Family Kicked Out Of Golden Corral Restaurant Over Children's Skin Disorder
Golden Corral restaurants may offer all-you-can eat buffets, but are they open to all?
The federal government sued a Westland, Mich. Golden Corral franchise Wednesday for allegedly kicking out a family after noticing a child that suffered from a genetic skin condition. The lawsuit charges that the restaurant's manager violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by denying service to Danielle Duford of Garden City, Mich. and her four daughters. Three of Duford's daughters suffer from epidermolysis bullosa, a condition that makes a person's skin extremely vulnerable to blistering.
According to the suit, manager David Robinson asked Duford what was wrong with one of her children, saying: “she has scabs all over, so obviously there is something wrong with her.” The document also noted that Robinson asserted the restaurant had “a right to ask what’s wrong if it concerns our customers and is contagious.”
The family was then asked to leave, despite repeated attempts by the mother to educate the restaurant management about the condition and the fact it was not contagious, according to the U.S. Justice Department.
The government is suing to prevent other incidents of discrimination and is seeking compensation for the family, as well as a $55,000 civil penalty.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/21/golden-corral-lawsuit-westland-skin-disorder_n_2733946.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
I doubt I'll be able to convince you that I have a soul, 
but if I was a waiter and this little guy...
was my customer, I wouldn't think it unreasonable for the manager to talk to the parents out of concern for the other customers health... not their comfort.
I didn't know, until last week, that you could find old stuff like that. I would only head over to the boys forum if I was feeling extremely pugnacious and there was no one on any any other forum willing to accommodate me. What do you think the chances of that happening are? 
No thanks...I'd be hard put to decide on a hot celeb...if I don't know you, you ain't hot. How's that for arrogance? 
he's posted that so many times on DU that you should have no trouble finding it.
BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE:
he wants gender discrimination allowed for health insurance because women will get charged more than men.
BUT
he wants gender discrimination outlawed for LIFE INSURANCE, because women will get charged more than men.
and here, he supports discrimination, and wouldn't you know it, --against 3 girls.
frankly, it's not fair to accuse him of anything more than KEEPING SCORE.
indeed, like zillions of similar counters built across the land since 1990, they should have been built at the proper height in the first place.
But having worked in the field for a full decade, it escapes me how a quadriplegic is supposed to use the serving spoons, or a person who is blind to be able to tell what's what. (This one might be easier, involving swappable plastic name tags with Braille for each dish -- but not everyone who's blind reads Braille.)
No offense, but the average person would be forgiven for being afraid of that condition. It looks like some sort of pox.
It's easy to blame the owner for discrimination, but he may have been genuinely afraid. Would I trust the assurances of the mother? No, not unless I heard it from a medical doctor. If they sat next to me, I'd leave.
Poor kid. 
One also hopes she takes her business elsewhere. 
there life has been a living hell. This just makes me cry. They are NOT contagious...they are human beings...with real emotions and feelings....people are so cruel!
The best to your sister and her daughter 
If you think otherwise, I have a bridge I'd love to sell you. 
It would seem to me that a very good defense in any such case as this would be: the ADA says I can't discriminate against a person with a disability unless there is a definite threat to health and safety, as defined by the law and by the regulations promulgated by the Dept. of Justice and, in this particular instance, the federal Dept. of Health and Human Services. I obeyed the law. That's my defense.
Can a court actually find you liable for damages that might arise in the course of obeying a federal law?
Is the Washington case an ADA related case? I'd be very interested to see the cite.
Just to emphasize, for 23 years now HHS has been publishing a list of communicable diseases, the people who have such conditions restaurateurs are allowed under the ADA to exclude from food preparation and handling (and I think a buffet style restaurant would qualify as "handling" . The list is updated annually. Managers are supposed to be cognizant of this. Most franchises like this also have an ADA compliance person on staff, if they know their business, to deal with just such situations. Not in each location, but certainly at the head office.
It just amazes me that after almost a quarter of a century people who are supposed to know are so oblivious to this act, and disability rights law in general. A few years back I ran into a situation on a college campus where the administration honestly didn't know (or said they didn't know) they were covered under Section 504 of the Rehab. Act. which was passed in 1973! It's been the law for almost forty years! It's like not knowing your local fire code, or, if you manage a restaurant, being oblivious to having to pass a health inspection.
It's particularly weird for me because I remember all the intense lobbying the various restaurant associations did around ADA. THEY were the ones for whom this part of the law was written. You'd think, as a part of being a savvy business person, these folks would get some education.
Anyway, it'll be interesting to see how this case pans out. The DoJ has been notorious among disability rights advocates for its lax enforcement of the ADA, so the fact that they're taking the case on at all would seem to indicate there's something there. But maybe not.
It's late, and my mind is mush.
Best wishes.
As such, he has no obligation to just take her word for it. That does not absolve him of liability, should she be lying.
What, you think that liability can magically be waved away by saying, "But so-and-so told me..."??
Exactly. He's not in a position to confirm or deny the mother's statement.
Chicken pox, measles, and impetigo are the ones that immediately come to mind, looking at the picture- both terribly contagious (assuming the sores were still weeping).
Ahh, and finally an appeal to authority. Well if the DoJ thinks so, they must be right, eh?
cheers!
or maybe you aren't familiar with that law.
Everyone is either a paragon of virtue or an evil monster. No one ever fucks up or has an accident, there isn't a person alive doesn't know everything there is to know about everything, ergo everything unfortunate that happens as a result must be malicious, callous, or grotesquely negligent.
because you know someone reading this is going to need it.
about other customers getting worried, offended, disgusted, and walking out, as a reason for denying this family service.
Prejudice, squeamishness, and ignorance are no excuse or justification for discrimination.
The same sort of reasoning ("I might lose customers" was used to justify Jim Crow, and was used historically to deny people with all manner of disability access to public accommodations, including restaurants, public pools, motels and hotels, etc. In fact, there used to be laws in some cities (Chicago, for instance) denying people with particular disabilities the right to be out in public at all. And it wasn't all that long ago that the general public was freaked out just at the sight of someone in a power wheelchair, or someone with a guide cane, or someone using American Sign Language. People who drooled, people who were missing limbs, people with speech disorders were routinely denied service because "you're disgusting to look at and you'll drive my other customers away."
This is precisely why the ADA was written and passed--to put an end to discrimination that came out of superstition, ignorance, fear.
I don't know how this particular case will be resolved, but it's very important, I think, that people understand that just because the sight of a particular disability makes you or others uncomfortable is no reason to discriminate against someone with that particular disability or illness.
The ADA does contain provisions dealing with infectious diseases, so I assume the court will have to decide, on the basis of testimony and the law and established precedent, whether this particular manager violated the law or not. But in general, being "unsightly" (the term often used) is no longer a valid excuse for denying someone the right to a public accommodation.
Best wishes.
...and say that if it looks like an infectious disease, such as chicken pox or measles or mumps,... I'm going to treat it like an infectious disease and ask the family to leave the premises, until the child is no longer showing symptoms
If they can show a doctor's order which declares that the child is 'contagion free' I might reconsider.
How could a competent restaurateur be expected to do otherwise?...???
TYY
....uh, fuck this family too then??? 
and your statement righteous and correct.
and i'm grateful that you posted it because it's a theme among a consistent minority of DUers who justify these types of things at every opportunity.
and worse, some justify it on the basis that they know or are related to someone disabled.
Next time you see a leper make sure they are wearing a hood and bell, okay?
