Taking Path of Travel Provision out of Disabled Americans Law Would Gut It

The current proposed changes to the Americans with Disabilities Act have several good points but some are strangely contradictory. The most glaring example of a proposed change that would effectively gut the whole law is the one about ‘path of travel’.

According to an advocacy group for the disabled, the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF), the Department of Justice proposal is that “if alterations are made to a public accommodation or public entity’s are of primary function, it does NOT have to bring the path of travel to that area into compliance” with the 2004 Americans with Disability law. In other words, if the local courthouse or library remodels the entrance, it will no longer matter if a disabled patron can get from the parking lot to the lobby? Is that what they really mean to say?

Because if there is no ramp for a wheelchair, or the door is no longer wide enough to admit a wheelchair, or if there is no longer an elevator, or no low buttons on the elevator, etc. etc. then there may as well be a Berlin Wall in front of that library or courthouse or other public facility.

We have come so far in terms of integrating disabled persons of many kinds into public and private buildings and businesses, places of work and play and recreation. I might add that while the numbers of long-term disabled is fairly steady, the ranks of short-term disabled could include any of us reading this story now.

Millions of Americans are “disabled” for a short term whether or not it is formally or informally recognized. Everyone who has broken a limb -- or had a stroke -- or a heart attack -- or any surgery -- has had to learn how to cope like a “disabled” person. They’ve had to try to carry on with normal activities like going to a grocery store, movie theatre, bank, or post office. You haven’t lived till you tried opening a jar of pickles with your left hand because the right one is in a cast.
The husband of friend had a heart transplant several years ago, and his wife said that they would get a few funny looks when they parked in the handicapped parking. Her husband’s disability was not visible, so onlookers assumed they were taking advantage of the parking space without cause.

I have had several experiences of taking my mom (post-stroke) or an aunt (multiple health problems) to the grocery store or doctor appointment and been glad that there were wide doorways, ramps, etc so that we could get from point A to point B without a hitch. Fortunately neither one lived in a fourth floor apartment without an elevator or I really would have been in a jam.

While I cannot speak about the specifics on whether a pool-lift needs to have foot-rests or not, I think I can say with some certainty that an American with Disabilities law REALLY needs a ‘path of travel’ provision.

[Please see a story about proposed changes to the ADA here at http://minnieapolis.newsvine.com/_news/2008/08/11/1740611-appalling-doj-proposals-would-weaken-disability-act-provisions?last=1218505510#dynamicCommentBox_2427716 and the webpage from the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF) with their discussion of the proposed rule changes here at http://www.dredf.org/DOJ_NPRM/ ]