Is Morgan's hotel truly ultra accessible?

Morgan’s hotels announced a “revolutionary” ultra accessible new hotel last month. While I love the idea of “going beyond regular ADA requirements”, I’m not entirely sure Morgan’s really get it. The future will tell. In the meantime, here are my concerns.

What they are doing

According to the announcement page, they are improving the layout of the hotel’s amenities and doing some staff training.

[...]Guests will find sleek but functional design including spacious common areas and guest rooms that allow for independent movement, eliminating barriers that often exist in traditional hotels[...]

[...]The hotel’s design features wider hallways, larger guest rooms, and easy access to elevators.[...]

[...]Specialized services will include staff trained in disability etiquette, assistance with mobility devices, and accommodations such as hearing aid loops and sensory-sensitive colors and lighting.[...]

Morgan's announcement

I realize and acknowledge they can’t spell out everything they are doing in such an announcement and it may be going further than that. But one thing that makes me hesitant to give too much benefit of the doubt is their use of the term “special needs”.

Special Needs

They refer to disabled people as “those with special needs” throughout the announcment. They do not use the word “disabled” a single time. They do use the word “disability” once when talking about “disability etiquette”.

Disabled people typically prefer to avoid the term “special needs”. It seems that in many ways the term “special needs” thrives in the education world, and among parents of disabled children.

Here’s a sentence from the announcement:

This will certainly be a hotel for everyone including those with special needs who, going forward, will feel more included, valued, and fulfilled.

This way of writing about disabled people very much feels like the charity model of disability. It feels othering.

Many years ago I recounted an anecdote from a disability rights protest. I wrote:

But don’t just take my word for it. The NORA project says:

the term “special needs” has taken root in the United States’ vocabulary to describe everything from people to schools to parents. However this phrase, among other euphemisms, is highly problematic for numerous reasons. First and foremost, it is not what the disabled community generally prefers.* Disabled leaders and activists have made it clear that the appropriate phrases to use are either “disabled person” (identity-first language) or “person with a disability” (person-first language).

The Harmful Reality of Disability Euphemisms

The Mighty writes:

The term “special needs” only exists so that people don’t have to say the word “disability.” It allows non-disabled people, especially parents and educators, to avoid describing children as having a disability — because they view disability as something bad.

Why We Say 'Disability,' Not 'Special Needs'

Parents.com echoes what The Mighty wrote:

The presence of a disability is not and should not be seen as shameful. The use of a euphemism in place of a diagnosis or even in place of the term "disability" creates the sense that there is something negative or even embarrassing to gloss over. The same sense of shame can be communicated by other euphemistic language like "differently abled," "handicapable," or "challenged."

What To Say Instead of 'Special Needs'

This is important because the words you use impact the perception of the people you’re talking about, as pointed out in USA Today:

Researchers from a 2016 study found people who are referred to as having "special needs" are seen more negatively than those referred to as having a disability.

'I am not ashamed': Disability advocates, experts implore you to stop saying 'special needs'

It appears the founder of Morgan’s has a disabled daughter, but both the announcement and the Morgan’s Camp About Us page refer to her as having “special needs”. I’m certain the impact of having a disabled family member is enlightning and a great incentive to improve accessibility for all. I can’t help wondering though…

How can the disability community trust an organization to be “ultra accessible” when they can’t even get basic terminology right?

Charity model

The words and tone used on Morgan’s Camp About Us page are indicative of a strong charity model approach to disability. There is a big difference between “We do it FOR people with special needs” and “We do it WITH disabled people”.

The charity model is not a great way to approach accessibility. It’s certainly not the way to “ultra accessibility”.

I’m sure Mr. Hartman has a good heart and great intentions. I’m certain his work has positively impacted many disabled youth and adults. I’m not trying to diminish those accomplishments. But frankly, we (disabled people) are tired of charity.

Accessibility overlay

Another aspect of this release is that the site is using an accessibility overlay. That is, a solution that is supposed to remediate any accessibility issue found on a website so disabled people can use it. The problem is, accessibility overlays rarely work the way they are marketed and often cause additional barriers to disabled users. In fact, some blind screen reader users have to install a plugin in their browsers to remove the overlay.

A blind friend once told me they prefered finding their way on a non-accessible website rather than fight the overlay as well as having to figure out the non-accessible website.

To laypersons, these features may seem beneficial, but their practical value is largely overstated because the end users that these features claim to serve will already have the necessary features on their computer, either as a built-in feature or as an additional piece of software that the user needs to access not only the Web but all software.

Overlay Fact Sheet - Strengths and weaknesses of overlay "widgets"

Companies selling these overlays have very good marketing strategies and a lot of funding behind them. They also aggressively pursue anyone who speaks negatively against them. (This is why I am not specifying the name of this particular overlay.) But they are appealing to organizations who don’t know any better. A cheap’ish solution that will solve their accessibility problems is hard to pass by. They don’t have the technical know-how to realize this is not a good solution.

I’ve said to clients before that if the offer sounds too good to be true, it’s because it is too good to be true. Not only do overlays not work for their intended purpose. But using them will get you sued.

The fact that Morgan’s relies on an accessibility overlay on the page announcing an “ultra accessible” hotel is very ironic to me.

Accessibility is about more than buildings

I really appreciate an accessible facility myself, since I’m a wheelchair user. I travel a lot (at least I did before the pandemic). And I’ve encountered endless problems at hotels. From facilities that never did any renovations to become accessible to facilities who completely renovated the inside of the hotel for “full ADA compliance”, but who forgot the hotel’s entrance had 5 steps to get in. I could write thousands of words on the horror stories of non-accessible hotels.

But making the building and facilities accessible is the very least a hotel can do. When I talk about digital accessibility, I say that the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) are the starting line of accessibility work, not the finish line. While I’m happy organizations work to be conformant with WCAG, I’m also not grateful that they’ve done this work. It’s the minimum. Similarly, complying with the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) is the least a company can do. Going beyond the ADA isn’t a superhero’s effort to be lauded. It should be what everyone does.

Doing some “disability etiquette” training for some staff is better than nothing. But that doesn’t impress me, as a disabled traveler who has encountered too many hotels refusing me entry because of my service dog. As a wheelchair user who couldn’t open hotel room doors because they were too heavy, and staff claiming to be trained on etiquette saying “they have to be that heavy because of fire regulations” (no, no they don’t, it’s actually in ADAAG!)

Are all the rooms wheelchair accessible? Are all the rooms equipped with visual alarms? Are all the rooms setup in such a way that a blind individual can function easily in the room? If not all the rooms, then which rooms? Are the wheelchair friendly room all as far away from the elevators as possible, as often happens, making it physically exhausting to navigate the long corridors with heavy carpets? Are the few rooms deemed “accessible” used for wheelchair guests and D/deaf guests, and blind guests? Are there wheelchair accessible rooms with one king bed, rather than two beds (because the assumption is that disabled people travel with assistants rather than spouses)?

What about all the other facilities? Gym? Pool? Restaurants? Bathrooms? Parking facilities?

What about being able to get information on their website in an accessible manner? What about being able to book a room from their website in an accessible manner? Because a hotel’s “ultra accessible” experience begins well before a guest’s arrival at the facility.

Nothing about us without us

You need to include disabled people in the planning and creation of products/buildings/facilities/experiences. It’s well understood in disability communities that it’s the only way to get a truly accessible product/building/facility/experience. Disabled people. Not our loved ones. Not our parents. People with lived experience, and ideally people with a certain level of expertise in the topic raised.

For example, I’m a wheelchair user. I’ve also been trained in doing ADA accessibility audits. I’ve also been trained in doing building accessibility audits in New Zealand. I feel capable on advising a hotel about what needs to be done for their building to be accessible. My friend Bob, who has been a wheelchair user for a decade or so has not been trained in the regulation and how to do an audit. He can tell them about what makes a hotel accessible for him. But he can’t speak for everyone else.

So who is advising Morgan’s on what constitutes an “ultra accessible” hotel experience? Is this disability led? Is this even disability included?

Not all sour grapes

No, I’m not just negative about Morgan’s aiming to become ultra accessible. I am glad that they are making this effort. We sure can use more hotel facilities working on becoming more accessible. It’s just that… I’ve heard too many unfulfilled promises. I don’t want this to be just one more performative dance about “look at us we’re doing so good for disabled people with special needs”.

I hope my doubts are unfounded. I hope they address some of the glaring issues (like an overlay on their website). But I won’t hold my breath. I know for a fact several people have told them via LinkedIn about the issues with using an overlay. There has been, to date, no public comment about any of the issues raised by me and others in the community.

If anyone from Morgan’s wants to get in touch to discuss this further, I’d be happy to help.