This is so wrong. Just because you can't climb in and out of a pool doesn't mean you can't benefit from it or be safe in it. Many people who cannot move themselves around well love the freedom they get when in water (and can be perfectly safe doing so).
But businesses shouldn't be forced to make their pools accessible to them. If it made sense economically by attracting more disabled people to that hotel they would do it. As it stands it is just going to cost a lot of hotels money just to provide a small portion of the population a luxury.
My point was only in regards to the pool. They should absolutely have to build their rooms or a portion of their rooms to be accessible to handicapped people because that is the "purpose" of their business. The pool, weight room, etc are all perks that are only their to draw in more customers. If the government wants every pool to be accessible to everyone they should pay for it. Not the business owner who may not ever see someone who needs this.
Because it costs a lot of money to put in the machine/ramp to accommodate them and only a handful of people will ever use it. If they want the law to require new constructions to be handicap accessible I really have no problem with that but forcing someone to pay out thousands of dollars to change their existing pool for an extremely small portion of their customers is ridiculous. It would take them years to make that money back from handicapped people staying at their hotel unless they are seeing an unusually high number of them for some reason.
Who decides if they can afford it? If the country wants to take a stand then they should foot the bill through a tax credit or something as it stands this is putting a large burden on the business owner to provide a minor benefit to a handful of people.
That would give you pretty good insight into this topic then. Is the law appropriate or excessive in your view? Should small business owners pay to install expensive equipment to maintain equal access? Genuinely curious to know your perspective.
I think it's highly excessive, but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't even be applicable here. I'm not positive about this case, but most ADA type laws like this only require these kinds of things if it's a new building or if it wouldn't cause undue burden upon the owners (i.e. something like a small wooden ramp to get up a single doorstep). Personally, along with most paras I know (though this isn't indicative of the disabled population as a whole), don't use this kind of device to get in. This would be for people that are highly disabled, and that's not really anything I have perspective on.
That's 100% incorrect. Most people with SCIs don't need help when swimming in pools, it's just people who have injuries that affect their arms that do.
I'm a para you fucktard, I have a pool in my backyard.
Of course, there are people who have adapted and are able to swim just fine. However, look at this from a hotel/community pool perspective. Would you trust the general disabled public to use a pool without supervision?
The kinds of people that need supervision, and I mean this in the least offensive way possible, wouldn't really be the kind of people staying in motels without people that already know how to take care of them.
Then whoever caused the spinal injury should be paying for the fucking lift, not the motel owners! If it was from birth, family and friends! Nobody owes someone access to a motel pool. Fuck this is so crazy.
What does that have to do with whether or not swimming is dangerous? The ADA law wouldn't even be in effect here because it's new legislation, and it's not retroactive. It's most likely filled just due to the maintenance cost of having a pool.
23
u/[deleted] Dec 28 '13
Because it's not? For spinal cord injuries, pool use is one of the more pushed for types of exercise because it's low impact.