Jump to content

Miami County Fair Can Suck It.


Anden
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have a handicapped child and on 8/15 whoever runs the petting zoo refused to let him in. No reason just that he couldn't go in. He is in a wheelchair but there were children in strollers in the attraction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's some bullshit Lee! I would have said something at the Fair office in the Grandstands. We were there last night too. Kinda sucked all around really, not nearly the fun it was when I was a kid.

Cheap entry at $5 but thats where they get ya, costs almost that to ride ANY of the death traps and the food prices were ridiculous. We spent almost $50 for 3 of us getting in and food/drink. Dont think I'll be going back anytime soon:nono:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This happend to the Ex I guess they offered up some passes for next year. I fired off a few emails from work. Will see what they have to say.

Ah, gotcha. Well, at least thats an "attempt" at correcting their foul but the passes seem to be the least of the expense to go there. If they offered free food/rides, then thats more like it. Hope they come through with something for you guys, cause thats some piss poor ethics on their part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Screw the passes. Go for the kill. Its one thing for them not to have something handicap accessable. But to outright deny a kid is some bullshit. I mean seriously who the fuck does that.

On second though go back and try again but have someone record it. Then turn to 2news. Im pretty sure there would be a massive shit storm after that.

Edited by 20thGix
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Devil's Advocate: I'm sure it's not done maliciously, but fear of accident/litigation.

Not that it makes it right, but the fun-police exist nowadays because everyone's terrified or their underwriter commands a bunch of bullshit "what ifs" that ruin every experience.

I'd complain, don't get me wrong...make them think about what this policy really does...but it's likely not some meanie at the petting zoo who gets off on hurting handicapped kids.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I called the fair and spoke to them being the step mother, they said it was a liability issue with it being a small enclosed area which true, it is. The entrance will barely fit an umbrella stroller. That was explained last night. They told me her husband, Lee, emailed them as well and they would all be getting free passes for next year.

I must be the estranged wife now :lol:

Edited by slingingchic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Devil's Advocate: I'm sure it's not done maliciously, but fear of accident/litigation.

Not that it makes it right, but the fun-police exist nowadays because everyone's terrified or their underwriter commands a bunch of bullshit "what ifs" that ruin every experience.

I'd complain, don't get me wrong...make them think about what this policy really does...but it's likely not some meanie at the petting zoo who gets off on hurting handicapped kids.

Exactly as they said and explained to her last night "liability"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its the fair not a permanent structure. Some of the pets in there do bite. Recall a billy goat biting Brendan's shirt a couple years back? And we were warned to be cautious? Yeah, I do. How exactly are you going to enforce that with Roo, who is deaf and when you sign "no" it doesn't stick. Maybe there was something he was doing too in his wheelchair that made it unnerving for the petting zoo. You and I have seen him excited, but we know him, they don't. I'm not being cruel. Life isn't fair for everyone. Just like certain rides not all kids can ride. The bounce house, 1 out of 3 was too big for it, made no sense because its just a big air filled tent. Yes his feelings were hurt but we went on, I'm sure you didn't notice and recall I didn't make a stink about it. Not everything is nor has to be handicap accessible, and he not a small child anymore, he is 13.

Edited by slingingchic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glad to see both biological and non-biological advocates for this child - he obviously has a lot of good people in his corner... :)

Seems to me to fall under the purview of Title III of the A.D.A.

Source: Guide to the A.D.A.

ADA Title III: Public Accommodations

Title III covers businesses and nonprofit service providers that are public accommodations, privately operated entities offering certain types of courses and examinations, privately operated transportation, and commercial facilities. Public accommodations are private entities who own, lease, lease to, or operate facilities such as restaurants, retail stores, hotels, movie theaters, private schools, convention centers, doctors' offices, homeless shelters, transportation depots, zoos, funeral homes, day care centers, and recreation facilities including sports stadiums and fitness clubs. Transportation services provided by private entities are also covered by title III.

Public accommodations must comply with basic nondiscrimination requirements that prohibit exclusion, segregation, and unequal treatment. They also must comply with specific requirements related to architectural standards for new and altered buildings; reasonable modifications to policies, practices, and procedures; effective communication with people with hearing, vision, or speech disabilities; and other access requirements. Additionally, public accommodations must remove barriers in existing buildings where it is easy to do so without much difficulty or expense, given the public accommodation's resources.

Courses and examinations related to professional, educational, or trade-related applications, licensing, certifications, or credentialing must be provided in a place and manner accessible to people with disabilities, or alternative accessible arrangements must be offered.

Commercial facilities, such as factories and warehouses, must comply with the ADA's architectural standards for new construction and alterations.

Complaints of title III violations may be filed with the Department of Justice. In certain situations, cases may be referred to a mediation program sponsored by the Department. The Department is authorized to bring a lawsuit where there is a pattern or practice of discrimination in violation of title III, or where an act of discrimination raises an issue of general public importance. Title III may also be enforced through private lawsuits. It is not necessary to file a complaint with the Department of Justice (or any Federal agency), or to receive a "right-to-sue" letter, before going to court. For more information, contact:

U.S. Department of Justice

Civil Rights Division

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Disability Rights Section - NYAV

Washington, D.C. 20530

www.ada.gov

(800) 514-0301 (voice)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:bitchfight:

Yes it is:lol: He fails to inform them that he knew there were passes offered last night, this morning he text me stating no one did anything, yet he knew partial or full truth..... I don't back down if you haven't noticed.

Put all facts out there before letting others jump to conclusions.

Edited by slingingchic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glad to see both biological and non-biological advocates for this child - he obviously has a lot of good people in his corner... :)

Seems to me to fall under the purview of Title III of the A.D.A.

I am by choice, husband doesn't want me apart of his sons life. Guess I do have a heart ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Liability my ass. It is the petting zoo. A small child attraction. So my next question is why such a small doorway.

Your fight is more than likely with the underwriter, who will determine such things. You can make a big stink, and yell at people, but mostly they're folks who have ZERO interest in keeping your kiddo away from cute animals.

It sucks, but it sounds like they're trying to be nice about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you piece of shit lawyers and judges allowing stupid shit to win lawsuits, and now anyone and everyone are just trying to cover their ass. I really feel for this kid and his family, and can totally understand them being upset. This would've been a non issue when we were growing up, but now we live in a fucked up sue happy society. Was wondering something though......if the child could maybe have been carried in by one of the parents, would that not be a viable and or doable solution?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was wondering something though......if the child could maybe have been carried in by one of the parents, would that not be a viable and or doable solution?

I like your thinking ;) It is very doable. Maybe him going into the petting zoo wasn't that important to her that night? But...as the fair said liability that could mean various things. I do wonder if Andrew had been walking with his walker would they allow him in? That is something he can do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...