Previously, I had written an article about a new process that Universal Studios and other theme parks had implemented to handle disability accommodations. In a nutshell, Universal, Six Flags, Sea World, and others now utilize a third party company, the International Board of Credentialing and Continuing Education Standards (IBCCES), to certify that the person’s disability accommodation request is valid. The process that the IBCCES uses involves uploading a statement from your medical provider regarding your disability and necessary accommodations. That means that Universal Studios, Six Flags, and others are no longer just taking your word for it. They want proof!
At the time, I thought that this was a good thing. It had the potential to cut down on the number of people trying to cheat the system. This would reserve accommodations for those who truly need it. However, a recently filed class action lawsuit against Six Flags claims that using the IBCCES violates the Americans with Disabilities Act.
In this article, I’ll do a quick review of the IBCCES accommodation process. Then, I’ll summarize (as best I can) the lawsuit itself and its merits.
But First, the Disclaimer
I am not a lawyer, so any analysis that I provide is purely from a layperson’s understanding of the law. Anything that I saw should not constitute legal advice in any way. In other words, if you rely upon a random yahoo’s article for legal information, then shame on you!
Quick Review of the IBCCES Accommodation Process
The IBCCES accommodation process has three steps:
STEP ONE: 48 hours before you plan on visiting the theme park, you apply for an Individual Accessibility Card (IAC). This card essentially certifies that you are a person who needs some sort of disability accommodation. You complete an online application where you state the nature of your disability and what accommodations you require. As part of the application, you need to upload a statement from your medical provider to prove you need the accommodations for which you are asking.
STEP TWO: The IBCCES will review your application. If approved, they will issue you a digital “card” which certifies that you need accommodations.
STEP THREE: When you go to the participating theme park, you present them with the card. They will provide you then with the necessary accommodations that you require.
The main difference between this process and the process at Walt Disney World is that Disney requires no proof other than your verbal assurance.
The Lawsuit
The class action lawsuit in question is “I.L. vs Six Flags Entertainment Corporation and Magic Mountain LLC”. You can read the full text of the lawsuit here, but I will describe the relevant points.
The plaintiff (whose identity is shielded for privacy reasons) alleges that the IBCCES accommodation process that Six Flags uses violates Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. For reference, Title III specifically deals with public accommodations that places of business need to provide to customers. Specifically, Title III states the following:
No individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation by any person who owns, leases (or leases to), or operates a place of public accommodation.
The lawsuit specifically calls out several ways that Six Flags’ accommodation process is in violation of the ADA:
- The level of proof required goes above and beyond what the ADA regulations allow
- The process could unfairly exclude people who legitimately require an accommodation
- The process provides unequal park access
Level of Proof Required
The lawsuit states that the process for confirming the disability and accommodation legally needs to adhere to the following points:
- Businesses cannot ask about a person’s specific medical conditions
- The type of “proof” that is required is very limited. Generally, only a verbal or written representation from the disabled person is required.
The lawsuit claims that the IBCCES process violates both of the above points. First, a statement from a medical provider, government entity (ex: VA), or educational support specialist (ex: IEP or Individualized educational plan) is required. While it is possible to craft such a statement so it doesn’t contain sensitive medical information, that may be hard to do in practice.
In the plaintiff’s situation, they provided a document issued by the VA (Veterans Administration) detailing the nature of his disability and diagnosis. The lawsuit states that the document listed information that was irrelevant to the accommodation, including personal and medical information.
Second, the regulations state that usually just a verbal or written confirmation from the disabled person is required. Generally, no medical documentation is necessary for most accommodations.
Unfairly Excluding People Who Are Legitimately Disabled
The lawsuit states that another principle of the ADA is that the administrative process to determine eligibility should not have the effect of discriminating against people who are disabled. It cites a number of ways in which the IBCCES violates this.
First, the documentation requirements are extremely rigid. There is no flexibility in the type of proof that is required. They specifically ask for a statement from a medical provider, government entity, or educational support specialist. But what if a person doesn’t have any of the above? The lawsuit cites a CDC statistic that 25% of disabled persons don’t have a usual health care provider. Thus, they are effectively restricting access to those people because of a documentation requirement that they cannot meet.
Second, some people may (rightly) be concerned about the security of the sensitive personal medical information that they are required to share with a third party site that isn’t bound by medical information privacy laws. Those who don’t want to release such information are effectively restricted from accessing an accommodation.
Third, in some cases, the person’s disability is apparent. Let’s say that a person with an obvious disability shows up at Six Flags requesting an accommodation. Because they did not go through the process, they would also be denied an accommodation. The lawsuit cites several Reddit posts where people complained about this exact thing. One person showed up wearing a brace and a cane, asking for an accommodation. They were denied because they hadn’t completed the process, even though any reasonable person would conclude that they had a mobility issue. There is no flexibility.
Unequal Park Access
Finally, the lawsuit states that the new process does not provide equal access to the park because now people requiring an accommodation can no longer spontaneously visit. A non-disabled park goer has the ability to just show up at the park on any day and enjoy everything that it has to offer. However, because it takes 48 hours for one to go through the pre-screening process, this option is not available to disabled guests. The lawsuit contends that this violates the “participation in unequal benefit” provision of the ADA.
Disney Is Mentioned
The lawsuit mentions Disney as a positive example of how to administer an ADA accommodation process. The lawsuit compares the IBCCES system to Disney’s Disability Access Service (DAS). It states that Disney’s has chosen to accept a guest’s verbal representation of their disability as proof. Thus, no invasive medical statements are required. Furthermore, one can just show up on the day of their visit, go to Guest Services, and sign up for DAS without any sort of advanced approval.
So the lawsuit holds up Disney as a gold standard of ADA compliance!
Buster’s Commentary
Does the Case Have Merit?
Again, I am not a lawyer, so keep that in mind.
One thing to remember is just because someone states something in a lawsuit doesn’t mean that it is correct. We are just getting one perspective on the lawsuit, and Six Flags certainly is entitled to its day in court. However, this lawsuit does highlight the fine line that theme parks (and all businesses) need to walk with respect to disability accommodations. On the one hand, they absolutely need to provide equal access to those with disabilities. On the other hand, they want to make sure that people aren’t taking advantage of the system. While most people are honest, there will always be a few bad apples who lie about their “disability” to get preferential treatment.
However, based upon the way the ADA regulations are written, the law seems to consistently err on the side of making the process as easy and unintrusive as possible, even if that means that a few bad apples can exploit it. Because of that, I feel like the lawsuit definitely has merit.
What Does This Mean For Disney and Universal?
Previously, I had speculated that Disney is keeping an eye on the IBCCES process, since it is being used by their nearest theme park neighbor. Now that this lawsuit is out there, I suspect that Disney is keeping an eye on that as well. From a park operations standpoint, Disney does have a vested interest in reducing DAS fraud. They have publicly stated that they have seen an “uptick” in DAS abuse and have already taken some steps to crack down on it.
However, Disney also has some of the best lawyers in the business. My guess is that they will watch how this lawsuit progresses before taking any more restrictive steps. However, if the IBCCES process holds up in court, I wouldn’t be surprised if Disney adopts it or its own, similar system.
With regards to Universal, they already are using the IBCCES system to validate accommodations. This lawsuit hasn’t seemed to change how they do business (yet). However, it certainly feels like it is only a matter of time before Universal is named as a defendant in a similar lawsuit.
Universal has good lawyers too. Interestingly, they haven’t made any changes to the policies in either Universal Studios Orlando or Universal Studios Hollywood. The latter is of particular note, since it is in the same jurisdiction where the Six Flags lawsuit is filed. That could mean that they feel like this lawsuit doesn’t have merit.
Wrap Up
It will be interesting to see where this lawsuit goes. The legal system moves slowly so it might take awhile before the lawsuit is resolved, either through a settlement or court ruling. However it plays out, it will definitely shape the future of how theme parks handle disability accommodations.
I certainly am in favor of efforts to cut down on fraud and abuse, as it makes everyone’s theme park experience better (both for those disabled and non-disabled). However, it needs to be done in a way that is fair and adheres to the law. Of course, there are no easy answers when it comes to items like this, so hopefully smarter people than me can figure it out!
Let us know what you think in the comments. We welcome your opinions!
AD: We hope you enjoyed this post. If you are coming to Central Florida and need a place to stay, please consider the Encore Magic Villa. It sleeps up to 12 and features a game room, theater room, themed bedrooms, and private pool… located within a short drive of the Magic!
If you enjoy this site and want to support us, please consider shopping on Amazon using our affiliate link. There is no additional cost to you, and it helps defray the cost of running this site.
If you really like us, please consider supporting us on Patreon for only $2/month. We would really appreciate it!
