really wish the US parks would require some kind of documentation.

I'm not sure if anyone else here remembers in the old days when Disneyland did let you show "proof." When DS first started using the (paper!) GAC--maybe 20+ years ago--we used to bring his IEP and documentation of diagnosis. Not sure if it worked the same way at WDW. Again, years back, I remember that GAC was talked about as being horribly abused at Disneyland, but at WDW they didn't have that problem. We saw that when we first visited WDW with him maybe 15+ years ago. Over the years, and really with DAS, we've seen that change at WDW. I think social media had a huge impact. In the early days, people just didn't know about it. I remember us often being the only people going through the back entrances, etc.

It would actually be fairly easy to "prove" in CA for children/adults with enough impairment for DD, etc. I assume it is similar in other states, but we have the Regional Center, which provides services to the state. Showing your IPP or other proof of services would be a good first step for DD, etc. Certainly not all people with DD will be with regional center, but those who are would have a good presumption. I assume each state has its own entity to deal with children/adults with special needs, which could easily establish a base level of "proof." This wouldn't be a bar, but would certainly make it easier for a certain subset to start the conversation with a certain amount of assurance that it isn't abuse.

I do wonder if that is what Disneyland was thinking by specifying DD like autism, etc. https://scdd.ca.gov/about/#:~:text=...mental,required for persons with intellectual Note the definition: "In California law, a developmental disability is more narrowly defined as occurring before the age of 18 and includes specific categories of eligible conditions: intellectual disability, epilepsy, cerebral palsy, autism, and “conditions requiring services similar to those required for persons with intellectual disabilities.” California law requires that the individual be substantially handicapped by the disability." Here's the actual definition in the code: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=WIC§ionNum=4512.

Of course no one knows Disney's intent, but part of me thinks the GAC and DAS were also set up as a way to provide a bit of special magic to people with special needs--in the same way that they do for Wish kids or special needs travel groups. It certainly has been that way for us. If you'd ever told me as a young adult that I'd be going to Disney parks the way we do for years, I would have thought you were nuts. But due in large part to the GAC/DAS, Disneyland has become a happy place for our family because it makes DS so happy. The Disney bubble for us is a place where DS is treated as if he is "special" in the best sense of the word--the rest of the world isn't always that kind. I am sure we will continue to feel that magic, but I hate that it has come to this.

 

[Karin1984]

@ryang25 as an FYI, I just did my video call for my DAS pass next month at Disneyland California. No questions about where I was from or calling from, if I was using a VPN, all she cared about if why I can't stand in a regular waiting line. She was professional, but not in the mood for small talk or no time.

(I logged on sharp at 9am Pacific time, 6pm my time, got an agent on the line at 9:07, getting the approval was about 5 minutes, advanced reservations took about 20 minutes)

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

All Cedar Fair Parks allow the person with a disability and up to 3 additional people. They do not allow extras for immediate family either though.

I was in the process of looking up why my regional/local amusement park does which is owned and operated by Cedar Fair before you made your comment so that's interesting what you mentioned.

For my local park their 2023 guide (which is the most recent one available as they aren't open yet for the 2024 season) doesn't mention allowing any additional guests. Their website and 2023 guide just says "The guest with a mobility restriction or cognitive impairment should visit Guest Services upon their arrival at the park to express their inability to wait in the regular line. Some questions are asked to ensure that the rider has the required physical criteria in order to safely experience attractions. Following that conversation, the Guest Services Associate will provide the details needed to participate in the program."

It's possible that once you get there in the parks their standard is up to 3 additional people but I haven't found it written anywhere for the explicit need of their version of DAS and applied unilaterally to all locations.

They do discuss Supervising Companion which is designated for a variety of situations (lap babies, doesn't meet the required height to ride alone but could with another guest who meets the definition of Supervising Companion, guests who do not have an appropriate center of gravity or demonstrate appropriate observed behavior which was specifically mentioned for a specific ride, etc) and says "The Supervising Companion must be seated in the same seat (row) as the Rider who needs accompaniment and can accompany the number of Riders for which the seat is designed. For example, if a seat is designed for three people, the Supervising Companion can accompany two Riders". But that is applied to all guests.

As far as Rider Swap like has been discussed that is more clearly spelled out for my local park and while also meant for expected situations for all guests it's actually also specifically listed under autism "We also offer Rider Swap. This allows one guest to ride while another guest waits with the guest who did not ride. When the ride is complete, the guests swap responsibility at the exit." Rider Swap doesn't appear to allow additional individuals even under autism, however reading through if the attraction fell under a Supervising Companion situation that appears to allow for additional riders up to how much a seat accommodates (with an exception listed for a particular ride or two which allows for separate seating). Rider Swap is also specifically listed for people using service animals when the attraction or area (like during Halloween events) prohibits the service animal from being on the attraction or in that area. However, again Supervising Companion is applicable to all guests rather than an accommodation only for those with disabilities.


I do think you may have situations where a company has a policy that is dependent on location. We already know that California laws for example means there may be policy differences for DLR compared to WDW.

 

[SteveMouse]

I think the groups of 2 will need to have a reason why one of them cannot be left unsupervised for any reason. And groups of one who are not trying to add anyone to their DAS I'm guessing will just be given a solo DAS? But it sounds like groups of 3+ people will just be directed to split up and send at least one person through the standby line.

And an issue with three is if two people can't wait alone (not just would BE alone, but cannot WAIT alone, for example, One unimpaired adult, one impaired individual requiring companion, and a third person who is 5 years old, without impairment. The same issue exists if there are more individuals in the party. A not-unusual combination is one unimpaired adult, an impaired adult requiring assistance, and two children under 5, who cannot enter a line alone.

 

[Tatebeck]

Re: RS for accommodations where the party can swap... Husband brought up a point-- couldn't one argue that "forcing" people with disabilities to split from their families is not reasonable for equal enjoyment because they don't "force" non-disabled patrons to do so? When normal RS is used is kind of optional.

My answer was, well, it could be considered optional in this case, too. You don't HAVE to go on the attraction.

The accommodations they choose to give are for the disabled person. Allowing the disabled person to have the shortest wait possible while waiting with at least 1 family member sounds very reasonable and I don't think that would hold up in court. Otherwise any disabled person would be allowed to have any crazy number of guests that they want and that's definitely not reasonable and would affect Disney's day to day operation, which is why they won't have to do it.

 

[lanejudy]

children under 5, who cannot enter a line alone.

Quoting this just because it is the most recent but several posts have mention “under 5”… Disney requires a child to be 7 yrs old to enter a queue or wait for their party alone.

Under 7 must be accompanied by age 14+ at all times.
Ages 7-13 can ride alone but must have someone 14+ within the park.
Age 14+ can enter the park alone and do attractions alone.
Obviously, it is up to individual families to determine a child’s ability to safely do any of these things.

 

[Sprinkles&Sprints]

Just to clarify because several posts have mention “under 5”… Disney requires a child to be 7 yrs old to enter a queue or wait for their party alone.

Under 7 must be accompanied by age 14+ at all times.
Ages 7-13 can ride alone but must have someone 14+ within the park.
Age 14+ can enter the park alone and do attractions alone.
Obviously, it is up to individual families to determine a child’s ability to safely do any of these things.

Maybe I’m overprotective but I don’t see myself allowing a 7 year old to stand in line alone at all, let alone 90+ minutes? I mean maybe if the line was short and I could see them at all times, but otherwise that would be a hard no for me. I could see letting a 14 year old do this - because I would equate it with the same type of responsibility as walking in the park alone.

 

[SarahC97]

Do we know what length of time they're approving DAS for before the switch in May? If you go before May 20 are you getting 30 or 60 day approval?

 

[lanejudy]

Maybe I’m overprotective but I don’t see myself allowing a 7 year old to stand in line alone at all, let alone 90+ minutes? I mean maybe if the line was short and I could see them at all times, but otherwise that would be a hard no for me.

I doubt if there are many unaccompanied 7 yr olds in the queues even though it is allowed by the rules. Sometimes siblings will go together. Or an adult will accompany the child in the queue but duck out the chicken exit without riding.