# Should products/services be accessible to disabled? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [October 27, 2004, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480 "2004-10-27T17:02:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Standup\_Karmic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ac91a4/32.png) [@Standup\_Karmic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Standup_Karmic)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/1 "2004-10-27T17:02:14Z")
I really don’t know if this should be posted here. It might well be better suited for GD, but that place kinda scares me. If this gets out of hand and better-suited for GD territory, then I do ask a Mod to move it there. I came across [this story](http://www.canada.com/national/story.html?id=9a4f32a3-daf3-43e7-a516-e709ff43d36d) today about three deaf people suing movie studios, distributors and theatres in order to force them to make all movie theatres accessible to the deaf. Quoth the new piece, “All are accused of failing to ensure that every theatre is 100% accessible to deaf movie buffs.” My question for you folks is, do you agree that all products and services should be 100% accessible to all persons, regardless of their abilities or disabilities? ---
**Author:** ![Phlosphr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c68b51/32.png) [@Phlosphr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Phlosphr)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/2 "2004-10-27T17:17:33Z")
Yes. Then again my wife and I have been staunch supporters of people with disabilities for many years now. I see no reason why large movie houses - at very least - should not provide services for the deaf. They provide services for people in wheel chairs don’t they? BTW, I have seen movie theaters with closed captioning projected on the area below the movie screen. It was not that bad for us who are not deaf, and worked very well for those who were. ---
**Author:** ![whiterabbit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/cab0a1/32.png) [@whiterabbit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whiterabbit)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/3 "2004-10-27T17:25:03Z")
As much as is possible, yes. It sounds like it isn’t too hard to come up with some sort of system for movies (though subtitling the main screen for all of them would irritate). I know at least one (and that’s probably two or three, but I haven’t paid attention) of the local theaters has the subtitle-at-your-seat thing. That seems reasonably easy to handle. I wonder if having descriptive narration through headphones (for the blind) would be any harder or more expensive to install. I’ve seen a couple of movies with that feature with blind friends at home, and it became immediately obvious that they end up missing a lot just because they can’t see the thing. In other things beyond movies, heck yeah. I think everybody should be made to get around in a wheelchair for a week, just to see how what it’s like. Suddenly those accomodations don’t seem quite so unreasonable… ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/4 "2004-10-27T17:37:33Z")
No, of course not. \*\*Public \*\* buildings, services, etc. should be required to be accessible to all. Private, on the other hand, is up to the owner. If the owner feels that they are losing business by not offering subtitles, then they should install the necessary equipment. Competition will take care of the rest. But to _require_ it? Ridiculous! That would be like _requiring_ that a magazine be printed in Braille, or that William F. Buckley stop using long words because it is discriminatory to the illiterate and stupid. Private people and organizations are free to make their own choices, and to rise and fall in the marketplace based on those choices. ---
**Author:** ![Farmwoman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8dc957/32.png) [@Farmwoman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Farmwoman)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/5 "2004-10-27T18:00:56Z")
What silenus said. Also note the difference between universal _access_ and special accomodations. Parents of small children in strollers will appreciate universal access in the form of curb cuts, ramps and elevators. Stores wishing to attract parents of small children will offer the special accomodation of stork/kid friendly parking spaces near the door. ---
**Author:** ![pestie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e5b9ba/32.png) [@pestie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pestie)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/6 "2004-10-27T18:21:00Z")
I’m pretty much with **Silenus** on this one. Government buildings or anything else funded with taxpayer money should be required by law to be accessible to absolutely everyone. Same goes for essential services like hospitals, etc. Beyond that, if it’s a private building or service the law should have nothing to say about it. I even think the ADA goes too far sometimes, but since this isn’t GD or the Pit I’m not going to get into that. Heh… ---
**Author:** ![Standup\_Karmic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ac91a4/32.png) [@Standup\_Karmic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Standup_Karmic)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/7 "2004-10-27T18:32:10Z")
I find it interesting and pertinent that the Canadian Association of the Deaf [says](http://www.cad.ca/english/resources/pp_statistics_on_deaf_canadians.doc) (Warning: .doc) that 65% of deaf Canadians are functionally illiterate. ---
**Author:** ![Phlosphr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c68b51/32.png) [@Phlosphr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Phlosphr)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/8 "2004-10-27T18:54:25Z")
To those who think **NO** for the OP - So I am completely out of luck if I want to go to the bathroom in a posh - privately owned - restaurant if they do not _want_ to waste the money on making the bathrooms accessible for me in a wheelchair? Is that what you are saying? Or how about the **private** school I happen to teach at? They should not be mandated to have bathrooms of a certain width so I, in a wheelchair, can take a leak? WOW! I should bring that up in our next admissions committee meeting - forget all the handicapped kids! We don’t need them :rolleyes: What you are essentially saying, is that because a place is private and not funded by our tax dollars, that they should not be mandated to accomodate those who have disabilities. I think not. That is the whole reason the Americans With Disabilities Act was enacted, to _ **make** _ buildings accessible to those with disabilities, so everyone can be on a somewhat equal plane. ---
**Author:** ![Phlosphr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c68b51/32.png) [@Phlosphr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Phlosphr)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/9 "2004-10-27T18:59:57Z")
Incidentally, I am not in a wheelchair, but thank Og some of you are not the legislator’s in my state! People with disabilities would be SOL. ---
**Author:** ![Bearflag70](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Bearflag70](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bearflag70)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/10 "2004-10-27T19:07:17Z")
Yeah for the free market! … and keep those black folk outta my restraurant because they scare off the good white customers … :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![whiterabbit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/cab0a1/32.png) [@whiterabbit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whiterabbit)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/11 "2004-10-27T19:14:50Z")
I can imagine it might be easy for some people to say things like “the ADA goes overboard” when they’ve never had to deal with any situations it would cover. Try being unable to reach an ATM because it’s over your head. I’ve been there. Or at least being unable to see the screen because it’s so high, as well as barely being able to reach the buttons. This makes life difficult if you don’t have somebody you trust with your PIN around. Some stores still haven’t figured out that the best place to mount card readers is NOT five feet off the ground, and fixed at an angle that makes them entirely unusable for me. Bank counters are invariably WAY too f’in high. And if there’s a low counter, nobody’s ever there. Curb cuts are a godsend to everybody. Ramps take up more room than steps, but is it really so hard to install one? Have you ever had to go a block and a half around a building to try to find an entrance you can get into at all? You who think private businesses should be exempt – well, this isn’t the Pit. ---
**Author:** ![DeVena](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/dec6dc/32.png) [@DeVena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DeVena)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/12 "2004-10-27T19:30:16Z")
A movie theater here shows subtitled films on Sunday afternoons. It doesn’t impinge on the hearing and it’s infinately better for the deaf. Think of how fast the Screen-to-DVD time is today. No special equipment needed, “new” releases are typically about a month after wide release. How could this ever be considered a burden? I am handicapped. You have no idea how much time is spent just planning out my route to and from the restroom at work. And I work in a public building. I plan how and when I go shopping so I don’t embarass myself and annoy others. Many an excursion has been cut short because crowded public restrooms are a joke. Do not try to tell me that my money is not as good as yours. I deserve to have access. I deserve no less than you. ---
**Author:** ![Ike\_Witt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ike_witt/32/283_2.png) [@Ike\_Witt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ike_Witt)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/13 "2004-10-27T19:35:29Z")
> [@Bearflag70](#): > > Yeah for the free market! > > … and keep those black folk outta my restraurant because they scare off the good white customers … Isn’t there a grand canyon sized difference between discrimination and accomodation? ---
**Author:** ![Mtgman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@Mtgman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mtgman)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/14 "2004-10-27T19:55:09Z")
> [@adam yax](#): > > Isn’t there a grand canyon sized difference between discrimination and accomodation? Yes, but it is generally bridged by the word “reasonable”. The ADA is riddled with this word. The [FAQ for the ADA](http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/q%26aeng02.htm) has this to say about “Public Accommodations”(like movie theatres) > [@](#): > > Q. Are there any limits on the kinds of modifications in policies, practices, and procedures required by the ADA? > > A. Yes. The ADA does not require modifications that would fundamentally alter the nature of the services provided by the public accommodation. For example, it would not be discriminatory for a physician specialist who treats only burn patients to refer a deaf individual to another physician for treatment of a broken limb or respiratory ailment. To require a physician to accept patients outside of his or her specialty would fundamentally alter the nature of the medical practice. Subtitles are a part of movies and always have been. Thousands of films from around the world have been subtitled in theatrical release including hits like “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon”. Therefore it stands to reason that subtitling films is not fundamentally altering the service. Enjoy, Steven ---
**Author:** ![Gr8Kat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gr8kat/32/18668_2.png) [@Gr8Kat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gr8Kat)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/15 "2004-10-27T19:57:02Z")
I am curious as to how, specifically, the ADA “goes too far.” I would love to hear how having adequate parking space to unload a wheelchair from my van, curbcuts to get onto a sidewalk, a slope or ramp instead of a step into a business, wide doors, spacious bathroom stalls, and raised toilets are a hardship for you. However, without them, many disabled and elderly (myself included) would be complete shut-ins. No shopping, no eating, no going to the bathroom. No necessities, no luxuries, no nothing. The ADA goes too far? As for the OP, what about Phlosphr’s post: > [@](#): > > BTW, I have seen movie theaters with closed captioning projected on the area below the movie screen. It was not that bad for us who are not deaf, and worked very well for those who were. That seems reasonable to me, too. Please tell us how it might be “going too far.” ---
**Author:** ![Bearflag70](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Bearflag70](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bearflag70)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/16 "2004-10-27T19:59:36Z")
> [@adam yax](#): > > Isn’t there a grand canyon sized difference between discrimination and accomodation? My point was that, leaving everything to the free market, we run into situations where people are effectively and unreasonably denied access to basic goods and services offered generally to the public, based upon the whims of or perceived cost-benefit analysis of individual business owners. ---
**Author:** ![Standup\_Karmic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ac91a4/32.png) [@Standup\_Karmic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Standup_Karmic)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/17 "2004-10-27T20:19:02Z")
> [@Gr8Kat](#): > > As for the OP, what about Phlosphr’s post: > > That seems reasonable to me, too. Please tell us how it might be “going too far.” I would first like to point out that I did not state that at any time the ADA has gone to far, and you are misattributing a quote. I don’t live in the U.S.A., and the ADA does not apply to me nor have any impact upon me. The story is about a Canadian lawsuit, but I felt that the story and the OP were general enough for global application, so didn’t really make a point of it. As far as **Phlosphr** ’s post, Rear Window Captioning (RWC) is an available technology, according to the linked-to news item. It does, however, cost in the range of $20,000 per theatre to install RWC. The problem, according to the story, is that only 30 of the 890 Famous Player’s screens (no word on any other screen operators) have this technology installed. I guess the question becomes, is it necessary and financially viable to offer this technology universally, when according the .doc that I linked to, “Statistics on Deaf Canadians” from the Canadian Association of the Deaf, somewhere around 300,000 Canadians are deaf, and 65% of them are functionally illiterate. According to this rationale, every restaurant should have their menus in braille as well as print. They should also each have an interpreter on-site at all times who is familiar with sign language, if necessary. Etc. I’m not against accomodating where it is reasonable and financially viable to do so. But it seems to to me that this lawsuit is asking a bit much. ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/18 "2004-10-27T20:27:05Z")
Let the Market decide. Let the Market choose our president. (Here’s $100 for your vote, thanks.) Let the Market provide firefighters (to those who can afford them-- don’t forget to tip!). Let the Market provide an Army. (“Why did you guys invade Saudi Arabia?” “Oh… it was good for the bottom line!”) Let the Market choose who gets an elementary education. (I wanted to send my Johnny to school, but I can’t afford it. Besides, he’s pretty busy running the band-saw down at the slaughterhouse every night-- and we need the $1.13 a day that he gets). I like this Market guy. He’s really smart and knows just what’s best for us! ---
**Author:** ![Mtgman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@Mtgman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mtgman)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/19 "2004-10-27T20:36:12Z")
> [@Standup Karmic](#): > > According to this rationale, every restaurant should have their menus in braille as well as print. They should also each have an interpreter on-site at all times who is familiar with sign language, if necessary. Etc. I’m not against accomodating where it is reasonable and financially viable to do so. But it seems to to me that this lawsuit is asking a bit much. More from the FAQ. > [@](#): > > Q. Will restaurants be required to have brailled menus? > > A. No, not if waiters or other employees are made available to read the menu to a blind customer. > Q. Will a clothing store be required to have brailled price tags? > > A. No, not if sales personnel could provide price information orally upon request. > Q. Will a bookstore be required to maintain a sign language interpreter on its staff in order to communicate with deaf customers? > > A. No, not if employees communicate by pen and notepad when necessary. > Q. Are there any limitations on the ADA’s barrier removal requirements for existing facilities? > > A. Yes. Barrier removal need be accomplished only when it is “readily achievable” to do so. > Q. What does the term “readily achievable” mean? > > A. It means “easily accomplishable and able to be carried out without much difficulty or expense.” > Q. What are examples of the types of modifications that would be readily achievable in most cases? > > A. Examples include the simple ramping of a few steps, the installation of grab bars where only routine reinforcement of the wall is required, the lowering of telephones, and similar modest adjustments. > Q. Will businesses need to rearrange furniture and display racks? > > A. Possibly. For example, restaurants may need to rearrange tables and department stores may need to adjust their layout of racks and shelves in order to permit access to wheelchair users. > Q. Will businesses need to install elevators? > > A. Businesses are not required to retrofit their facilities to install elevators unless such installation is readily achievable, which is unlikely in most cases. > Q. When barrier removal is not readily achievable, what kinds of alternative steps are required by the ADA? > > A. Alternatives may include such measures as in-store assistance for removing articles from inaccessible shelves, home delivery of groceries, or coming to the door to receive or return dry cleaning. > Q. Must alternative steps be taken without regard to cost? > > A. No, only readily achievable alternative steps must be undertaken. > Q. How is “readily achievable” determined in a multisite business? > > A. In determining whether an action to make a public accommodation accessible would be “readily achievable,” the overall size of the parent corporation or entity is only one factor to be considered. The ADA also permits consideration of the financial resources of the particular facility or facilities involved and the administrative or fiscal relationship of the facility or facilities to the parent entity. Enjoy, Steven ---
**Author:** ![Gr8Kat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gr8kat/32/18668_2.png) [@Gr8Kat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gr8Kat)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480/20 "2004-10-27T21:51:42Z")
> [@Standup Karmic](#): > > I would first like to point out that I did not state that at any time the ADA has gone to far, and you are misattributing a quote. I don’t live in the U.S.A., and the ADA does not apply to me nor have any impact upon me. The story is about a Canadian lawsuit, but I felt that the story and the OP were general enough for global application, so didn’t really make a point of it. > > As far as **Phlosphr** ’s post, Rear Window Captioning (RWC) is an available technology, according to the linked-to news item. It does, however, cost in the range of $20,000 per theatre to install RWC. The problem, according to the story, is that only 30 of the 890 Famous Player’s screens (no word on any other screen operators) have this technology installed. > > I guess the question becomes, is it necessary and financially viable to offer this technology universally, when according the .doc that I linked to, “Statistics on Deaf Canadians” from the Canadian Association of the Deaf, somewhere around 300,000 Canadians are deaf, and 65% of them are functionally illiterate. > > According to this rationale, every restaurant should have their menus in braille as well as print. They should also each have an interpreter on-site at all times who is familiar with sign language, if necessary. Etc. I’m not against accomodating where it is reasonable and financially viable to do so. But it seems to to me that this lawsuit is asking a bit much. Sorry, I wasn’t trying to imply that you specifically had said the ADA goes too far. I get wound up easily on this issue, I admit. Maybe only 35% of the Deaf population could benefit from the technology, but what about the hard of hearing? What about the elderly? How many more people would be spending their dollars at the theater who don’t now because they can’t fully appreciate it? Even hearing people can benefit. How many times has an explosion, a soaring soundtrack, a laughing auditorium, or a chatty seatmate made you miss a snippet of dialogue? If you make things better for disabled people, often times you make them better for everyone. Is that unreasonable? Finally, I’ve seen signs in quite a few restaurants that say Braille menus are available upon request. Is that more than reasonable? I don’t know about hiring interpretters for the Deaf, but having dined with Deaf people before I know they get by with pointing and writing notes if they have to. Plus friends and family can interpret in a restaurant if necessary (unlike during a movie in a theater–the environment just isn’t very conducive to interpretting, in my experience, YMMV). Expecing a restaurnat to hire interpreters probably would be unreasonable. Do you see the difference? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-products-services-be-accessible-to-disabled/271480.md?page=2)