I just wrote this on my blog, but I though I'd share it here as well:

We live in a litigious society. If something bugs us, we sue them or at least write an indigent letter or even email. This is known all-too-well within the disabled community. We’ve all heard of some guy suing some business because the mirror in the bathroom was too high and winding up with lots ‘o money in the bank. Is this fair? I’m all for ADA codes, but sometimes things can go a bit too far. Just read this article.

Tonight hubby & I ate dinner at The Galley restaurant in downtown Morro Bay. Delicious sea food, great view of the bay and we both got the five star treatment. Why such nice service? It’s not because we’re big tippers. It’s because we’re in wheelchairs. To them, they see lawyers and money being flung about. You see, The Galley has been in the process of remodeling for years now ever since Jarek Molski (a man who is in a wheelchair from a motorcycle accident in 1988) decided to sue them over some such nonsense related to accessibility (think paper towel dispensers too high). Hubby (while in college) had dinned at The Galley on numerous occasions prior to the remodeling with out making a federal case. Now, to understand the restaurant scene in Morro Bay you must know that most of the buildings are old, creaky and built sometime in the 1960’s. They are mostly fish joints that somehow turned into fancy restaurants. You don’t expect these places to be exactly up to code, but Molski apparently did and got busy suing. Some restaurants closed and some just paid out money to quite the situation. The Galley however, got busy rebuilding.

All this suing has made many restaurants uneasy when they see hubby and I push in. It’s the subtle way the waiter or manager will come and check on our table every 10 minutes. We’ll arrive at a restaurant at six and expect to wait 15 minutes for a table, but instead they’ll whisk off that ‘reserved’ sign and set us at the table with the great view. I feel bad for the other couple that called hours earlier and requested that table. Sorry, but wheelchair trumps reservation. Does this make me happy? Perhaps for a moment (I feel like a celebrity!) but really, it makes me mad.

A few years ago I was trying to get an internship at a design firm. I went to an interview at a kitchen and bath place. They loved my work and all my designs & I was at the top of my class (dean’s medalist nominee … etc.) any firm would be lucky to have me. However, a week later I found out from a teacher they were not going to hire me. Instead, they were hiring three of my classmates to do the job I wanted. I was pissed! Their reason? They were afraid I’d sue them because their bathrooms were not up to code. I was stunned. Could they do that? At the time I was a stupid student just trying to get my degree and be done with college, I didn’t want the hassle of getting into something and having it blow up in my face. For the rest of my senior year I struggled to find an internship. I blame this struggle on not only the crappy selection of design firms in the Central Valley but also because of people like Jarek Molski and our litigious society.

So, do we sue when we find an infraction of the ADA code? Or do we let it slide. Why have an American’s With Disabilities Act when businesses will not even comply with it? Frankly, I’m the kind of person to let it slide. If a business will not make a few accommodations to allow me access they don’t need my money. Sure, I’ll complain to the manager and suggest something be changed - but at what price do we pay (or have the business pay) for such violations.

Karen,

I am in two minds on this one, and both those minds hold very strong views, so there is little middle ground!

On one hand I fully agree with you that a litigious society breeds bad relations, which directly affects the disabled community. Everyone becomes so cautious so as not to fall foul of the law that they end up doing nothing. Doing nothing becomes "safe". Added to this (and specific to us) equipment manufacturers spend an inordinate amount of money on legal costs to prevent litigation, which in turn is built into the price of their product. Hense the ridiculous price of wheelchairs!

On the other hand I see too many businesses and public venues which are still not accessable. This is un-acceptable. Any major business or public building, in 2008, after nearly three decades of access campaigning, which is not accessable clearly is pushing their luck, and deserves to be hammered hard. These days no-one can claim to be un-aware of disabled access. It would be un-acceptable for them to post a "no women allowed", or "no blacks allowed" sign, so why is it still OK to effectively run a "no disabled people allowed" establishment?

Personally, I steer clear of such places. If they don't provide me with access they don't get my money, but I can't help but feel they are being allowed to get away with blatant discrimination. Clearly these discriminators are not willing to come-to-the-party by choice, so the one means would be to have some pain administered to their bottom-line.

From the isolated safety of the South Pacific, the prolific and outrageous practices of suing in the US and other countries are bizarre.
It's been very rare here in New Zealand to sue since the mid1970s when we introduced a no-fault national insurance scheme. It has worked very well but is gradually being undermined by greedy insurance companies and lawyers who want to follow the US way. A pending chnage of Govternment towards the end of this year will probably all but complete it's destruction.

Hi Karen,

They way I look at it, there are plenty of 'steps' (lol, pun not intended) between doing nothing, and suing. If a restaurant, business etc can be encouraged to 'make accommodations' and at least try and make changes as far as their situation will allow, then that may be a better solution for all. Some are not malicious or avoiding disabled folks, they simply are unaware of the difficulties steps and narrow toilets bring etc..


I know its very idealistic, but it does happen sometimes.

Recently I was in Clothing and home store NEXT which is a New building (last 5 years). They have access to the building, yet their rails etc were arranged in such a way that no one with a pram, shopping trolley never mind those of us using a chair! Soooo, I 're-arranged' the Store using my chair. The manager wasn't happy, but i figured actions speak louder than words. Action doesn't always = suing!

OH, EDITED TO ADD, that when I went back to the store a few days ago, they have the rails arranged a little better. Is it b/c of what I did?, I am not sure, but who knows?!!

interesting blog post...

Take care,

K

It is, to a great extent, because lawyers have become so prevalent(sp). If you want a shot at making big money, fast, and aren't adept at playing a sport or musical instrament, you get a law degree and help other people sue.

Since the vast majority of our legislators, regardless of natonality, are lawyers, it is unlikely they will enact laws that will limit their ability to make these windfalls, nor to continue allowing such laws to exist ( in the case of NZ).

Love makes the world go round,,,, if you're talking about the love of money!!!

It seems that we all fall victom to the lottery mentality...Pot of gold,,, buried treasure,,,hier to an unknown fortune,,,We have all thought about how nice it would be.....Then a lawyer says " It will cost you nothing unless we get money for you!!"

Whatcha gonna do????
ed

Old Post I know but I have a story to tell.. as usual.

While in Monaco, frenchy and I went to eat at a seasonal place B&B or B&P it was called. I cant remember now that Im trying to recall the name. Anyways we called ahead to see if things were accessible, they said yes and we went. Apparently their idea of accessible and my reality were quiet different. The entrance was fine, one big smooth"ramp" to the doors. Unfortunately the resturant had a big step right at the doors. I couldnt make the jump, and had to be helped. No big deal... The floorplan from then on seemed ideal. Huge open patio, great views, no crowds. All was well until the Merlot reached my bladder. I excused myself, asked a waitress to point in the direction of the restroom and started to roll there. I rounded a corner only to find 4 huge steps between the bathroom and me. I got the waitress and told her the issue. (The entire staff there was SUPER) She got two guys to come over and lift me up the stairs. At this point she's apologizing as she walks to ladies room and opens the door for me. Immediately I scope it out, and she scopes me out. She ask if everything is alright and I tell her there's no way Im going to fit in those stalls. We both laugh and I tell her the only way Im going to get on that toilet is by having somone set me there. So, we got another guy. (lol) He set me on the potty, I closed the stall door and just about wore my arms out trying to get my pants on and off with nothing to grab except the small bit of toilet seat I wasnt sitting on. It felt like 30 minutes later, when I opened the door and asked the waitress to get the guy to help me again.. I finally got back to the table and told frenchy my terrific time. We joked, he got semi upset.. and I basically let him know that it did suck, but the fact the place was 'dead' and the staff was so great about it all helped alot. I wasn't going to need therapy or lawsuit to fix it.
ABout 10 minutes later the same waitress came over to let us know that her manager had just gotten off the phone with Prince Alberts "people" and assured us the problem was going to be fixed within a week. They even invited us back, on their tab, if we would still be around. Unfortunately we weren't...
Anyways.. its an experience in itself. It was another country so it wasnt like I was going to call my lawyer. Its Monaco, its rich I know, but its not the US so I didnt expect much.. I was thrilled to hear the news, not for my sake.. but for everyone elses. If you are ever in the area, stop and grab a bite to eat!

I've been on wheels almost 43 years and experienced quite a few accessibility issues over the years. As with any group, SCIs have their share of assholes, too. Maybe even more so than the general public. Some go around with a chip on their shoulder, have a sense of entitlement, take advantage of their disability, bully others, and even try to profit from it.

The ADA is a good thing for the most part, but is open to abuse. The sad thing is, the assholes who abuse it ruin it for those who don't and every SCI gets labeled a jerk. I'm no door mat. But I like to take a more reasonable, diplomatic approach to accessibility issues. I'd rather try to talk to and educate people rather than be combative and confrontational. ABs, even today, may be largely uninformed on and unaware of many issues we face. I'd much rather teach than fight.

It's been my experience that you will get more and better results when people understand and want to help instead of being forced to help. If they are badgered into doing something, they will do just enough to get you off their back. On the other hand, if you convince them, they will often do more than what is strictly required.

My feeling is, some people were assholes before they were disabled and their disability gave them an excuse and shield to be more so.