Disability line etiquette

[Xenavire]

So, I'm not sure who may of heard about it here, but there is a crazy popular pop-up store in the Westfield mall. It's the Pokemon centre London, and queue times have been unreal (to put it simply, the store has gad to close early every day it has been open because it sells out, even with limits set on customers.)

So, they opened up a accessibility line (I think for the first time today), and there are apparently a bunch of people abusing the line to get priority over people that have been waiting for hours (note, I am not saying these people don't have disabilities, just none that would warrant needing to skip the line.)

So, my question: Does anyone here believe that hidden disabilities qualify you to skip lines?

Since each of us here suffers from at least Dyspraxia (and for some of us, quite a bit more), I wanted to get other opinions on the matter. Does the severity of the hidden disability matter?

Personally, I think that anyone able to walk unassisted shouldn't qualify in this particular case (unassisted walking would mean that blind people with seeing eye dogs or someone with a caregiver would still qualify, but Dyspraxics would not.)

[michael]

Interesting question--some people cant stand for long periods of time due to knee, hip and back problems. Some people with ADD get really agitated in long lines. Once I was standing in a line at a pharmacy and a guy with Tourette's was in front of me. the line was moving very slowly and he started to curse but masked it as a cough into a cupped hand. The longer we waited the more you kept hearing, 'mother-*ucker' coughed into his right hand. I felt bad for him, but to tell you the truth it was a source of amusement at the same time.
Seriously, I think there is too much potential for abuse with a policy like that, and if seemingly healthy, young people were cutting in front of me--I'd just leave. I have a feeling it's also a fertile environment for altercations as well.

[firemonkey]

Should it really be about whether one has a physical disability or not ? What about people with ASD or mental illness that may also find it hard to stand in the queue for a long time ? There can be both physical and psychological reasons why a person may find it hard to queue for a lengthy amount of time. Saying only physical ones count feeds into a non-physical disorders/illnesses are lesser ones position . We need to throw such thinking into the garbage bin of history where it belongs .

[Xenavire]

Yeah, I've been thinking about it all day. People with back, hip or leg problems might count under the "cannot walk unassisted" portion, but I imagine severity would have to be taken into account. And I don't think Tourettes should count unless it is a significant physical tic (I've never heard of one that severe up until now, but I wouldn't assume it doesn't exist.)

After all, it was specifically named an "accessibility line", which means people who may need help to get into the store, or otherwise have difficulty getting around or purchasing their items. I don't feel that the majority of hidden disabilities would qualify (and any that do would almost certainly need a caretaker, which I also specified would be totally fine by me.)

By and large, if you can live alone and don't have difficulty standing or walking, I'd certainly be wondering why you were in that line.

(As for myself, I'll be in line for that store sometime next week, and despite Dyspraxia and sensory overload that makes crowds particularly overwhelming for me, I'll be in the regular line, not the accessibility line.)

Firemonkey - I am sure many people that have hidden disabilities managed to queue just fine on all the other days. The reason it should be limited to physical or extreme cases of hidden disability is because A) where do you draw the line? I don't feel entitled to a spot, but some random person with depression might argue they do. And B) the more people being given special treatment, the more "normal" people that made extra effort to arrive early suffer. There were people that arrived at 11pm last night in order to get their pick of items - while the accessibility line started around 9am this morning.

I believe that unless you otherwise would not be able to get into the store on any day due to your disability, you should not be given a spot in that line.

[firemonkey]

I'm against anything that fosters a dishonest,discriminatory and prejudicial belief that some types of disability are less disabling than others , and the effects of some types of disability trump the effects of others . What you suggest leads us down that path.

[Xenavire]

I don't see anything dishonest, discriminatory, or prejudicial about it. What I am saying is that people that need help to move about should be able to skip lines because otherwise they would not be able to participate at all, unlike someone like myself who can easily wait in line, despite how tiring or uncomfortable I may find it.

The people that actually need help should get it - but when someone who doesn't need help goes in that line, they make it harder for those than need help to actually get help.

If you want to claim Dyspraxia is as debilitating as muscular dystrophy, downs syndrome, and dozens of other conditions that make life horribly difficult for the people that have it, go for it, I won't agree and I won't stop you. But I wouldn't stoop to that to get into a store faster.


I do agree that we shouldn't discriminate in any way when that is reasonable. But what isn't reasonable is letting just anyone line skip because they have a minor condition that barely impacts their ability to wait in line.

[firemonkey]

I would scarcely call dyspraxia a 'minor' condition . In any case some of us have several non physical(hidden disabilities?) . E.G I have been diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome and schizoaffective disorder . I most probably also have dyspraxia .That was mentioned in the report of my autism assessment, but not diagnosed as the intent was solely to diagnose or not diagnose me as being on the autism spectrum .

[Xenavire]

I'm well aware that many Dyspraxic people have multiple other conditions or disorders on top of Dyspraxia. But for pure Dyspraxia, with no other factors? I don't think it is a major condition when the task at hand is waiting in line.

The important thing here is the context - as far as I am aware, I have Dyspraxia with no other complications. I believe that people in my exact situation can easily wait in line, and should.

Your case could be entirely different - if you suffer greatly and feel that waiting in line for a significant amount of time would be entirely too much to handle, then yes, you should be able to use an accessibility line. But if you just did it because it saves you time, or any of the numerous other reasons to want to skip, that would be immoral in my eyes.

I suppose my earlier definition isn't broad enough though, and I may need to amend it. But by and large, I don't know anyone that can live alone, unassisted, that wouldn't be able to wait in line. They may not have the patience for it, but every person I know that doesn't need assistance would be capable of waiting without issue.

[Tom fod]

It's an interesting debate. Certain less visible conditions are no less disabling. I'm disabled by the notion that to me Pokemon is a steaming pile.

I'd expect that people with Guide Dogs/assistance Dogs should also qualify for priority access if they want it. A slightly calmer queue would be beneficial to both themselves and their assistance dogs. People with heart or lung conditions or Diabetes might also struggle standing for long periods too.

That said, I think a lot of people with a genuine case (too many) would not feel comfortable seeking access into the preferential line even if the severity of their condition made then a worthy candidate

I suspect quite a number might still feel they were somehow a fraud and/or be accused of such by those policing/organising. They might also fear or be subjected to inappropriate challenge from people in the General Admission queue.

How people are impacted is relative to them and it is not right for people to arbitrarily eject them or abuse them, accusing them of faking or exaggerating their condition to obtain preferential access.

I suspect the genuine chancers 'faking it' would be most likely to very vocally scream discrimination. Not sure these kind of fakers have any conscience at all.

[Xenavire]

If it wasn't for the fakers, this thread wouldn't exist at all, so I totally agree. That specific subtype of person sickens me so much - as you said just now, because of the fakers, many legitimate claims get challenged because the staff there are well aware of the abuse. It's a horrible chain reaction.

Anyway, this thread actually reminded me of a piece of advice my mother gave me when I was "diagnosed", and it boils down to this - "Don't use Dyspraxia as an excuse to be lazy or give up." I've been guilty of using Dyspraxia as an excuse more than once and it never felt good, so over the years my mindset has changed so I try to avoid letting myself feel defeated by it. It's not always easy advice to follow (as an example, my favourite band is performing nearby early next year, and I'd love to see them live, but I don't think I could last in that environment. In this case, I don't see much of a choice but to skip it.) But I do follow the advice as much as possible.

[firemonkey]

I am totally against a person with no physical and/or mental health problems 'faking it' as you two put it. However I'd caution against judging anyone as 'faking it' based on a short period of seeing them. Not all disabilities are instantly noticeable .

We live in an environment where a right wing government pushes a negative agenda against the disabled and poor. As people with a disability,whether it is mild or not, we shouldn't be buying into such an agenda by leaping to quick judgements as to how disabled a person is and how it affects them .

We can be a civilised force for good ,or we can go over to the dark side and buy into the reactionary and uncivilised stance of this government (and the average reader of the Daily mail/express).

[Xenavire]

I'm in total agreement in theory, firemonkey - people with disabilities should have certain rights. But it depends on the case - if it affects employment, infringement on basic human right, living costs and specific accommodations - all of those should be fought for and protected.

However, I don't know that every activity or situation should have special considerations that cover every disability. Waiting in line for a store is on the far less important end, and the dispensation should have a specific scope that fits "waiting in line".

If this was an issue of, say, healthcare, the person that has a knife wound in their stomach requires more immediate attention than the person that has a sprained ankle - I'm just saying that severity does matter. I'm not trying to dismiss anyone or diminish them or what they struggle with. I also do my best to avoid judging people. But I have family that suffers far more than myself and I know what it means to judge my need as less than someone else, which is why I take the stance I do.

I have a younger brother that is on the spectrum and has severe lung issues, and I had an aunt with down syndrome that could barely leave the house (she passed away last year.) I couldn't stand to see someone take a spot in that line that didn't need one, because it would only make it more difficult for them to get in, or get the help they need. (Fakers being the worst, but those reasons apply to me too - I couldn't live with myself if I made life more difficult for someone that already has a worse deal than me.)

[firemonkey]

I'm not doubting that severity matters, but that can be hard to judge when interacting with/seeing a person for a short time. We should not jump to the conclusion, as many have done in the past, that a physical disability is necessarily more severe than a mental/psychological disability.

I wouldn't jump a queue as I'd be too nervous to do so. In fact I'd probably avoid such a situation unless it was imperative I should be there .

[Xenavire]

I agree, yet again, that we shouldn't snap to judgement. But how exactly should it be handled? Should fakers get a free pass to prevent any accidental witch hunts or accusations? Or do we challenge anyone "normal" in order to get their story, so we can ensure that fakers get removed?

I don't like the idea of challenging anyone, but I like the idea of fakers taking up places meant for people with disabilities even less.

One idea I did see was digital queueing - a headache to regulate with such extreme numbers, but could be a solution for people with disabilities (due to the lower numbers.) It wouldn't be foolproof, but it would prevent fakers taking advantage of such a line at the last moment. My only concern is that it adds a barrier for entry when we are ideally meant to be removing barriers, so I'm not sure if it's as good an idea as it sounds on the surface.

[firemonkey]

Better to find one guilty person innocent than 5 innocent persons guilty.