Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Twice Exceptional A question about the law

I think it comes down to the fact that in this country we have decided that disabled people should have similar access to public facilities/services, generally under the ADA. Personally I find the argument most compelling when we are talking about government provided services since I think equal protection under the law should mean, well, equal protection. However, interestingly this has already been applied in a number of cases to private settings such as motels and hotels or your doctor's office.

When mobility disabled people ride airplanes, to cite your example, the airlines and airport have to provide transportation services (for example between terminals). Someone has to pay the salaries of those people who push the wheelchairs to carry these people where they need to go. These people don't pay a higher ticket price. Who pays? You and me. Most people don't seem to have a problem with that.

You may not be aware of this, but when a deaf patient seeks care in a private doctor's office (in the US) that physician is legally obligated to provide for a sign language translator, even at the typical cost of a few hundred dollars (because often mileage charges and minimums apply). That's even though the typical Medicaid or Medicare reimbursement for the patient's visit is well below this amount. And the physician is expressly not allowed to charge the patient or the insurer (usually Medicare) for this. One doctor got sued successfully because he tried to substitute written communication since he knew the patient could read and write. Who pays for that? Obviously initially the doctor takes the loss but eventually that also gets passed on to me and you.

My point is only that it is unfair to decide some disabled people get accommodations at public cost and some don't. Certainly the incremental public cost here is minimal (a few cubic feet of air?) particularly given the state in the case has already agreed the child is disabled and requires an aide at least some of the time, at public expense.

Yes, disability is expensive and in virtually all cases somebody besides the disabled person is picking up part of the tab. Just ask all the motels that had to spend thousands upgrading their pools to make them accessible to people in wheelchairs following recent changes in the law. Or ask the families supporting these disabled persons (who pay taxes too).

****

Nm. Let's simply agree to disagree on this.

Okay.

Yes, really, I can.

I'm with Val on this one. The "barrier" to the child being able to attend the swim was an extra $8. And the parent has admitted he could have still participated without the TSS, and the associated $8 fee. That barrier is easily surmountable. No law was violated.

Nope. Gyms.

Wow, autism should not be considered a disability that is covered by ADA because you think it is over diagnosed?

My son was diagnosed at 2 and at that time had no behavior problems at all. He met the criteria for an autism diagnosis based on the DSM-5. He is now 4 and is a very sweet person who happens to have occasional severe behavior problems relating to his social and emotional delays and anxiety.

As a former therapist myself I know exactly how to deal with problem behavior in the "right way". Unfortunately when my son gets upset nothing works to calm him down other than time. The therapist is there to help prevent meltdowns to begin with and help me deal with behaviors when they occur. Without her there is a higher chance others could be hurt and/or that we would have to leave the pool much sooner.

The parking lot at the pool is a fair hike from the pool entrance and carrying a protesting 40 pound kid plus all the swim gear to my car is something that I have done before, but something I never want to do again. The stares from people like you who think I'm just a crappy parent aren't much fun either.

My son also has significant sensory processing differences and mixed receptive expressive language disorder (where he is able to communicate at a much higher level than he can understand). He receives OT, speech, special instruction, PT, and 20 hours of behavioral support a week, in addition to state insurance paying for his allergies and GI issues as well as potential arthritis we are still investigating. He's started developing tics and he has strong OCD tendencies. I'm pretty sure I didn't convince the IU, local children's hospital who diagnosed him (CHOP), Early Intervention, staff at Theraplay and everyone else that he has autism just because I want an excuse for him pushing anyone who comes into his personal space. And I'm pretty sure the state would not pay for all of that if there wasn't pretty convincing evidence that he has an actual disability.

My son has 2 high functioning friends on the spectrum who also clearly require the help that they receive. I don't know anyone who would want their kid to be labeled autistic just for accommodations. We all just want our kids to be happy and healthy, just like any other parent. We also want to be able to go out and do normal things with them without the burden of extra expenses that families without disabled children do not need to worry about.

I haven't researched the law on this question, but when dealing with the ADA in an employment context, the law requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations to their employees that will allow them to perform their job duties. The key in that analysis is "reasonable." It isn't always the ideal accommodation, or exactly what the employee might most like to have/do. My assumption would be that in a case like this, if the pool is accessible to the individual without waiving the entrance fee for the aide, waiving that fee would likely not be legally required simply because it is preferable.

Or, ditto Dude.

I said no such thing.


I've been through similar scenarios countless times. That seems like a fairly routine parenting situation to me.