Editorial

In this day and age of de-institutionalization, many developmental centers are going the way of the dinosaur. They're closing up shop, because they simply aren't needed any more, as former residents are being moved into less restrictive environments. And that's a very good thing, as far as disabled advocates are concerned. But what do you do with those old facilities? Board them up? Tear them down? Just let them sit and hope for the best?

Well, in the case of the Syracuse Developmental Center, none of the above. In fact, the Empire State Development Corporation plans to sell that facility to Syracuse Resort (a limited partnership) who in turn plans to turn it in to a "resort for the disabled."

Yes, you read that right - these folks are actually turning a former institution into a resort for the disabled.

I can just hear the conversation now.
Me: So where are you going on your vacation, Joe?
Joe: We're going upstate to an institution.
Me: Oh, I see.
Joe: You know, that place is Syracuse where Pete was locked up for four years?
Me: Yeah, right. Well, er, have a good time.

OK, you get the drift. But aside from the obvious PR problems with it all, there's a bigger issue with the whole grand plan. The developer plans to make it a "disabled only" resort. Yes, that's right folks, in this day and age of mainstreaming and inclusion, they want to move backwards and segregate PWDs once again.

And that's a fact that's not lost on many locals. As one woman put it, "When we go out on vacation, or to any recreational activity, I don't limit myself to a site that caters to my disability. I look for accessibility, but I look for a site that is inclusive for everyone."

And she's not alone. Not by a long shot. That's one thing Simon Darcy discovered in his groundbreaking "Access to Anxiety" survey. He debunked the popular myth that people with disabilities like to travel in groups with other people with disabilities, when he reported that 80-90% of his disabled respondents reported traveling with one able-bodied friend, family member or companion.

And to be honest, this whole "disabled only resort" concept has been tried before here in the US (several times) and it really hasn't worked. In the end there were always funding issues.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't have any problems with someone making a resort barrier-free; in fact I encourage that. But everyone should be welcome, and access should just be another one of the amenities offered - like internet access or the free breakfast buffet. When you advertise a resort as being "for the disabled" it reeks of segregation, especially when the former incarnation of that facility was exactly that - a place where disabled people were segregated.

So if the folks at Syracuse Resort are reading this - reconsider your approach. Sure, go ahead and use the principles of universal design to make sure your new resort is barrier-free; but market it to everybody. In the end, that will be the more successful approach; as you will be able to address a wider market to pay the bills, yet still offer access features to those folks who need them.

Food for thought.

While perusing the online edition of the UK's Travel Weekly, I stumbled across the travel agent sentiment about the full implementation of the EU access regulations in 2008. Well at least I think I did.

The article in question warns travel agents that when the EU regs are fully implemented next July, they will be required to inform the airlines at least 48 hours in advance if their clients have access issues that require accommodation. If they fail to do that, it could result in a fine of up to £5,000. If however a travel agent books a disabled client on a package tour through a tour operator, the tour operator must inform the airline.

OK, let's back up a minute here. It just seems like common sense for a travel agent to notify the airline if their client needs an aisle chair or wheelchair assistance at the airport or has any other access need. But apparently it's not, as it had to legislated. That's somewhat troubling, however it does explain why many clients fall through the cracks.

But at least the new legislation will take care of that. And more.

Apparently it also requires all travel agents and tour operators to at least provide a minimum level of website access to people with visual disabilities. Now that goes way above and beyond what's required here in the US; however I also have to add that many companies voluntarily provide such access.

It's an interesting regulation, as part of it addresses something that should be a standard practice as it's common sense, while another part goes way beyond what's already on the books in the US.

Well at least folks are addressing the issues, and that's a very good thing. It can't lead to anything but improved access.

It's been a very busy week for me, as I've done scads of print and radio interviews for my newest title, 101 Accessible Vacations; Travel Ideas for Wheelers and Slow Walkers. There were some interesting (and unique) questions posed by folks, but one issue was addressed over and over again: "What's the state of access today as opposed to when I started covering accessible travel 14 years ago?"

Of course it has improved; after all 14 years ago it was in its infancy. And to be honest, when I told people I was covering accessible travel back then, they looked at me like I was a few fries short of a happy meal. Today it's much different, as with the aging of the Baby Boomers the hospitality industry is actively courting their tourism dollars. And I don't mean just conforming to the letter of the law, but actually going beyond that.

Take the Mornongo Casino for example. I spent a few days down there last week for a media conference and I noticed that all of their guest rooms (not just the accessible ones) were designed so that some slow walkers could use them. The low step showers were huge and they had a nice built-in bench with a hand-held shower head. Now granted this setup won't work for everyone, but considering their clientele (largely over 50) it seems they are responding to the needs of that market.

And they're not the only ones. Several properties in Las Vegas have ceiling track lifts in their "high needs accessible rooms", and many of the properties have more than the required number of accessible rooms.

And then there are the cruise lines. Many have been providing accessible staterooms since long before I even came on the scene. Again, something that wasn't required.

Finally let's not forget the inns and B&Bs. Many are not required to be accessible, but have added access features to some of their rooms and public spaces. Why? Well these properties are big into destination weddings, and if one member of the party can't get in the door, then they loose the whole party. I learned that while researching the first edition of There is Room at the Inn; Inns and B&Bs for Wheelers and Slow Walkers, and as I am starting to research the second edition, I've found it's a trend that's catching on. And that's a very good thing.

Like I said, things are definitely improving! OK, they're not perfect, but at least we are moving in the right direction.

In the course of researching accessible travel, I read anything and everything that's even vaguely related to my area of expertise. To be honest, some articles are more pertinent than others. Usually I follow up on the pertinent ones and delete the rest. It's something akin to hand-picking the ripest and juiciest cherries.

But I'm having a hard time with my cherry picking today, and I just can't bring myself to deep-six one of those not-so-pertinent articles. In my defense, technically it involves accessible travel, because it's about a woman traveling in a wheelchair. But that's pretty much where the relevance ends.

Specifically, it's about a dead woman traveling in a wheelchair. Apparently she died while on holiday in Xian, and her husband wanted to take her home without a lot of muss and fuss. To that end, he schlepped her on a 28-hour train trip and then wheeled her across the China-Hong Kong border.

Now here's where it gets a little strange.

According to her husband, after he presented their papers to the immigration officer at the border, the officer asked him to pull up his wife's hat so he could see her face. The officer then scrutinized the photo on her permit, and when he was satisfied with her identity, he let her pass. Or more correctly, he let her husband wheel her cold lifeless body across the border.

And yes, it really happened.

I just don't get it though.

Was the border official just so totally bored with his job that he zoned out and didn't notice that not only could the woman before him not speak, but she couldn't breathe either? Or did he just not care? Or did he just assume that all disabled people look like that? I'm not sure which premise bothers me the most.

Personally I find it odd that I can't take a lousy six ounce bottle of hand lotion on an airplane, yet it's perfectly OK to wheel a dead woman across an international border crossing.

Like I said, I just don't get it.

Although I’m all in favor of finding unique solutions to access obstacles, I have to give a big pfffffffffttttt to one suggestion I happened across yesterday.

Basically the premise of the article  was simple. Since people get decrepit and disabled when they are old, we should just all travel while we are young and then basically become shut-ins for the rest of our life.

OK, perhaps that’s an oversimplification, but that’s what I took away form the article.

Although the author seemed to have some compassion, as he took his ailing mom and dad on a cruise; he also expressed a great deal of frustration at being held up by other old and disabled travelers who signed up for shore excursion that were "not for them".

Again, another big pffffffft.

Who is to say what each person can do? In the end, isn’t each individual the best judge of their own abilities?

As for traveling while you are young, that’s great. I did it, but I didn’t stop when I passed some magical chronological milestone. And I have to say that the traveling I did when I was young was of a very different nature than what I do now. I remember backpacking and hostels and even sleeping on a bench at one point. I remember having less than $5 to my name in Paris. I even remember a few questionable decisions.

Today I look back at those times and chuckle a bit, but have no desire to relive them. Today I can afford to do things that I couldn’t when I was 20-something. And I’m going to do them. And if someone has to wait for me, then so be it. They can wait.

So although I think that traveling while you are young (however you define young) is a great idea; it’s not an access solution.

Travel while you’re young? Sure

But don’t stop there!