One of the things sticking in my head right now is “what does meaningful accessibility look like?” and “what is reasonable in accommodation?”
I think my work is a good example. I can work from home 3 days a week, and only have to be in the office two days a week. If I’m sick, I can work from home. If I don’t feel safe to drive, I can work from home. My employer is currently conducting a lighting study to see how the office lights can be adjusted to be less harsh, particularly where I sit. This is accessible for me with my migraines and my fibro. And honestly, I’m pretty sure fucking everyone hates the harsh bright white lights in the office.
Conversely, the building itself claims to be accessible, but is left wanting. Both parking lots are quite a bit of distance from the doors (600 ft to ADA parking), and the most direct route requires stairs. Then it’s another 800+ feet from the front door to my office, with a wait on the single functional elevator. A quarter mile from car to desk is a LOT when you have stability issues and you’re on a cane. It’s a lot when you aren’t.
The upstairs bathrooms are fine, except for the scalding water in the sinks. But downstairs, the bathrooms have a turn handle and are very heavy. They’re difficult to access because of the door, and absolutely not mobility aid friendly like that.
I guess my point is that accessibility as determined by able-bodied people looks insanely different from accessibility as determined by those in need of access. And the able-bodied need to stop telling us what accessibility looks like, and start listening to what we need.
Also, your fear of individuals abusing the system is no reason to deny accommodation. Period.
