Help me compose a rant.... I mean rebuttal.

[selkiechick]

I am on a committee of a conventions and we are talking policy. We are talking about medical documentation requirements for accommodations, and I am having a hard time finding the right words to tell them why this is a /terrible/ idea, and as a newb of sorts, I'd love to have some authority to stand on. Is there a good blog post or website out there already outlining the reasons why that is a bad requirement, and why?

Thank you.

(I promise, my next post will have content)

Comments

[wordweaverlynn]

Medical documentation requirements for accommodations????

1. It's expensive to con members.

2. Also humiliating.

3. Also difficult -- people who need accommodations face enough daily challenges; even if they have the extra spoons to produce their documentation, they certainly won't look forward to spending their time and money that way.

4. This policy sends entirely the wrong message: "You're a burden and you're probably lying, so we need to make you jump through hoops to prove you really need help, which we will furnish begrudgingly. Because people like you are not worth our time, energy, and accommodation."

5. Has anybody worked out the logistics of this? Who's going to check all that medical documentation? Who will check the passes to allow the hard-of-hearing into seats up front? How will you issue those passes? Or do you plan to make the disabled brand themselves in some way? Moreover, many ways of making a con accessible are part of structural planning -- like making aisles in the dealers' room 60 inches wide at a minimum (so wheelchair users can pass safely), or hanging signs at both wheelchair-level and standing-adult level, or having ingredient lists in the consuite.

6. If your convention goes with this policy, it will stir up a shitstorm of Biblical proportions. Have your fellow con members forgotten Racefail? and the recent scandals in sexual harassment? Believe me, the community of people with disabilities will rise up on the Internet and totally freaking trash the con, the concom, and anybody who supports such an inane and idiotic policy. And I can guarantee you that I will be one of the most vociferous.

7. Why would anyone think it's a GOOD idea?

ETA: My qualifications: I have been on the concom of FOGcon from the beginning, and I ran Access for several years. I also run the website.

[selkiechick]

Thank you for this! This is nice and clear.

I hit points 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6, and added a dose of "ZOMG, HIPAA are we really going down this road?"

And, to be fair, this is due in part to one specific thing, we are working pretty hard to norm access throughout the convention, from aisles and parking spaces in panels, to accessible text for publications.

Say, if you have some time, I am working up a "best practices for conventions" document. May I send it to you for commenting when it's ready in about a month?

I've been working on Arisia for a few years now... and have some of this as part of my day job.

[wordweaverlynn]

That would be great!

The FOGcon Access Policy is based on Wiscon's, but you may find it useful.

[selkiechick]

I will look it up. I used a number of things from Wiscon's access plan when working on Arisia's (and now... more convetions!).

[jadelennox]

HIPAA is one of the big ones I was thinking of re: legality. You really want con-running volunteers collecting, disseminating, and protecting individual medical records? Really? You don't see how much it will cost to train your people to do that legally, or deal with the fallout when they screw it up? Personally-identifiable medical records management is *hard*.

[lexin]

Everything she said X10.