Disneyland Slammed By Federal Judges For Dissing Disabled Visitor


Anaheim, oh dear, Anaheim.

You've had to endure the insufferable Curt Pringle, Harry Sidhu and the Rams.

Lately you've watched your city literally on fire as cops clash with
outraged residents alarmed over continual evidence of police brutality and hoodlum antics.

How bad are things now in Anaheim?

Well, Disneyland–the city's largest enterprise and one that should have mastered
the art of winning free, positive advertising decades ago–has tripped over its own slick publicity machine.
]

It's difficult to transform a storied amusement park for kids into a
nasty villain but, if a panel of federal judges are right, that's what the folks at The Happiest Place on Earth
managed to do this month.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit
sternly lectured officials at the Walt Disney World Company for
their callous treatment of a woman who suffers from muscular dystrophy
and was blocked from using a Segway, a two-wheeled mobility device, to
visit the park with her eight-year-old daughter.

That mother, Tina Baughman, claimed Disney's action constituted a
violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) because it
denied her equal access to the park. Disney argued strenuously
that it even though the Segway might be the least painful transportation
device for Baughman, it wasn't “necessary” because she could use a less
comfortable
wheelchair. U.S. District Court Judge Cormac J. Carney sided
with the company inside the Ronald Reagan Federal Courthouse in Santa
Ana.

But the appellate panel led by Chief Judge Alex Kozinski ridiculed Disney's stance, stating:

“Read as Disney suggests, the ADA would require very few accommodations
indeed. After all, a paraplegic can enter a courthouse by dragging
himself up the front steps, so lifts and ramps would not be 'necessary'
under Disney's reading of the term. And no facility would be required to
provide wheelchair-accessible doors or bathrooms, because disabled
individuals could be carried in litters or on the backs of their
friends.”

The court then poked Mickey Mouse in the chest even harder:

“That's not the world we live in and we are disappointed to see such a
retrograde position taken by a company whose reputation is built on
service to the public . . .  As new devices (for the disabled) become
available, public accommodations must consider using or adapting them to
help disabled guests have an experience more akin to that of
non-disabled guests.”

Ouch!


In a final shot, the judges underscored their frustration with Disney's bad attitude, writing:

“Disney simply takes the position that, even if Baughman's access is
made 'uncomfortable or difficult' by its policies, any discomfort or
difficulty she may suffer is too darn bad. Disney is obviously mistaken.
If it can make Baughman's experience less onerous and more akin to that
enjoyed by its able-bodied patrons, it must take reasonable steps to do
so.”

Follow OC Weekly on Twitter @ocweekly or on Facebook!

R. Scott Moxley’s award-winning investigative journalism has touched nerves for two decades. An angry congressman threatened to break Moxley’s knee caps. A dirty sheriff promised his critical reporting was irrelevant and then landed in prison. The U.S. House of Representatives debated his work. Federal prosecutors credited his stories for the arrest of a doctor who sold fake medicine to dying patients. Moxley has won Journalist of the Year honors at the Los Angeles Press Club; been named Distinguished Journalist of the Year by the LA Society of Professional Journalists; and hailed by two New York Times Magazine writers for his “herculean job” exposing Southern California law enforcement corruption.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *