Last July, San Diego resident Trisha Malone applied for a disability waiver at a booth just outside of Disneyland and California’s adventure theme parks.
The Disability Access Service, or DAS, would have allowed the pass she wanted to avoid waiting on a time-consuming line for popular Disney rides.
Malone met with a representative of Disney for a DAS application interview. In that public setting, they sought private medical information from women with disabilities.
After a short exchange, Malone was rejected. Her disability was because she failed to meet new, more stringent DAS standards.
That denial was detailed in a 32-page class action complaint filed against Walt Disney Parks and the Resort along with partner Inspire Health Alliance at Orange County Superior Court on Monday.
Malone’s complaints allege Disney violated confidentiality, invaded her privacy and violated the Unruh Civil Rights Act and several California Civil Rights Codes.
The female attorney alleges in the complaint that the new DAS Pass standard “illegally excludes individuals with other disabilities.” The complaint did not provide details regarding the plaintiff’s disability.
She asks Disney to go back to the previous, less restrictive version of DAS Pass Enforcement. She is also looking for legal damages, compensation and attorney’s fees.
Her attorney did not respond to calls requesting comment.
A Disney spokesman who asked not to name it said the park strives to provide a great experience for visitors with disabilities.
“Disney offers a wide range of effective accommodations with disabilities and works extensively with experts to ensure that the individual needs of guests are in line with the accommodations they need, and the complaints claims include I don’t think there’s any merit,” the spokesman said.
Disney’s DAS Pass is not a license to skip waits. Rather, it provides the pass holder with return times for the attraction. There, match those who paid for Express or Lightning Lane access.
In April, Disney announced that it had changed its DAS qualifications. The new language was intended to accommodate guests who were unable to wait long in traditional queues due to developmental disorders such as autism. ”
The change took effect at Disney World on May 20th and at Disneyland on June 18th.
For guests who have difficulty tolerating extended waits in traditional queue environments due to failure, the old standards were much broader.
Disney said that as a result of that language, the program’s use tripled between 2019 and 2024.
But what Malone is demanding is these old standards.
Malone has sued on behalf of several unnamed disabled clients who have refused an unnamed disabled pass since June 18th. She included the Inspire Health Alliance. This was provided by nurse practitioners who worked with Disney staff to determine the value of the DAS pass.
Malone’s lawyers say that requiring guests to undergo the screening process on eligibility criteria that disproportionately affect individuals with disabilities is contrary to California’s Unruh Act and the Disability Act or the ADA. He claims in a complaint.
Unruh prohibits discrimination by California businesses based on a variety of factors: age, ancestry, colour, disability, country of origin and other factors.
Disney maintains in previous interviews with the Times, which offers plenty of accommodation for guests with disabilities.
These include sensory experience guides that show which parts have loud sounds, darkness, and glow. Disney also offers sign language interpreters, wheelchair and scooter rentals, assisting handheld and video captions on some vehicles, as well as dialogue and narration for other scripts.
When it comes to ride waiting, Disney offers a “back to queue” process. This allows the party to keep a place in line for disabled guests. There are several other similar options, such as “location return time” accommodation offered to wheelchairs.
Malone’s lawyers said the accommodation “difficult to provide equitable access and poses undue burdens, logistical challenges, mental distress and safety risks.”
Source link
