A child wants to play in a chess tournament, but he hates recording games because it involves using a pencil and writing. This in fact has created a barrier to his participation in tournament play.
The child has ADHD and has a IEP (Individualized Education Plan) approved by the county school system. He has a keyboard to use at school.
Can an accommodation be made and the child excused from keeping score? Or someone else record the moves for him? I am thinking that if a TD were to refuse a request like this based on the child’s learning disability, that he or she would be opening themselves (and the USCF possibly) up to a huge lawsuit.
I am fairly sure that the “lawsuit” threat is empty, but it is perfectly legitimate to make accommodations for disabled players under 35F. Whether the conditions requested are “reasonable” and do not place an undue burden on the tournament or the other players is something the TD must decide on the spot. In the case you describe, I would probably do the same thing normally done with players who cannot keep score for religious reasons – allow him not to keep score but take some time off his clock.
Well, the child’s parent could keep score for him. I really don’t think an advance notice would be necessary: what is there to prepare for?
There are the various rules about parents being in the same room as their kids while the games are being played, but unless the TD comes up with a better idea I do not see an alternative, unless it i sproviding the child with a Monroi.
I would not casually dismiss the lawsuit idea: a chess tournament that you have to pay to participate in and is rated is surely covered under interstate commerce, and that means it’s covered by federal law regarding discrimination and equal access.
It would be helpful if the people responding to this post stated whether they are TDs or not. I am not … just an interested parent.
Advanced notice for special situations is always a good idea. As a TD I want to make the situation fair for everyone. I need to be able to check out the claim of disability and make sure it is valid. In a large scholastic event there is usually so much going on right before it starts that to simply show up and declare a need for special accomodation - particularly for something that is not that obvious to the naked eye - like a physical issue - is not fair to the TD. If I were to know in advance, could verify this with the coach/teacher, I would figure out a way to make an accomodation.
Another problem with waiting until the last minute is space. Usually I have found that adding another person to record requires a special set up. The player needs a permanent baord placement on the end of a row or some similar arrancement for the recorder just to fit. Advance notice lets me set that up. Otherwise I probably cannot accomodate that until at least round 2 due to logistic issues like that.
We had a situation in the national elementary in my section this year wher a player could not take notation. We were able to accomodate but since the request was made right before round 1 it was round 2 before we got the arrangements sorted out. The father sat in and was the recorder.
If special accommodations (such as an assistant who records the moves) are provided for one player, the rules require the same accommodation to be offered to the opponent (rule 35B, equality of treatment, and rule 35F10, optional assistance).
That’s one of the reasons why those accommodations require extra space in the playing hall.
I know players who would be very suspicious if someone’s father sat beside him at all his games to take notation, especially if there was no obviously visible reason, and ADHD doesn’t exactly present a lot of physically obvious characteristics.
I would highly, highly recommend that the child learn to record the moves!
I currently coach two kids that have been clinically diagnosed with ADD. When they started playing in local school tournaments they did not record the moves and had some success.
They wanted to play in USCF tournaments. I told them that if they want to play, they had to record the moves (even though it was not required by the tournament). First we started with recording the first 10 moves, then 20 moves, etc.
Now they record the entire game and have placed in the top 10 in Northern California (which has a huge scholastic program) for their grade level. In fact one played on our team that placed in the top 10 at the USCF Junior HS Nationals, even playing one game that lasted 2 1/2 hours! For a child with ADD that was a greater accomplishment than he actually winning the game too!
I have noticed a direct correlation between recording the moves and winning games, and my students are seeing it too. When they first started recording the moves, they absolutely hated it. Now, they want to record the moves because they know it makes them take their time, be more serious about the game, and consider their move as they are writing it down.
You’re talking about the Americans with Disabilities Act. It has four sections: Employment, Public Services and Transportation, Public Accommodations and Commercial Facilities, and Telecommunications. I strongly doubt that any of them apply to a chess tournament. Of course, if you put up a sign saying “No handicapped need apply,” you’d be in trouble, but short of that I can’t see it. Do not feed the lawyers.
The section of the ADA that applies here is Public Accommodations and Commerce. A chess tournament that requires an entry fee that is open to the public is, by definition, both commerce and something that occurs in the public domain.
Far from feeding the lawyers, wise thinking and foresight ahead of time avoids this kind of thing. That’s why I posted this.
I am convinced by the posts that an advance notice is fair. I am sure that, in the long run, encouraging a child to the point where they DO begin recording moves is the best way to go. (For one thing, annotating your own games is the way I am being taught by my chess teacher, so it makes sense for kids as well.) I am just not sure if it is wise to insist on this before the child with a learning disability has learned to compete at all.
That sections covers convers “accessibility” in the sense of wheelchair ramps and elevators. Keeping score in a chess tournament would be a real stretch, though of course it’s always possible you might find a judge who doesn’t mind being reversed.
Since the goal is to get people to play chess, accommodation should be made for handicapped players provided a) the player does not get any competitive advantage from the arrangement and b) the other players are not unreasonably disadvantaged or disturbed.
I would add: c) providing that the accomodations are within reason for the organizer.
If 5 ADHD kids showed up at my tournament in July, all insisting that I provide someone to record their moves for them, I could not possibly accomodate them, even with advance notice it would be very difficult to line up that many additional assistants.
Here’s where ADA law tends to get fuzzy IMHO. Schools get public funding, so having the schools provide the aides is paid for by tax dollars. I don’t have that luxury in my July tournament, so expecting ME to provide the aides is IMHO an undue hardship.
There was an adult player at the Amateur Team tournament in NJ who claimed to be at a disadvantage because he said he had ADD and it made him spend a lot of time to write the moves down. He threatened to sue the tournament, the USCF and the hotel, for allowing the tournament to be run in a manner which deprived him of his right to have his disability accommodated (I think he had some special large board that would automatically detect the moves, but I think it was very large and bulky, and I don't know how it was supposed to work).
I recall that his request was denied, and he was advised to pursue any changes in the USCF rules with the Rules Committee.
It is very easy to prove a child’s disability: require that the parent or guardian show the IEP that accommodates it in the school system.
It seems to me that, if a parent gives a couple days advance notice, comes to the tournament with the IEP, and requests an accommodation, the TD refusing such a thing is indeed running a risk of a successful lawsuit. There would be many an attorney who would salivate at the prrospect of a slam-dunk case like that.
Chess tournaments are a business, folks. That means commerce. While the definition of what is reasonable provides some room for debate and argument, it seems to me that finding two extra spaces for people to record moves does not place an undue burden on anyone; to claim otherwise is to claim that the TD can estimate to within a few players the number of people who will show up to play in a tournament on the opening day and that he or she can therefore find space to accommodate those and only those players.
That is quite a stretch.
That’s a gross misreading of the law. By your reasoning, a quadriplegic could show up at NASCAR and demand that a voice-controlled car be provided. The ADA requires that all persons be given access to public facilities and events. Thus, a chess tournament probably could not refuse to accept a player’s entry solely because he had ADD. But it would perfectly free to require that all players compete under the same conditions. Organizers can (and, I think, should) provide reasonable accommodations for handicapped players, but this is a voluntary act, not a legal requirement.
I think you may be confusing this situation with, for example, schools, which are required by law to provide special arrangements for “special needs” students, no matter how inconvenient. But that is an entirely different part of the law, and it does not apply to private businesses or associations. The sections of the law covering those are full of such terms as “reasonable” and “undue burden
“Gross mis-readings of the law” are wholly contingent upon what a judge determines. Ask President Gore if you don’t believe that simple fact of judicial life.
My point is, what TD would want to run the risk of being wrong? And what kind of negative publicity would a refusal to accommodate cause?
It depends on the specifics of the situation. The ADA is not a blank check. (Well, not on private individuals.) Suppose a player announced that he had claustrophobia and demanded a 2000-square foot room to himself? Would you have to accommodate him? After all, he gave advance notice.
All I am saying is, what do you think the relative negative PR impact of a denial of one accommodation for ADHD would be versus the denial of a room for someone with claustrophobia?
Reasonableness is the key here. All that is being asked is someone wlse to write down moves, for crying out loud.
And there’s a heck of a lot more sympathy out there for kids with ADHD. That’s my two cents worth. If anyone is in this situation and wants to risk the lawsuit, that’s their business