Tragedy Punctuates a Safety Issue

For all the progress made in improving theme park safety in California, one 4-year-old boy’s precarious hold on life at UC Irvine Medical Center in Orange this week has borne testimony to how much remains unresolved.

In 1998, a fatal Christmas Eve accident at Disneyland’s Columbia sailing ship became the catalyst for reform in a state where the theme park industry had been able to elude meaningful oversight for decades. Early this year, legislation went into effect that brought state review of serious accidents into play. So when young Brandon Zucker was critically injured last Friday night while riding in a Roger Rabbit “taxicab” at Disneyland, the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health began an independent investigation.

Because of the legislation, investigators have been able to quickly ask good questions. The state’s inquiry has been looking into the right areas, such as whether workers at the ride were properly trained, whether the ride was adequately staffed and whether it should have doors or additional restraints.

That’s all to the good, but this also is the first serious test of state resolve to protect consumers under the new legislation. The jury is still out on how successful that monitoring will be, given years of effective industry lobbying to keep outside scrutiny at bay.

The investigating agency lacks authority under the legislation to mandate industrywide changes, but it can send a message in this case. This is the first year that theme parks have not policed themselves, and as a condition of reopening the ride the agency should grasp the opportunity to insist that all necessary safety measures be taken. That may include changes in the cars’ design and restraint system.

It is especially important to protect small children who can be injured precisely because they do not fit neatly into the industry maxim that rides are safe if only riders will behave as expected.

The theme parks and consumer advocates have engaged in a tug of war over just what the notion of rider responsibility means and what measures a park must take to ensure a safe outing. A certain amount of precaution is simply common sense on the part of both sides. For operators, signs and judicious boarding procedures can promote safety. For parents, judgments have to be made just as they would be in granting children access to scooters, bicycles or in-line skates.

But this accident also is taking shape as a case study for evaluating how much consumer protection is enough at theme parks throughout the state. Is a cut-out opening for loading passengers on a spinning ride safe, even with a safety lap bar on the seat bench? How about the lap bar itself, ostensibly providing protection but which also can be a literal loophole through which a squirming child reveals the flaw in a blueprint design?

The lap bars in fact are a matter of dispute throughout the theme park industry, and this accident is sure to sharpen the safety debate over consumer protection. State inspectors now have an accident as a focal point to enlighten the public and possibly lead to reform.

Even as the accident at Disneyland took place, lobbyists were asking for weaker provisions on what sort of injuries now need to be reported. Proposed rules for inspections still are under discussion. As the state lives with its new law, don’t count on the industry to take the lead in putting public safety first.