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

[rydra_wong]

In addition to what's already been said:

*It forces people to disclose private medical information.

*Disabilities don't actually come with nice neat little information packs explaining all the situations in which someone may need accomodations. Demanding that people visit their doctors/healthcare providers in order to request a letter of some kind to "prove" that they need X is imposing a substantial extra burden on them.

*Seriously, why the hell should people have to "prove" their disability in order to use accommodations? What's the point, even? What sort of unfair advantage do they imagine that people are somehow scheming to get by pretending to have disabilities? It's not like people are generally going round going, "hey, I hear perfectly well, but I'm going to ask for a sign language interpreter just for shits and giggles."

*Is the con planning to not provide accommodations unless attendees send in information in advance "proving" that they need them? E.g. "we'll be in a wheelchair-inaccessible building unless someone books in advance and proves they need ramp access". Because that says very strongly "our default is to be inaccessible". And obviously effectively guarantees that people with disabilities can't choose to attend the con on the day.

[selkiechick]

So, to be clear this is not for all accommodations. It's most explicitly about having a "free" membership for a companion.

As I said above, we are working pretty hard to norm access throughout the convention.

We will be working to improve upon the model of what I have done at Arisia.
http://2013.arisia.org/Access

(and I apologize, I realize I am being wicked defensive)

[rydra_wong]

No worries, that makes a lot more sense of things.

But presumably you have precedent from Arisia of the "adult in tow" membership working fine without the need to produce documentation?