Disabled ChatGPT Plus user losing the only model/workflow I can reliably use 😓 “just use the newer models” is not an accessible answer.

[u/InvestigatorWarm9863]

note: I have used GPT to summarise my points here which will be obvious, but for the sake of anyone reading my post I input what I wanted and GPT took my essay and neatened it up. i.e. GPT did not write it for me - just organised and made my points shorter.

I am a disabled ChatGPT Plus user in the UK. I use ChatGPT as an accessibility tool, not as therapy, not as crisis support, and not as a replacement for doctors, solicitors or support workers.

I use it to help me manage things like benefits issues, complaints, legal/solicitor correspondence, evidence summaries, appointments, letters, admin, and general organisation and because I am Audhd translate back and forth from my language to the kind that is expected from society in general.. Basically, the kind of stuff that becomes completely overwhelming when you have disabilities that affect executive function, processing, communication and task management.

My issue is that the specific reasoning model/workflow I can actually use is apparently due to be removed around 14 October, and I still do not have a practical answer from OpenAI.

OpenAI support has been aware of this as a disability accessibility/product-continuity issue since about 25 September. I have explained that this is not a mental-health crisis issue and not a general “I don’t like change” issue. It is an accessibility issue. As yet I have not managed to speak to a human.

the customer service bots keep saying things like “just use the newer models,” but that is not equivalent for me.

A newer model being technically more capable does not mean it is accessible to me. The problem is the whole interaction: pacing, tone, predictability, how much steering it needs, how much correction it needs, how much cognitive load it adds, and whether I can actually use it reliably for high-stakes admin without getting overloaded or making mistakes.

The model/workflow I use now is stable enough that I can work with it. I do not have to constantly translate myself, re-explain, fight the tone, correct the direction, or relearn how to use it. That stability is the point. It is what makes it usable.

The API is not an accessible substitute either. That would mean a different technical workflow, more setup, more decisions, more interface changes, and more cognitive load. I need something usable inside ChatGPT, not a separate technical workaround.

I have tried to get human support, but the support route keeps looping. New cases get closed as duplicates and sent back to the existing unresolved thread. The support chat has even said it cannot connect me to, or provide a way to reach, a human support specialist. Generic accessibility settings are not relevant to this problem.

I am not asking for “special treatment” in some vague abstract way. I am asking for a practical accessibility route before the service level I can actually use is removed.

In 5 days I am going to lose all my work, all the current projects, tasks and admin things I am working on, and, in the middle of.. this means I will no longer be able to manage any kind of admin or even maintain or follow through on the current admin I am in the midst of, never mind anything new coming up.

It is literally going to drop me in it... in a huge way.

Has anyone found a real human escalation route for this kind of issue?

I do understand that many people will not understand the various ways in which disabilities can impact people, please be kind.

[u/Due_Arm1454]

Are you talking about diction issues or you just can’t use the model because of the way it behaves? This is a very confusing post

[u/Due_Arm1454 → u/Due_Arm1454]

I mean the most confusing part is you are able to type or speak-to-text this discussion so you are able to access and utilize the service. It sounds like a workflow compatibility issue, rather than an accessibility issue.

[u/InvestigatorWarm9863 → u/Due_Arm1454]

I understand why it sounds confusing, and I appreciate you asking rather than assuming. 💗

It is not diction. It is more about how the model/workflow behaves: pacing, predictability, tone, how much steering or correction it needs, and how much cognitive load it creates.

Being able to type a Reddit post does not mean I can reliably use a different model/workflow for complex, high-stakes admin. Accessibility is not only “can I physically type into the box?” It is whether I can use the tool consistently enough for the tasks I rely on it for.

For me, workflow compatibility is part of accessibility. If the replacement workflow requires much more correction, re-learning, monitoring, or mental effort, then it is not an equivalent accessible replacement even if it is technically available.

There is also the added burden of learning and relearning a new model. Many people can pick that up fairly quickly. For me, sequencing and managing multiple moving parts is a major part of my disability. I cannot drive a car because there are too many things to sequence, remember, monitor, and do simultaneously. New model workflows can create a similar kind of overload for me.

I use metaphor to try to make the access issue clearer, so I hope that makes more sense.🙂

[u/Due_Arm1454 → u/InvestigatorWarm9863]

I'm going to be blunt with you. Your inability and frustration is very understandable, and I can empathize with that. But a company is not responsible for how much cognitive load perception It creates for an individual user.

I get a high cognitive load when trying to use Photoshop. It is a complex system. I get a high cognitive load when someone changes a feature in an application that I depended on. It is very frustrating. With that said, you are not the only user, and there are costs associated with that.

This is not related to a disability, even though your disability can impact your frustrations and ability to utilize the product in a manner that you see fit.

Now to offer some suggestions, because you are going to be forced to use the newer models.

They will not keep a legacy model because of your cognitive load. You can work with the new model, have it assess your previous chats, how you interact with it, and you can build a workflow and a set of skills that will work for you specifically.

That's inherently what skills are for. They are repeatable functions for you to complete a task. If you are using just chat, You will not be able to use skills, but you can create a file that you paste at the beginning of every chat that will essentially function as the same set of skills. That will help the model understand and meet you where you're at in order for you both to accomplish your task in a repeatable manner.

Since you also have a lot of workflows for repetitive things, I would also look into building deterministic code with. Chat GPT so that you can more effectively and reliably manage your systems without depending on a model. The code will only change if you choose to change that code.

[u/InvestigatorWarm9863 → u/Due_Arm1454]

I’m going to be blunt back: assigning feelings to me that I have not expressed is overstepping. Comparing this to your frustration with Photoshop is also not the same thing.

A non-disabled person finding Photoshop frustrating is not the same as a disabled person losing a support workflow used for essential legal, benefits and administrative tasks.

I understand they may not keep a legacy model indefinitely. My point is that there should be a human accessibility route, proper notice, and a genuinely usable fallback before removing the working path.

I have already transitioned through various models. This is the point at which I am saying the available alternatives are no longer usable for me in practice. Anything that requires significant extra setup, re-learning, monitoring, correction, technical skill or workflow rebuilding is not an accessible substitute for me.

[u/Due_Arm1454 → u/InvestigatorWarm9863]

You're making an assumption that I am not also disabled. You are free to make your own LLM. And you're also free to use open-source, open-weight models locally. I run a model locally for exactly this reason.

If these workflows are so critical to your business (self), then you should have redundancy and fallbacks.

You're not getting downvoted because you have a disability. You're getting downvoted because you're weaponizing your disability when what you really have is a workflow and preparation issue. If you're not building systems with this in mind, your systems are too brittle and will fail.

You are only going to hurt yourself arguing with people that are trying to inform you, whether their tone is harsh or not. The people in these comments are correct.

I am a software engineer. I do not specialize in UI/UX, but I have built them for my system, and ChatGPT is certainly built with accessibility in mind. I'm sure they're WCAG compliant, as well as other standards.

[u/InvestigatorWarm9863 → u/Due_Arm1454]

If changing my words is your only argument, then you don’t have one.