Disney World Makes Minor But Maybe Major Change to DAS Policy

Disney just changed a single word in its Disability Access Service policy that could be consequential for DAS approvals & denials going forward. This covers the before and after of language change, plus our commentary about the motivations (or lack thereof) for making this tweak and how it could end up being minor but meaningful in practice.

As quick background, Disney overhauled DAS at Walt Disney World and Disneyland prior to the start of last summer. According to the company, the changes were due in large part to abuse, misuse, and proliferation of the program’s use–with issuances of DAS tripling from 2019 to last year. For more about the specifics of the new-look Disability Access Service, plus our commentary about winners & losers, as well as collateral damage and more, see Disability Access Service (DAS) Changes at Walt Disney World FAQ.

We’ve been following this saga closely for the last several months, receiving reports from readers and reading accounts of other guests applying for accommodations after the overhaul of the Disability Access Service at Walt Disney World. Obviously, it’s a highly sensitive subject that is very, very personal since it is, quite literally, make or break for some guests trying to experience Walt Disney World. There have been widespread reports of guests who previously had DAS being denied and advised to use alternative accommodations, some of which are new–or are revised and highlighted more prominently.

Suffice to say, it’s been a contentious ~9 months between the company and the disabled community. Many fans have hoped that Walt Disney World and Disneyland would relax the policy or overhaul it once again, and there’s been a grassroots campaign to accomplish exactly that.

Fast forward to late January 2025, and the DAS policy has been updated in multiple locations on both the Walt Disney World and Disneyland official websites. Here’s who Walt Disney World now indicates DAS is aimed to assist:

Old language: “DAS is intended to accommodate only those Guests who, due to a developmental disability like autism or similar, are unable to wait in a conventional queue for an extended period of time.” (Emphasis added.)

New language: “DAS is intended to accommodate those Guests who, due to a developmental disability like autism or similar, are unable to wait in a conventional queue for an extended period of time.”

It’s worth noting that this is essentially Disney’s statement of intent for DAS, as variations of this language appear at the very top and throughout Walt Disney World’s official DAS page. It’s not something minor buried in an FAQ or something inconsequential.

Turning to commentary, it may seem like only one little word, but there’s undoubtedly a reason being made for the change. This isn’t just someone on Walt Disney World’s web team hastily making changes, like we’ve seen countless times in the last year that have resulted in mistakes for the attraction lineups at hard ticket events, refurbishments, and so forth.

Every word written on the DAS materials would be scrutinized by Disney Legal. They would have the final say, and approve or dictate any verbiage changes or loosening of limiting language. The flip side of that is that Disney’s lawyers would’ve done precisely the same prior to launching the DAS overhaul. An army of attorneys probably spent months poring over every word on those websites prior to publication–especially the statement of intent for the new-look DAS.

In other words, that “only” was approved by Disney Legal and its removal is likewise being approved by Disney Legal. But probably not from the perspective of concerns about legal exposure, as those conservations would have already happened, extensively. Disney Legal undoubtedly performed comprehensive litigation risk assessments, which is precisely why they elected against using IBCCES and steered the overhaul in a different direction, even if many disabled guests would’ve preferred that. (Universal has since stopped requiring IBCCES, likely as a result of ongoing litigation concerning the service at Six Flags.)

The overhaul to DAS will almost certainly give rise to more litigation, regardless. Accessibility changes inevitably do, and it’s likely Disney’s perspective that it’s the cost of doing business. The die is cast, irrespective of this “only.” (I’d also expect Disney to prevail in any such lawsuit, as Disney Legal is meticulous and methodical.)

I’m very reluctant to play armchair attorney on this as I have zero relevant expertise and Disney Legal has countless lawyers who do. Second-guessing them seems slightly silly. With that said, the thing that surprised me from the outset was Disney using limiting language tailoring DAS to guests with developmental disabilities.

Parsing the language, it’s not just the “only” that matters there–it’s also the “due to.” The policy is not using developmental disabilities as an example, it’s narrowing the scope of the accommodation to developmental disabilities and providing autism as an example. Removing “only” might change perceptions, but it doesn’t change the policy.

For this to be a material change from a legal perspective, I’d think the word that would need to be stricken is “developmental.” By limiting the accommodation to only guests with developmental disabilities, it’s possible Disney is pre-screening out a class of disabled individuals that might run afoul of the ADA. If so, that’s still true with a straightforward reading of the statement of intent, since “only” simply reinforces the “due to” (just like previous iterations included “small percentage” of guests language).

But again, I’d imagine Disney Legal did their due diligence on this and determined that, when it came to legal exposure, alternative accommodations to DAS were sufficient for all other classes of disabled guests. Playing armchair attorney here is foolish.

Given all of that, it’s nevertheless safe to assume this verbiage change is deliberate, but is not being made from the perspective of exposure to litigation. It’s also safe to assume this isn’t happening haphazardly and came after careful consideration and analysis. So what could be the reason for Disney making this change ~9 months after launch?

My best guess is that Disney wants to soften the perceived limitations in the policy among prospective applicants. To make it appear less harsh or stringent, to encourage guests other than those with developmental disabilities to apply for DAS. It could be a way of unofficially expanding the scope of eligibility without making any substantive changes to the policy or overhauling the program yet again.

This might have occurred if the Inspire Health Alliance health professionals and Disney Cast Members who work together to determine appropriate accommodations have also seen internal policies loosened. That could mean either giving them greater discretion in approving DAS applications, or informally expanding eligibility criteria for DAS without more material guest-facing language changes.

Beyond that, it’s difficult to say why this change might have happened. And it’s impossible to know how it’ll play out in practice until there are more reports of DAS approvals and denials. Even then, what’s reported isn’t necessarily representative of the program as a whole, as there’s self-selection bias in who is most likely and least likely to share their experiences. “We’ll never know what this means in practice” isn’t exactly a satisfying assessment, but it’s probably accurate.

Disney is in an unenviable position here with tremendous amounts of push-pull.

On the one hand, there have been heartbreaking stories of DAS denials, many of which have gone viral for good reason. These have made it really seem like a more flexible and humane approach offering greater discretion to Cast Members is necessary. All of this strongly suggested that Disney went too far with the DAS overhaul, and needed some degree of relaxing its policies.

On the other hand, Disney needs to avoid relaxing its rules too much, or else risk a return to the rampant abuse that was fostered by hugely popular TikToks and influential social media groups. This has been exacerbated by a sense of entitlement, lack of shame, and Disney creating an incentive for DAS scammers by monetizing line-skipping via Lightning Lanes.

It’s a really tough for Disney to balance this, but as we’ve said repeatedly, there has to be a middle ground. The pendulum swung from one extreme to another, and there has been a lot of collateral damage among disabled guests who needed DAS and have been denied under the overly-stringent system.

Then there’s also the impact on the guest experience for everyone else, which is faster-moving lines and lower wait times. We discussed this at length in Here’s Why Standby Lines and Lightning Lanes Are Moving Faster at Walt Disney World. The bottom line is that the DAS changes and, to a lesser extent, switch from Genie+ to Lightning Lane Multi-Pass are having a significant impact. It should go without saying that there are controversies, downsides, and unfortunate realities to the above. But the improvement to the flow of lines–standby and Lightning Lanes–as well as lower wait times is also undeniable.

In the end, there’s a lot for Walt Disney World and Disneyland to balance, and I wouldn’t want to be on the team tasked with that. It’s a really tough and delicate needle to thread. Here’s hoping this single-word change to the DAS eligibility criteria on both coasts is exactly what’s needed to achieve that unicorn of reduced abuse, approvals for those who truly need DAS, and lines that continue to flow smoothly for everyone.

We also hope that the softening of the DAS policy language results in a softening of the interviews. We’ve heard from countless readers who have been denied, and there’s a word that has been used repeatedly to describe the process: interrogation. While we can appreciate how stressful this process is for Cast Members and the verbal abuse they take for disgruntled guests, there’s still gotta be a better way of handling the process that feels less adversarial. Disney has an exemplary reputation for guest service and accommodations. It would be a shame to lose that as even more collateral damage to the DAS overhaul.

Planning a Walt Disney World trip? Learn about hotels on our Walt Disney World Hotels Reviews page. For where to eat, read our Walt Disney World Restaurant Reviews. To save money on tickets or determine which type to buy, read our Tips for Saving Money on Walt Disney World Tickets post. Our What to Pack for Disney Trips post takes a unique look at clever items to take. For what to do and when to do it, our Walt Disney World Ride Guides will help. For comprehensive advice, the best place to start is our Walt Disney World Trip Planning Guide for everything you need to know!

YOUR THOUGHTS

Thoughts on the slight language change to DAS policies at Walt Disney World and Disneyland? Think this is prompted by legal exposure, Disney wanting to informally expand DAS eligibility, or something else? Hopeful that this will result in increased approvals for those who truly need DAS while keeping abuse low? Agree or disagree with our assessment of the changes or policy as a whole? Please try to stay on topic–we’ve noticed some of these DAS comments sections get heated and personal. Discuss the policy itself, not others’ use (or lack thereof) of it.