The mother of a deaf cheerleader has brought a lawsuit against an elite cheer program, claiming it discriminated against her deaf daughter, violating the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The plaintiff in the lawsuit is Alicia Mims, the mother of 9-year-old Ari, who has a cochlear implant. For three years, Ari participated in Plano-based Cheer Athletics, one of the largest cheer and dance facilities in North Texas. But as Ari has gotten older, it has become harder for her to understand her instructors.
To assist her daughter, Mims requested that Cheer Athletics provide an American Sign Language interpreter for each practice and competition. Without an interpreter, the plaintiff claims her daughter is “missing learning opportunities and safety warnings otherwise available to her hearing teammates.”
In response to the lawsuit, Cheer Athletics issued the following statement:
“We are heartbroken to see months of hard work and commitment by the Cheer Athletics staff to help a little girl safely participate in cheerleading ultimately result in a lawsuit that we were first notified of tonight by the media.
“The claims made are categorically false. Cheer Athletics spared no expense conferring with experts in the field. We spoke with the child’s doctor, who said a roger device was the correct accommodation for this athlete in the all-star cheer environment. We immediately purchased the roger device at our sole expense. The mother refused the roger device accommodation and demanded a translator. A translator was then provided at our expense.
“Our investment in this athlete surpasses tens of thousands of dollars and the accommodations provided have changed the method and manner of instruction for this athlete and the team. We have advocated for this athlete to ensure she remains an integral part of her squad.
“Cheer Athletics has decades of success with athletes with hearing loss succeeding to the highest levels in our program—including winning world championships—and will continue to provide a safe and inclusive solution—to the best of our financial ability—for all all-star cheerleaders.”
Mims’ attorney, Lia Sifuentes Davis, told the media that “it’s very rare that actual litigation is filed about these issues.
“The onus is on the business to provide effective communication, but the Americans with Disabilities Act does not necessarily spell out the specifics and the minutia of how to accomplish that effective communication,” she continued.
The lawsuit states that despite the plaintiff’s “repeated requests for interpretation services, Defendant failed to provide this accommodation for practices until… the start of 2024, and then only for a limited ‘trial period’ at practices only. Despite ultimately securing an interpreter for this ‘trial period,’ Defendant placed significant restrictions on the qualified interpreter’s ability to meaningfully communicate necessary information to [Ari] at practices.”
Further, it claims Ari “feels embarrassed and frustrated by her lack of understanding at practices and competitions. Without effective communication, she is excluded from opportunities to connect with her teammates and be fully included in Defendant’s programs and services.”
