For one, I am glad to see this issue raised.  That was the rule at this
museum, but as usual, no one remembered why it was established, and so I
quickly removed it.  (Still no refreshments, pets, etc. in our gallery
buildings)

I have the distinct impression that many museums have certain regulations
dating back to another generation when everyone was uptight about this or
that, and had no real "feel" for serving the public.  Fifty years later, do
they still make sense?

Ross Weeks Jr.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Indigo Nights" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2000 2:56 PM
Subject: Fwd: Re: Discrimination at the Kimbell


> Colleagues, the issue below was presented to the
> ADA-Law list on Monday.  I have the author's
> permission (see below) to repost the materials to this
> list.
>
> My purposes are several.
>
> First, if there is a representative from the Kimbell
> on list, I'd ask that they or a representative from
> the Kimbell please contact Ms. Saroff.  As presented
> to ADA-Law, and, as discussed there, the issues she
> presents are very valid under the Americans with
> Disabilities Act, and I'm hoping that someone will
> contact her concerning her concerns and allay the ill
> will her experience this past weekend caused.
>
> However, my second purpose is not to embarrass the
> Kimbell but rather to elevate the level of
> conciousness about these kinds of issues to our
> colleagues here so that these kinds of issues can be
> reviewed inhouse and difficult situations avoided.
>
> On the one hand, I can understand where there may be
> concerns about a stroller banging into and/or
> destroying precious artworks.  A search of the
> archives and the web showed that the Kimbell is quite
> zealous about its security matters.
>
> However, this woman had issues of an unobvious
> disability, vis a vis a bad back which precluded her
> from lifting her child without risking further serious
> injury.  Many of the TABs (Temporarily Able
> Bodied--which is most of us until the old body has
> other thoughts) have come to recognize the OBVIOUS
> disabilities--wheel chair users, the blind, the deaf,
> and have come to accommodate them either by choice or
> by law.  However, it is the not so obvious ones, still
> covered under the ADA, of which we must be equally as
> sensitive.
>
> Truly, I hope to cause none on the list any
> embarrassment.  But open-to-the-public museums must be
> able to reasonably accommodate the whole public and
> not exclude the disabled in any capacity.
>
> My intent is hoping this will be a lesson learned for
> museums in the aggregate, a chance to "make nice" for
> Ms. Saroff, and a chance to elevate the conciousness
> of the topic in general.
>
> I've been VERY pleased with the efforts AAM has made
> in raising the level of awareness of ADA issues.  It
> just appears a refresher may be in order.
>
> The issue rings close to home for me.  I'm a VERY
> active grandmother, with very large-for-their-age
> grandchildren, and a bad back.  Had I been stopped in
> any of the museums I've trotted the children to here
> in LA while they were stroller age and told the
> stroller was not to be allowed, we would have missed
> the exhibits.  As it is, the elder had to forgo some
> at the LA zoo because the stroller of his baby sister
> couldn't be accommodated.
>
> Thank you for considering this matter.  If you have
> cross-posting issues you'd like me to take to the
> ADA-Law list, let me know and, if you'd like to join
> it yourself, you can do so from the following link:
>
> http://listserv.nodak.edu/archives/ada-law.html
>
> Quick research questions on the topic can be found
> there by searching on keywords.
>
>
>
> --- "Sharon R. Saroff" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > Thank you very much for the offer to take my cause
> > to the museum list.  I
> > give my permission for you to quote what I posted on
> > the ADA-Law list.
> > Hopefully the Kimbell will respond and in a positive
> > manner.
> >
> > Sharon
>
> > >--- "Sharon R. Saroff" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > >> Yesterday I had a very upsetting experience when
> > I
> > >> visited the Kimbell in
> > >> Fort Worth Texas.  It seems they have a very
> > >> interesting rule "No baby
> > >> carraiges or strollers allowed."  This my not
> > sound
> > >> like somethin bad, but
> > >> it is if you can't carry your child.  I have bad
> > >> arthritis in my back and
> > >> while I can walk and push a light stroller,
> > carrying
> > >> my son for any period
> > >> of time is painful.  When I noted the problem to
> > the
> > >> Kimbell staff they
> > >> treated me like I was trying to make trouble. I
> > >> noted to them that they
> > >> were discriminating against disabled mothers and
> > >> violating the ADA.  Their
> > >> response was "We are concerned for your child's
> > >> safety." (I noted that my
> > >> child is much safer in his stroller than he is if
> > I
> > >> were to carry him.)  It
> > >> seems that a couple of years ago a man didn't
> > >> realize that there was a baby
> > >> carraige behind him as he was stepping backwards.
> > >> He backed into the
> > >> carraige, lost his balance and fell on the child.
> > >> He injured the child and
> > >> apparently the Kimbell suffered as well.  Thus is
> > >> why people make stupid
> > >> rules.  My response was that you can use the same
> > >> logic on a wheelchair or
> > >> scooter.  People need to be careful and look
> > where
> > >> they are walking and
> > >> people should not place baby carraiges or
> > >> wheelchairs directly behind
> > >> people.  I ended being escorted through the
> > museum
> > >> exhibit by the weekend
> > >> supervisor.
> > >>
> > >> I wish to write a letter to the museum concerning
> > >> this incident and their
> > >> policy.  Do you agree that this is discrimination
> > as
> > >> a result of someone's
> > >> carelessness.  Next time it might be a
> > wheelchair.
> > >> I am concerned then
> > >> they will use the same stupid logic and ban
> > >> wheelchairs.  What do you think?
> > >>
> > >> Sharon
>
>
>
> =====
> Indigo Nights
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
> http://mail.yahoo.com/
>
> =========================================================
> Important Subscriber Information:
>
> The Museum-L FAQ file is located at
http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed
information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message
to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help"
(without the quotes).
>
> If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to
[log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff
Museum-L" (without the quotes).

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).