I would say that unless the family had to employ a carer Specifically for that child, they’d just be treated like any other family. If the child was in need of extra support and the only chance for the family to have a day out together was to employ a carer, then the carer should go free.
Chester Zoo Chester and the Disabled?
- Thread starter Javan Rhino
- Start date
Twiglet2010
Well-Known Member
My friend has 3 girls. A 9 year old and 12 year old identical twins. The twins BOTH have Cerebal Palsy. She can't afford any help with the twins and gets nothing in way of support from her local authority because her partner works full time, so she has to take all 3 girls out and about on her own. She's really grateful for consessions that places such as zoos do because it helps her out a lot, she's also very grateful for disabled parking spaces (1 of the twins uses a wheelchair), toilets, ramps etc.
LOL, am i that bad? Sorry
I can't really comment too much on Benefits as my knowledge is limited, however, from the little experience I do have, I’d say it depends on the situation. It might be different for someone living with their family compared to some living in a care home. In a care home most of the money received in benefits will go to the home for rent and to pay the wages of support staff. Homes are expensive things to run. I can’t speak for everyone in that situation but disposable income is often very low, little more than pocket money. Certainly I know people who get less each week than it would cost for two entries in to any decent sized British zoo.
Wow, I'm suprised this topic has gone so far. I would like to point out a comment on the zoo's facebook page though:
Lynn Clough: 'As a disabled person I don't wish to be patronised with free bees. It is more than reasonable for carers to be requires to pay. It is not the Zoo's fault I have a disability. The state gives me extra pension to pay for care.'
I don't know if this is typical, but this spells out that there are benefits available for disabled people to help pay additional costs for carers.
Lynn Clough: 'As a disabled person I don't wish to be patronised with free bees. It is more than reasonable for carers to be requires to pay. It is not the Zoo's fault I have a disability. The state gives me extra pension to pay for care.'
I don't know if this is typical, but this spells out that there are benefits available for disabled people to help pay additional costs for carers.
My late brother had Downs syndrome and I took him to Chester once a year, which he and I both enjoyed and which gave our parents (who were his main carers) a little break. At that time, if I remember correctly, he paid half price and I got in free. This was a bargain, but if the current pricing system had operated then it would have not have stopped us. On the other hand, I realise that some people may now find the cost prohibitive. I am also aware that other zoos have different policies, so I am not going to criticise Chester for changing their system.
This is a difficult question because there is such a range of disabilities which each demand different types and levels of care: what is fair and reasonable in one set of circumstances might be very unfair in another. Likewise it would be very unfair on the zoo staff to expect them to judge the degree of disability of each visitor and then set the entrance fee accordingly.
However I think there are a couple of fundamental requirements. Every zoo should do as much as possible to meet the needs of disabled visitors and every zoo should have a clear, public statement of the charges that they and their carers will pay. Visitors or their carers should be able to find out about facilities and charges easily, from the Internet or e-mail, by phone etc. I think it would be unacceptable if disabled visitors had done their best to prepare for a visit, only to find that when they arrived an unexpected or unexplained circumstance of any sort prevented them from actually entering the zoo.
Alan
This is a difficult question because there is such a range of disabilities which each demand different types and levels of care: what is fair and reasonable in one set of circumstances might be very unfair in another. Likewise it would be very unfair on the zoo staff to expect them to judge the degree of disability of each visitor and then set the entrance fee accordingly.
However I think there are a couple of fundamental requirements. Every zoo should do as much as possible to meet the needs of disabled visitors and every zoo should have a clear, public statement of the charges that they and their carers will pay. Visitors or their carers should be able to find out about facilities and charges easily, from the Internet or e-mail, by phone etc. I think it would be unacceptable if disabled visitors had done their best to prepare for a visit, only to find that when they arrived an unexpected or unexplained circumstance of any sort prevented them from actually entering the zoo.
Alan
Nice summation "Gentle".
I think this is a complex issues and this has been a thought-provoking debate.
I had a friend complain to me about this the other day. Thinking about it I think it might be because if a zoo has an "over 5's" policy, human nature being as it is*, a lot of people would be claiming their 6 and 7 year-olds were under 5 to get in. As an "over 3's" policy it probably prevents this and in reality works as an "over 5's" policy i.e. the 4 and 5 year-olds will be claimed to be 3. Let's face it given a big queue no-one in an admissions booth want's to start a debate whether a child is 4 or 6 -an "over 3's" policy operated I suspect with some slack avoids the issue. Still screws over honest parents though.
* it amazes me that a number of otherwise scrupulous people I know think nothing of lying about their childrens age to get free/cheaper admissions, bus travel. etc.
I think this is a complex issues and this has been a thought-provoking debate.
I had a friend complain to me about this the other day. Thinking about it I think it might be because if a zoo has an "over 5's" policy, human nature being as it is*, a lot of people would be claiming their 6 and 7 year-olds were under 5 to get in. As an "over 3's" policy it probably prevents this and in reality works as an "over 5's" policy i.e. the 4 and 5 year-olds will be claimed to be 3. Let's face it given a big queue no-one in an admissions booth want's to start a debate whether a child is 4 or 6 -an "over 3's" policy operated I suspect with some slack avoids the issue. Still screws over honest parents though.
* it amazes me that a number of otherwise scrupulous people I know think nothing of lying about their childrens age to get free/cheaper admissions, bus travel. etc.
adrian1963
Well-Known Member
I visited the zoo yesterday and would like to put a different twist on this thread as the disabled have to pay for the carer then why are under 3's allowed into the zoo for nothing as I will prove they are no different to the carer.
The disabled toilets were being used by parents with very young children and at one lot of toilets they were cueing up thier were about 8 parents and at the back of the cue was a person in a wheelchair, why were the parents using the disabled toilets in the first place
How many times do you see parents using the ramps provided for the disabled for pushing thier prams up or down.
Most inprovements are made for wheelchiar users yet 90% of the time are used by parents with children in prams therefore I would have a policy of everyone pays as everyone uses the facillities
The disabled toilets were being used by parents with very young children and at one lot of toilets they were cueing up thier were about 8 parents and at the back of the cue was a person in a wheelchair, why were the parents using the disabled toilets in the first place
How many times do you see parents using the ramps provided for the disabled for pushing thier prams up or down.
Most inprovements are made for wheelchiar users yet 90% of the time are used by parents with children in prams therefore I would have a policy of everyone pays as everyone uses the facillities
I don't think you can use irresponsible parents as a guide one way or another. It annoys me when people change their babies on the benches in front of the cheetah viewing windows or on one of the picnic tables (other people have to sit on or eat off those), but likewise one could hardly cite the abuse of a stupid few as the basis for any decision making.
Unless they're causing an obstruction I don't see why they shouldn't. It's not like they're stopping wheelchair users from using the ramps.
EDIT: Which isn't to say pushchairs can't be a right pigging nuisance in other ways!
In all fairness, all buildings/bridges I can think of have access via a ramp and not steps. I use the ramps for Realm of the Red Ape for example, since they are the way in. I'm not a wheelchair user and I don't push a buggy, the ramps are there for everybody (I assume that it is easier to build one ramp for general use, rather than steps for fully-abled people and a ramp for disabled people).
I don't know if that's the point you were trying to make?
I don't know if that's the point you were trying to make?
Maisie
Well-Known Member
It's a tricky one... on the one hand, if a disabled person is employing a carer, then yes, they have to pay for the carer and then also pay for zoo entry for them. On the other hand, someone who's caring for a disabled husband/wife/child would probably be going to the zoo with them anyway, even if they weren't disabled, and should pay the full entry. It's hard to know what proportion of carers aren't family members, and whether making everyone pay is a fairer system than making no-one pay.
As I noted earlier, if disabled people have professional carers (as in to say hired, rather than friend/family member) then they get grants/benefits to pay for expenses such as this.
I also like the child/parent argument. Under 14's can't get into the zoo without an adult present, so if the parent doesn't want to go then should they be made to pay, since they are essentially the child's carer?
adrian1963
Well-Known Member
What I was trying to say was in an earlier reply someone had put if the zoo had gone to all the expense of having ramps and toilets put in for the disabled then why shouldn't they pay for the use of them. All i was saying if a parent uses these facillities for there under 3 year old child surely if the disabled person has to pay for a carer then a parent should pay for a under 3 year old
I am a carer for my mother and I have never paid less then full admission to any wildlife facillity and yet see mothers and children using disabled facillities regulary and it's not just a mindless few it quite alot especially if the ladies toilets are full and cuing outside.
It's a simple solution to the problem make everyone pay including disabled carers and under 3 year olds that way nobody can moan
While we are on about paying and using the facillities of the zoo why do they give discounts to coach companies or groups of above 10 or more ain't they using the facillities and aren't they going to enjoy the zoo as much as say you and I in a way this argument could go on for ever.
Happy chatting everyone
I am a carer for my mother and I have never paid less then full admission to any wildlife facillity and yet see mothers and children using disabled facillities regulary and it's not just a mindless few it quite alot especially if the ladies toilets are full and cuing outside.
It's a simple solution to the problem make everyone pay including disabled carers and under 3 year olds that way nobody can moan
While we are on about paying and using the facillities of the zoo why do they give discounts to coach companies or groups of above 10 or more ain't they using the facillities and aren't they going to enjoy the zoo as much as say you and I in a way this argument could go on for ever.
Happy chatting everyone
I don't necessarily see what's wrong with using a disabled toilet, which is often standing empty, if there's a long queue, although I would let a disabled person go ahead of me if one turned up. I was in the supermarket once and no one was going down the wide 'wheelchair isle' and the person at the till said 'It's wide so a wheelchair can get down it, it doesn't mean no one but wheelchair users can use it." Equally lots of us, rightly, may use a ramp if it gets us where we want to go.
I don't think disabled people should 'pay' for the things that are available to allow them to access things, we should aim to make access as universal as possible, equally I don't think everyone else should be banned from using stuff just because it allows disabled access.
OT - re nappy changing - I was at Monkey World during an England match and the place was pretty much deserted. Some people completely undressed a child, aged about 4, in one of the chimp nursery viewing windows - the young chimps were absolutely fascinated.
I don't think disabled people should 'pay' for the things that are available to allow them to access things, we should aim to make access as universal as possible, equally I don't think everyone else should be banned from using stuff just because it allows disabled access.
OT - re nappy changing - I was at Monkey World during an England match and the place was pretty much deserted. Some people completely undressed a child, aged about 4, in one of the chimp nursery viewing windows - the young chimps were absolutely fascinated.
adrian1963
Well-Known Member
Unfortunatly I have no children of my own but do take my nieces 2 year old to some wildlife facillities I know what you mean but this is the point I'm trying to make by saying everyone uses the disabled/non disabled facillities so therefore evryone should pay to enter a wildlife or any other facillity as everyone uses the facillities or enjoys the use of the facillities.
Unfortunatly I am no good at writing down correctly what I am trying to get across I don't intend to upset or agriviate anyone I am just saying if people use or want or have to go to the facillity then they should pay the correct addmission and there should be no freebies as everyone in one way or another uses all the facillities provided
Unfortunatly I am no good at writing down correctly what I am trying to get across I don't intend to upset or agriviate anyone I am just saying if people use or want or have to go to the facillity then they should pay the correct addmission and there should be no freebies as everyone in one way or another uses all the facillities provided
I get ya now, I thought you meant it was unfair that able-bodied people used the disabled facilities such as ramps etc. No harm done
Twiglet2010
Well-Known Member
The toilets at Colchester are so chuffing small (you practically have to climb on the seat to be able to shut the door) that when I took the kids today we had to use the disabled loo as the little girl I took needs help with self-help situations such as going to the bathroom. The woman at the ticket desk on the way in asked if I wanted a disabled ticket for the little girl but I said no as she was accessing everything that everyone else was getting and was no different- I explained that I didn't mean it in a nasty way and the woman did understand. I was shocked and saddened at the number of looks and stares and comments that we got, just because the child has Down Syndrome, lost of which came from adults not children (children are so accepting of difference )
In terms of buggys, as much as I love kids (kinda have to as a teacher lol), pushchairs and buggys get annoying at times, esp when you're trying to look at something and a parent/carer tries to run you over with the buggy!
) In terms of buggys, as much as I love kids (kinda have to as a teacher lol), pushchairs and buggys get annoying at times, esp when you're trying to look at something and a parent/carer tries to run you over with the buggy!
I was shocked and saddened at the number of looks and stares and comments that we got, just because the child has Down Syndrome, lost of which came from adults not children (children are so accepting of difference
I'm sorry to learn that. I was very rarely aware of that sort of thing when my brother was alive; perhaps I just ignored it, perhaps more babies were born with Downs 50 years ago.
I hope the little girl enjoyed her visit, which would have given you the reward you deserved.
Alan.