A statement that I have already made a long time ago and in my stereotypical autistic idealism held onto was that zoos and other educational institutions should offer free access to everybody, but now I can see how at least for some time this concept would be for several reasons not feasible.
One fact I believe to be more or less universaly accepted is that people with disability have often difficulties to participate in the workforce. Not everybody but seemingly a proportionaly part, so I started to look up what different institutions offered for people who would not have the financial resources to visit, and I found that there were round about five different categories.
People with severe disabilities, that can come in form of physical or mental conditions, are given a gradual attest to the severeness of their condition and can be entitled to a support person, that can be a friend or family member or official.
Note an overview of what institution offer what might follow, but I no longer remember exactly what specific park offered what adaption of the concept of accessibility.
Category one - in my opinion actualy the only ethicaly correct and the rest are transtional at best
Both the disabled and support person are given free access.
I would like to note why I think disabled people should be entitled to visit the park free of charge as well as their support person. Suffering from phyisical or mental conditions can mean that one has to cut a visit short, additional interactions for compensation can be another source of stress that further discourages a disabled person to participate in outdoor activities that would benefitial affect their well being and contribute to the improvement of their condition that then could but ethicaly speaking does not have to lead to an increased functionality that would also more or less indirectly positively affect the whole system and society.
Why should a support person given free access as well. The energy and also financial burden how some would describe taking care of disabled loved ones often leads to many people abandoning disabled people in general, taking care of a friend or family member costs time and money, as well as energy not only physicaly but also mentaly, what can lead to decreased functionality. The income of social workers is rather low so that they cant afford to join the people they look after too often, but are in many cases the only party the disabled could turn to. We should not as society even further punish those disadvantaged in many other fields. There should not be any second class citizens.
Always remember everybody can become disabled any time ´the things you dont grant others can happen to be used against yourself as well, therefor please always have empathy, they cant pay for themselves, if you can be thankfull, disability is not a choice and the difficulties the conditions bring upon disabled weigh out the few exceptions they get granted.
Categroy two - close but not enough
Either the disabled or the support person are granted free access plus the other person is given a small discount
Category three - gradual less
Only one party is given free acces, and not discount for the other person.
category four
neither is given free access but discounts for mostly only one party is given
category five
neither free access nor discount are offered
I have also checked what offers the dutch zoos had and they had either very small discount of one euro or none at all, so not social at all.
When we visited denmark I was suprised that some zoos and aquaria from the state also offered entirely free access.
Remember just because you are disabled and still work a job does not mean everybody would, the free access and discount are only available to those with a special card.
The same applies to people who have wealthy family, friends or a partner. Everybody should be offered the same access no matter their ability or lack there off. Everything else is ableism.
One fact I believe to be more or less universaly accepted is that people with disability have often difficulties to participate in the workforce. Not everybody but seemingly a proportionaly part, so I started to look up what different institutions offered for people who would not have the financial resources to visit, and I found that there were round about five different categories.
People with severe disabilities, that can come in form of physical or mental conditions, are given a gradual attest to the severeness of their condition and can be entitled to a support person, that can be a friend or family member or official.
Note an overview of what institution offer what might follow, but I no longer remember exactly what specific park offered what adaption of the concept of accessibility.
Category one - in my opinion actualy the only ethicaly correct and the rest are transtional at best
Both the disabled and support person are given free access.
I would like to note why I think disabled people should be entitled to visit the park free of charge as well as their support person. Suffering from phyisical or mental conditions can mean that one has to cut a visit short, additional interactions for compensation can be another source of stress that further discourages a disabled person to participate in outdoor activities that would benefitial affect their well being and contribute to the improvement of their condition that then could but ethicaly speaking does not have to lead to an increased functionality that would also more or less indirectly positively affect the whole system and society.
Why should a support person given free access as well. The energy and also financial burden how some would describe taking care of disabled loved ones often leads to many people abandoning disabled people in general, taking care of a friend or family member costs time and money, as well as energy not only physicaly but also mentaly, what can lead to decreased functionality. The income of social workers is rather low so that they cant afford to join the people they look after too often, but are in many cases the only party the disabled could turn to. We should not as society even further punish those disadvantaged in many other fields. There should not be any second class citizens.
Always remember everybody can become disabled any time ´the things you dont grant others can happen to be used against yourself as well, therefor please always have empathy, they cant pay for themselves, if you can be thankfull, disability is not a choice and the difficulties the conditions bring upon disabled weigh out the few exceptions they get granted.
Categroy two - close but not enough
Either the disabled or the support person are granted free access plus the other person is given a small discount
Category three - gradual less
Only one party is given free acces, and not discount for the other person.
category four
neither is given free access but discounts for mostly only one party is given
category five
neither free access nor discount are offered
I have also checked what offers the dutch zoos had and they had either very small discount of one euro or none at all, so not social at all.
When we visited denmark I was suprised that some zoos and aquaria from the state also offered entirely free access.
Remember just because you are disabled and still work a job does not mean everybody would, the free access and discount are only available to those with a special card.
The same applies to people who have wealthy family, friends or a partner. Everybody should be offered the same access no matter their ability or lack there off. Everything else is ableism.
