The Deaf Concert Court Case

[greypanther]

Looking into how social norms changed within the last century (or in history altogether), there's very little reason to believe that just asking nicely has ever achieved anything. People had and still have to fight for their rights. Be it because of a different gender, skin color, sexual orientation or an impairement.

Now that sums up the issue here exactly.

[Rug]

Grey panther,Did i say the disabled cant climb,no, i said they cant climb to the same level as an able bodied person.That gentleman would never be able to free climb(without ropes).

Err, that would be soloing, free climbing is simply climbing without aid - which these days is almost exclusively used on big wall climbs by those without the skill/time to free all the pitches. Also I'm pretty sure that he could solo lower grade routes - particularly slabs. Leading would prove a problem as I don't see that he could clip the rope into a carabiner. But why do you feel this matters ? He's a Mountain Leader ...

... Im happy to see that gentleman got the support he needed,but i hope none of it was demanded.

So it's OK for disadvantaged people to accept help, just as long as they have the decency to wait for it to be offered, and not to kick up a fuss ?

<Expletive here> (Feel free to get creative !)

Rug

[Gosnell]

Asside from the perception of social justice.Why should someone be forced to help another?

[Antilogic]

Sigh.

[Gosnell]

To close my side of the debate ,i will only say,each unto their own perspective.Sociological differences encourages debate,sadly when either side have a few who will always take it to the extreme it makes fair discussion turn nasty.

[Antilogic]

To close my side of the debate ,i will only say,each unto their own perspective.Sociological differences encourages debate,sadly when either side have a few who will always take it to the extreme it makes fair discussion turn nasty.

I can only refer to Rugs final comment.

Talk about walking off on a high horse of irony.

[pjknibbs]

Asside from the perception of social justice.Why should someone be forced to help another?

OK, that's where you lost me. I thought you were mostly making reasonable arguments up to this point, but this is arrant nonsense. Of course there will be people in society who are worse off than others, we can't prevent that; but we can at least TRY to even things out as much as possible. This doesn't mean showing subtitles on all movies on the offchance there might be a deaf person attending, but having mechanisms that allow deaf people to get subtitles without impacting everyone else in the cinema, that's totally fair.

If we go down the route of "Why should someone be forced to help another?" then we lose the medical profession, social services, jobseekers allowance and things like that, all of which I think are generally good things. This isn't "social justice", it's "society".

[Gosnell]

There is a difference between being in a job you chose to do such as medicine,where I would hope you are working out of the ability to help people,or being forced by law to help others.
Provide help that is reasonable to your perspective.
Don't let society pressure you into providing more

[Stars_InTheirEyes]

Asside from the perception of social justice.Why should someone be forced to help another?

Its to do with this thing called "being civilised human beings".

Provide help that is reasonable to your perspective.
Don't let society pressure you into providing more

If you're ever in an accident and need someone's help, remember this.

[Alan Phipps]

I think this debate may be becoming too polarised through missing each others' points.

I can see that Gosnell is concerned about over-use of litigation and the courts in matters that could instead rely more on commonsense.

In harm-threatening situations, others standing by and doing nothing when they could safely prevent further harm might logically and correctly be considered to indulge in criminal negligence - unless there are mitigating circumstances such as profound fear for self or severe phobias, etc. There would probably be few such mitigations for the emergency services personnel, for example.

In matters concerning personal convenience and enjoyment rather than safety, the application and interpretation of the law is often far too blunt a weapon to wield accurately. This is where politeness, respect, selflessness and commonsense should be the main guides for involved individuals, and established codes of best business practice (based on the qualities previously listed, the current legislations and pursuit of good PR) for the more commercial and service providers.

Climbing down slightly from the fence, I think the claimant in this particular case should probably first have contacted the relevant Authority or Association of Concert Promoters (or whatever it is called) for further guidance before involving the courts. (I am assuming that this was not the case here.)

That route at least does not initially carry a risk of formal judgement contrary to the claimant's case and so setting a legal precedent that could make their lives even less convenient in future. The commercial standards bodies hold some sway over their members and associates and so can usefully assist in matters such as this one.

[Gosnell]

Well said

[UniTrader]

First post from the here:

I agree with the OP that the demand for a Personal Translator is not reasonable. That is for the following Reasons:
=> Hiring a Personal Translator is afaik far more costly than the Tickets she has paid for and in addition
=> This is also a one-off to accomodate maybe 3 persons a single time without further use for anyone else - it would not help other deaf persons on the next concert - neither by the same band nor later concerts on the same Stage.

On the other hand i also agree that the Organizer could have made a few reasonable adjustments

What is in my opinion reasonable:
=> Also providing a more detailed programme winth all planned and possible Lyrics is certainly do-able, if not trivial (obviously not as single adjustment, but in addition to the 3rd point)
=> The offer for a free carer Ticket for an Interpreter provided by the Attendees is a start, but only in addition to the next point. And provding the Interpreter if said next point cannot be done for some reason (shedule, technical difficulties...) is a possible contingency....
=> Installing a Display for "subtitles" and changing the seating so the Deafes can easily see it and the Stage is also reasonable (the Stage Builders most likely wouldnt even notice that they are additionally installing such a dislay because they install much stuff anyway)
-> In fact it might not even require an additional Display - Often there are already huge ones behind the Band in which the Lyrics could be Displayed, and also what the Band Members talk about between each Song (And this would surely be helpful for many more people at the concert, if they cannt hear properly what is said but are interested - because of the noise from others there)

[Golden_Gonads]

=> Installing a Display for "subtitles" and changing the seating so the Deafes can easily see it and the Stage is also reasonable (the Stage Builders most likely wouldnt even notice that they are additionally installing such a dislay because they install much stuff anyway)
-> In fact it might not even require an additional Display - Often there are already huge ones behind the Band in which the Lyrics could be Displayed, and also what the Band Members talk about between each Song (And this would surely be helpful for many more people at the concert, if they cannt hear properly what is said but are interested - because of the noise from others there)

The problem with displaying lyrics is that you might get everyone singing along kareoke style, which is fine for a kiddies showing of Frozen (or a Robbie Williams gig) but not what you are paying good money to go see.

[The Q]

=> This is also a one-off to accomodate maybe 3 persons a single time without further use for anyone else - it would not help other deaf persons on the next concert - neither by the same band nor later concerts on the same Stage.

That's not completely true. Now that the promoter has done this once, they have gained the experience to do it again. They have some organisation or company at hand, which can provide the interpreter/signer and they know what obstacles are there to overcome. Now imagine the next time they organise such a show, they hire the interpreter themself without any outside pressure and advertise this accordingly. Who knows, maybe instead of 3 deaf people, 10, 20 or 30 maybe even more may attend this concert then, which may already be enough to pay the interpreter.

[Jericho]

The problem with displaying lyrics is that you might get everyone singing along kareoke style, which is fine for a kiddies showing of Frozen (or a Robbie Williams gig) but not what you are paying good money to go see.

I haven't been to a concert/gig in a long LONG time... But that is what happens even without the lyrics.

In fact, that is Robbie Williams' whole act

It's always nice how someone who would be completely unaffected by this feels so able to make a judgement call.

Like a judge and jury?


One of the last things my dad got to do before he died was see the Rolling Stones live at Wembly. This was a long long long time ago. The event organizers were shocked, SHOCKED I tell you, that a dying man who'd half his calf and achillies tendon removed, might need to sit down. "Can't he just go in the wheelchair area?" Well no, no he can't. Firstly there are no wheelchair area tickets left, secondly he isn't in a wheelchair, thirdly he'd like to experience it with his family. Sounds like not much has changed over the years.


Questions:

1) With a venue appointed signer: Would it be 1 signer per paying deaf customer?
2) Would all the deaf people need to be gathered together into their own section so they can have a signer or 2 to share?
3) Would non-deaf people be allowed in that section (The mother in this article wanted to share the experience with her daughter).
4) Would there be a limit to the number of non-deaf people you can bring into this signing area? A works-outing or 60 people, 1 of them is deaf. That's 59 people taking up room in the "signing section". I appreciate there will be far fewer deaf people attending than wheelchair users for example, and at theaters and cinemas, it often seems like wheelchair users are more or less dumped in a zone and left there.
5) Would there be a separate area for dwarfs to stand on their platforms as was stated earlier? How would the height requirement be measured? What about the non-dwarves they are with? Would they be barred from the platform area? Seems a bit pointless to be having a bunch of dwarves on their raised area surrounded by 6-foot tall people, making it impossible for them to see. I used to go out with a girl who was 5 foot tall, so I was one of those arseholes who had his girlfriend on his shoulder the whole time, blocking the view of dozens of people behind.
6) With an audio transcript of the dancer's moves for blind people, would they be in a sealed sound-proof booth so that they can hear the audio transcript? How would their non-deaf party members hear? Or would they all be separated?
7) Would certificates of disability have to be presented on arrival to ensure there are no shenanigans? I'm already fingerprinted when I go to Disney World...
What about service animals... Anti-depression ducks, social anxiety snakes etc? Are they allowed in the mosh pit? Or is it separate areas at the O2 arena?
9) Women only zones? What about trans women? Are they allowed in? What about men who identify as women, are they allowed in the women-only zones? What kind of proof do they have to bring?
10) If there were performances (for example) only for deaf people, would the acts even have to sing? Can they just dance and mime silently while the signers go through the words? Is that acceptable, or is that a rip off? Similarly, do they have to dance if they audience is entirely blind?


This isn't sarcasm, I'm genuinely curious how these things would work, and where the line is drawn regarding keeping the parties together to experience the show together. It seems like we'll get to the stage where people are saying "I'm 5' tall, why can't I go to the raised platform section? I paid the same as those dwarves." and "I'm right at the back and can't see the stage, why can't I be in the visually impaired booth with their giant screens? I paid the same as them."

[Alee Enn]

I want to have a go at wheelchair basketball as I know a disabled friend who plays it. The organisers of the group tell me, when I enquired, that I am welcome to come and have a go, but they have no spare wheelchairs, however if I am able to bring my own chair, I would be welcome.

I do some searching, but the cheapest wheelchair I can find is £500, and I don't have that money to spare to buy a wheelchair for one evening's wheelchair basketball.

Would it be morally right to take the organisers to court to force them to provide a wheelchair for my exclusive use for one night?

The situation above is hypothetical, but the question still stands.

[Antilogic]

It's always nice how someone who would be completely unaffected by this feels so able to make a judgement call.

Like a judge and jury?

Yeah.

[Alan Phipps]

@ Alien Tech Inc.: "The situation above is hypothetical, but the question still stands."

Not really since the answer is self-evidently 'No' and the premise of the scenario is probably inappropriate too. There are very few sports (for the able-bodied or disabled) where the venue is legally-required to provide users with all of the necessary sport equipment apart maybe from certain essential but common-use safety and protection equipment should the user not have them.

Wheelchairs for such active sports are specialised and must suit and fit the occupant. Many of the wheelchair games players will have gained their specialist wheelchairs through sports grants, sponsors, local or self fund-raising or, less frequently, through charities. The more well-off ones will have bought them themselves. Perhaps the disabled player you know might briefly lend you theirs for a short taster but, if they do, they will be quite nervous about their chair while you are in it.

As an able-bodied person just wanting to try something for kicks, good luck trying to compel someone legally to give you a grant or sponsorship.

I am sure though you would be most welcome to try sports for the blind wearing a simple blindfold and 'borrowing' a guide, or perhaps doing athletics while simulating some other impairment such as strapping up a limb.

[X2-Illuminatus]

Questions:

1) With a venue appointed signer: Would it be 1 signer per paying deaf customer?
2) Would all the deaf people need to be gathered together into their own section so they can have a signer or 2 to share?
3) Would non-deaf people be allowed in that section (The mother in this article wanted to share the experience with her daughter).
4) Would there be a limit to the number of non-deaf people you can bring into this signing area? A works-outing or 60 people, 1 of them is deaf. That's 59 people taking up room in the "signing section". I appreciate there will be far fewer deaf people attending than wheelchair users for example, and at theaters and cinemas, it often seems like wheelchair users are more or less dumped in a zone and left there.
5) Would there be a separate area for dwarfs to stand on their platforms as was stated earlier? How would the height requirement be measured? What about the non-dwarves they are with? Would they be barred from the platform area? Seems a bit pointless to be having a bunch of dwarves on their raised area surrounded by 6-foot tall people, making it impossible for them to see. I used to go out with a girl who was 5 foot tall, so I was one of those arseholes who had his girlfriend on his shoulder the whole time, blocking the view of dozens of people behind.
6) With an audio transcript of the dancer's moves for blind people, would they be in a sealed sound-proof booth so that they can hear the audio transcript? How would their non-deaf party members hear? Or would they all be separated?
7) Would certificates of disability have to be presented on arrival to ensure there are no shenanigans? I'm already fingerprinted when I go to Disney World...
8) What about service animals... Anti-depression ducks, social anxiety snakes etc? Are they allowed in the mosh pit? Or is it separate areas at the O2 arena?
9) Women only zones? What about trans women? Are they allowed in? What about men who identify as women, are they allowed in the women-only zones? What kind of proof do they have to bring?
10) If there were performances (for example) only for deaf people, would the acts even have to sing? Can they just dance and mime silently while the signers go through the words? Is that acceptable, or is that a rip off? Similarly, do they have to dance if they audience is entirely blind?

1) No, judging from the examples I posted earlier, it's usually one signer per concert or act.
2) Certainly depends on the venue. For a small venue it might be enough that the signer is positioned on the stage accordingly in order to be seen properly by the whole audience. Additional, special lighting highlighting the signer makes it easier to spot them. I can also imagine having special video screens just showing the signer. However, this of course will have limits, so special seating may again be the way to go.
3 & 4) Again, depends on the venue.
5) I don't think it must be a platform. With most other kind of disabilities, special seating or areas is the way to go. Which can be a gallery or lodge in indoor buildings, or the first rows in outdoor or festival areas.
6) The blog posts from a blind person visiting music concerts I posted earlier in this discussion suggest that blind people do not expect to get something like an audio transcript of the dancers of a music show. Therefore, as I suggested earlier as well, maybe we should focus on actual problems and not make something up, which isn't a problem to begin with.
7) Either when buying the tickets or when entering the venue, they would probably have to provide a certificate of disability.
8) Sorry, but who in their right mind would want to bring their service animal into a mosh pit? The animal will be harmed, other concert goes may be harmed, and I also like to question what disability or illness there is requiring you to bring a service animal into a mosh pit to begin with.
If you look into the rules/regulations of big venues or festivals you often already find information on what has to be provided to bring your service animal, where you can bring them and what you, as an owner, have to do.
10) What kind of question is this? We already discussed that not all people are equally deaf, but can hear certain frequencies and of course can feel the bass. Also deaf people are not blind. A singer, who is a trained professional in singing/performing, will certainly do a better job actually doing what they're trained to do instead of fakingly doing it, don't you think? Also how would the signer/interpreter know what the singer is currently supposed to sing, if they cannot hear them?

This isn't sarcasm, I'm genuinely curious how these things would work, and where the line is drawn regarding keeping the parties together to experience the show together. It seems like we'll get to the stage where people are saying "I'm 5' tall, why can't I go to the raised platform section? I paid the same as those dwarves." and "I'm right at the back and can't see the stage, why can't I be in the visually impaired booth with their giant screens? I paid the same as them."

I have to admit that I don't understand the described problem or idea of an attitude or sentiment here. The answer to the question of why a non-disabled or non-impaired person cannot use the area specifically designed for or assigned to an impaired person is simply that they are not impaired. In modern societies we already distinguish between different groups of people. Sometimes simply because of their age (children vs. adults), sometimes of their health (elderly, ill or pregnant people), sometimes because of an impairement. Thus we treat different people differently already to help them being a part of our society. As such, I don't understand why extending this to more people in different ways would warrant such a behaviour as you describe it.
Having said all this, inclusion should always be the aim, but where this is not possible we work with what is available.

[Stars_InTheirEyes]

I want to have a go at wheelchair basketball as I know a disabled friend who plays it. The organisers of the group tell me, when I enquired, that I am welcome to come and have a go, but they have no spare wheelchairs, however if I am able to bring my own chair, I would be welcome.

I do some searching, but the cheapest wheelchair I can find is £500, and I don't have that money to spare to buy a wheelchair for one evening's wheelchair basketball.

Would it be morally right to take the organisers to court to force them to provide a wheelchair for my exclusive use for one night?

The situation above is hypothetical, but the question still stands.

That's quite different. A concert is marketed, and sold, to the general public and should have the ability to suit their needs. It is reasonable to expect fair treatment.

A wheelchair basketball team is not marketed toward the general public and as Alan Phipps said, those who would be involved in that sport would most likely have their own wheelchair. It is not reasonable to expect to have equipment provided for you.