Search

This JAMA Insights article reviews Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) rules for patients, visitors, and other members of the public bringing service animals into health care settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

By Lois Elfman The pandemic has brought all students challenges, but none more than students with disabilities. On February 3, renowned disability rights advocate Judith Heumann held a virtual conversation [...]

INTRODUCTION 305 I. AUTOMATED TOOLS AND GUIDELINES FOR WEB ACCESSIBILITY 308 A. GUIDELINES 310 B. AUTOMATED TOOLS 312 II. EXISTING LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR WEB ACCESSIBILITY 314 A. STATUTES 314 B. [...]

In this chapter, we discuss the use of technology to enhance learning for students with physical disabilities and other health impairments. In recent years, there has been significant growth in numbers, diversity, and academic orientation of persons with physical disabilities and other health impairments; therefore, it is incumbent on special educators to adopt and use appropriate emerging innovative technology to enhance student learning. Impactful laws (Americans with Disabilities Act [ADA], Every Student Succeeds Act, Individuals with Disability Education Act, and Title II of ADA) provide impetus for advancing the policies on the use of technology by students with physical disabilities and other health impairments in the United States. The International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) Standards also guide the development of educators' digital literacies and pedagogical practices that will harness technology for student learning. This chapter is organized around the ISTE Standards, US Department of Education policies, and the use of technology to aid students with physical disabilities and other health impairments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Physical activity policy can play a crucial role in ensuring that individuals, communities, and societies can obtain the wide range of health benefits associated with regular physical activity participation. Policies such as Title IX, the Americans With Disabilities Act, and state physical education laws have all increased opportunities for millions of Americans to participate in physical activity. With that said, how policies are developed and implemented vary considerably. The purpose of this manuscript is to contrast an academic conceptual framework with a pragmatic approach for policy implementation. In an ideal world, polices would be developed from foundational knowledge, scaled up to community-level interventions, and implemented in a sequential fashion. However, policy implementation is a disorderly process that requires a practical methodology. The National Physical Activity Plan encompasses strategies and tactics across 10 key societal sectors—and highlights the disorderly process of policy implementation across the various sectors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the electronic age has taken hold of the global community, and digital devices have become the mainstay of human interaction, new accessibility barriers have emerged for people with disabilities. Although most courts now conclude virtual inaccessibility is an injury cognizable under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, great ambiguity surrounds the injury-in-fact requirement of Article III standing in online accessibility cases. Despite pleading for elucidation and clarifying principles, federal district courts have been left to navigate the uncharted territory of the digital injury-in-fact inquiry with exiguous guidance from higher courts. The resultant confusion in the federal courts has manifested itself as diametrically contradictory injury-in-fact holdings in factually identical cases, both inter- and intra-circuit. This Comment clarifies the digital injury-in-fact inquiry by identifying and dissecting four crucial issues dividing federal courts in ADA Title III online accessibility cases: (1) the location a plaintiff must intend to return; (2) the application of the geographic intent-to-return test factors in cyberspace; (3) the role of future injury; and (4) the scope of virtual standing. First, this Comment argues the destination of a plaintiff's intent to return is preordained by the type of injury alleged by the plaintiff. If a plaintiff alleges a purely virtual website injury, federal courts must assess the plaintiff's intent to return to the inaccessible website. If a plaintiff alleges a hybrid website injury, federal courts must assess the plaintiff's intent to return to the inaccessible website and intent to avail themselves to the goods or services of the public accommodation's brick-and-mortar location. Second, this Comment contends the geographic intent-to-return factors are not probative of a plaintiff's intent to return to a website. However, federal courts cannot merely remove the geographic factors from the intent-to-return test because the resulting analysis infringes on Supreme Court precedent. Rather, federal courts must substitute the intent-to-return test's geographic factors with factors appropriate in cyberspace. Third, this Comment asserts the injury-in-fact inquiry cannot be satisfied by past injury alone. Instead, federal courts must assess the plaintiff's likelihood of future injury. Finally, this Comment argues federal courts should not adopt a lenient approach to standing because a lenient approach is not necessitated by Supreme Court precedent, it is inconsistent with Supreme Court precedent, and it exacerbates the extant issue of serial litigation in online accessibility cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article focuses on the coming legal plight of workers in the United States, who will likely face discrimination as they search for work outside their home states. The Article takes for granted that climate change will have forced those workers across state and international boundaries, a reality dramatically witnessed in the United States during the Dust Bowl of the 1930s. During that environmental emergency (and the devastation it wrought), workers were forced across boundaries only to be violently discriminated against upon arrival in their new domiciles. Such discrimination is likely to recur, and it will threaten the livelihoods of workers across the country, especially the poor and workers from minority communities. While it may be tempting to believe that the current array of federal employment-discrimination laws is both comprehensive and flexible enough to meet the challenges ahead, the prevailing interpretations of federal employmentdiscrimination laws show that applicable federal law will not be able to respond. Specifically, the main federal statutes targeting employment discrimination, including the Equal Pay Act of 1963, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (1991) will be of limited utility to judges, workers, lawyers, and employers, among others, if Congress does not amend them. The Article is novel in at least three ways. First, it is the only article addressing the confluence of climate change and employment discrimination in the United States. Second, the Article is innovative in an additional way--it argues that groundbreaking recent precedent from the Supreme Court of the United States interpreting a federal employment anti-discrimination statute, notably Bostock v. Clayton County, does not cover employment discrimination based on climatic displacement. Third, the Article is the first to propose a number of climaterelated changes to federal employment-discrimination statutes to facilitate the work of judges, workers, lawyers, and employers, among others. The Article argues that in the absence of protection under federal law, claimants will likely turn to state employment-discrimination laws, state common-law causes of action, and constitutional claims under federal law that likely will provide inadequate relief. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Museums are key educational and cultural resources in the community, yet many are not accessible to visitors with disabilities. Universal design promotes products and environments usable to the greatest extent possible by all people, regardless of ability. This study explores current industry practice and perceptions of accessibility and universal design in a small sample of American museums. Suggestions for how occupational therapists can help museums go above and beyond ADA guidelines are provided. Method: An 17-item cross-sectional survey was used to collect data. Twenty-five museum associations assisted with recruitment. A descriptive numerical summary and qualitative analysis were used to summarize the results. Results: Sixty respondents participated in the survey. Accommodations for visitors with visual impairment and physical barriers created by historical buildings were identified as both challenges and successes by the respondents. Confusion between ADA standards and universal design was evident in several responses. Conclusion: The most frequently reported accessibility rating was good. Staff training and community-based partnerships are important, but often overlooked practices for improving accessibility. Local agencies who serve people with disabilities are underused resources in the community. There is a potential role for occupational therapists to assist museums with staff training, recruiting people with disabilities, and establishing community partnerships. Additional research is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article explores how Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) and Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 interact with artificial intelligence (AI) and employment bias and discrimination against and for people with disabilities. Under these sections, employers are prohibited from discrimination on the basis of disability in the hiring and employment process, yet technology that screens video interviews, applications, and other employee and prospective employee materials demonstrates bias and does not select disabled job candidates. These biases can run afoul of the ADA and raise ethical concerns. People with disabilities face disproportionately high unemployment rates compared to the general population. Technology often improves lives and access to opportunity, but AI has the potential to disrupt gains and progress made to improve the lives of disabled individuals. Part I of this Article analyzes AI and its relation to the disability rights and disability justice movements. Part II explains hiring biases and technology's relationship with disability. Part III is a thorough analysis of AI and disability bias in employment under Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act and Title I of the ADA. The concluding section of this Article offers some reflections on accessibility and equity within the workplace as it concerns people with disabilities and how AI can help, rather than hinder, disability hiring and eliminate bias, rather than continue to perpetuate it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Approximately half of Americans have an overweight or obese body mass index (BMI), yet weight discrimination is legal in nearly every jurisdiction. This means employers can set BMI limits, maximum weights, waist sizes, and more with no legal consequences. This Note examines the history of anti-fat bias and weight discrimination and how that motivates weight discrimination in employment and in the law generally. It then discusses possible solutions. Currently, most scholars propose prohibiting weight discrimination on a state level through legislation similar to Michigan's Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act or on a federal level by recognizing obesity as a disability protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). This Note proposes prohibiting weight discrimination by adding "weight" as a category protected under Title VII. As the cases discussed in this Note demonstrate, this is the most efficient and effective way to protect fat and non-fat employees alike from experiencing weight discrimination in the workplace. This Note discusses how Title VII would enable fat employees, in particular, to allege weight discrimination without needing to either prove that their weight physically disables them or having their weight deemed disabling regardless of its impact on their abilities. Employers should not be able to refuse to hire or to terminate an employee because of harmful stereotypes about fat people. Prohibiting weight discrimination on a federal level through Title VII would be an important step towards creating more inclusive work environments for all. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explores the legal protection and rights of theater actors with disabilities in the U.S. Topics discussed include the improvements in theater productions which may be attributed to the enforcement of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the employment discrimination being faced by actors with disabilities, and the statutory interpretation and application of affirmative action in cases involving said actors.

The opioid epidemic has brought the immense harms of substance abuse to the fore of national attention. Despite a growing bipartisan consensus that substance use disorders are best addressed through treatment and community support, rather than punitive deterrence measures, policymakers have yet to allocate the necessary resources for a comprehensive and evidence-based national drug policy. Until that occurs, advocates for individuals with substance use disorders must search for reform opportunities within existing law and policy. To that end, this Article explores whether, and to what degree, the federal disability statutes that are applicable to public schools—the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Americans with Disabilities Act—can “see” and serve adolescents with substance use disorders within the public school system. It argues that substance use disorders can be educationimpacting disabilities, that the general failure to recognize and address substance use disorders in school settings is due to widespread misperception of substance-involved students, and that a novel-butreasonable interpretation of existing law could provide a meaningful degree of support for certain students with substance use disorders. This Article has three objectives: (1) to instigate a debate in an uncharted area of education law and policy; (2) to provide a comprehensive survey of current medical research and special education case law for advocates of students with substance use disorders; and (3) to direct further attention to the broader inadequacies of special education law and policy for students with mental health challenges. The implications of this debate, upon the lives of the estimated 1.6 million adolescents with substance use disorders and upon education policy generally, are profound. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article provides an overview of the history and current status of federal disability discrimination law as it applies to institutions of higher education. It sets out the major issues of attention historically and provides a perspective on issues that most require current and focused attention because they are complex, changing, and high profile. It urges an approach that is proactive and encourages institutions not to just comply with the legal mandates, but to consider what actions can be done and should be done by balancing a range of concerns. Appreciation is expressed to Barbara Lee and Maxine Idakus for their exceptional editorial work on the article. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Research has long documented the low cost and effectiveness of most workplace accommodations to enable qualified people with disabilities to seek, secure, and maintain employment. OBJECTIVE AND METHOD: RETAIN Kentucky's return to work and stay at work intervention involves focused training for participants on requesting needed accommodations from their employers. RESULTS: In this article, we describe the win-win approach to reasonable accommodations, which serves as the basis for helping Kentuckians with disabilities identify and request on-the-job supports to aid in their efforts to remain in the workforce. CONCLUSIONS: Workers with disabilities are more likely to stay in the workforce and continue making valuable contributions to the national and global economies if they have effective accommodations and other employment supports available to them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The wave of remote work that has swept the nation since the COVID-19 pandemic has upended traditional notions about how and where work is performed. Advocates for disabled workers have lobbied for remote work for decades because the standard American workplace is designed around the nondisabled worker. The ability to work remotely is crucial to many workers with disabilities; it often determines whether they can maintain a job. And yet, most employers have refused to embrace remote work as a disability accommodation. This knee-jerk resistance to remote work has often been based on assumptions, past practice, and a lack of imagination rather than a careful, evidence-based examination of what is feasible and reasonable in a particular situation. In litigation, courts typically side with employers, basing their holdings on evidentiary practices that inevitably elevate employers' concerns over those of employees. This Article makes two unique contributions to the literature on remote work accommodations. First, it identifies and categorizes these sometimes subtle, but usually dispositive, evidentiary practices and analyzes how each is legally unsound. What the pandemic has taught us about remote work further erodes the bases for these practices, rendering them indefensible. Courts should abandon these evidentiary shenanigans. Second, this Article studies federal remote work accommodations decisions between April 2020 and December 2022. Results are mixed, but there are hopeful signs that some courts are changing practices in light of the mountain of data our pandemic-induced nationwide remote work experiment has generated. This change would be a welcome development for disabled plaintiffs that would help ensure they have a fair chance in court. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article explores the connections between disability and health justice in service of further tethering the two theories and practices. The author contends that disability should shift from marker of health inequity alone to critical demographic in the analytical and practical application of health justice. This theoretical move creates a more robust understanding of the harms of health injustice, its complexities, and, remedially, reveals underexplored legal and policy pathways to promote health justice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The American with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act have made little progress towards preventing disability-based discrimination within the organ transplant evaluation process. Intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD) pose a unique problem for transplant teams and transplant physicians because I/DDs can simultaneously be a legitimate contraindication for transplantation and a mechanism for invidious discrimination against intellectually disabled persons. A culprit for ongoing disability-based discrimination is a transplant center's authority to develop its own eligibility criteria. While medical criteria for eligibility are generally well-settled, psychosocial criteria — an amorphous constellation of risk factors for post-transplant success — can serve as a facially neutral disguise for social worth determinations of individuals with I/DDs. Consequently, individuals with I/DDs are unjustifiably denied eligibility for organ transplantation and transplant-related services. This Article begins by identifying the pitfalls of current federal antidiscrimination legislation. It then discusses the foreseen benefits and drawbacks of House Resolution (H.R.) 8981, a recently proposed federal bill, that expressly prohibits disability-based discrimination within the organ transplant evaluation process. The Article ends by offering potential solutions for professional organizations and transplant centers that aim to provide for equitable access to organ transplantation and transplant-related services for intellectually disabled individuals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The decision to disclose an illness is a difficult choice for many individuals. Despite national laws such Americans with Disabilities Act that protect workers with disabilities from discrimination in the workplace, the stigmas around certain illnesses, fears of being judged by others using different standards, and concerns about a lack of support regardless of legal requirements are all reasons why someone may hesitate to disclose a health condition in the workplace. Design/methodology/approach: Using experimentally manipulated vignettes and a combination of theories on attribution and incivility, this study explores the dangers of not disclosing a disability/condition that can lead to behaviors that will engender judgments by coworkers. Findings: The results of the study make clear that there are social benefits to disclosing a health condition rather than concealing. The findings clearly demonstrate that attributing an individual's negative behavior to their disposition will lead to more judgments of responsibility, and less sympathy and more anger compared to behaviors that can be explained by any health reason. Furthermore, more punishment, feelings of revenge and social distancing await individuals whose negative behavior cannot be explained by health issues. Originality/value: This study combines issues of health, attributions, incivility in an experimental studies that illuminates issues surround disclosing a workplace disability that go beyond the typical focus of legal questions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most patients have limited to no prior knowledge of what radiation therapy for their cancer entails or what to expect. We thus developed animated videos that explain expectations of radiation, treatment effects, and interventions to help manage side effects, with the following overarching objectives: • Prevent or minimize radiation-induced toxicity and help patients better understand radiation therapy by producing professional, animated videos that explain concepts in a clear and captivating manner • Advance health equity and reduce disparities by improving accessibility and wider reach of the videos through translation of voiceover audio into other languages and English and non-English captions that adhere to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) for American Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines We worked directly with an award-winning animator from the UCLA Animation Workshop in the Department of Film, Television and Digital Media to illustrate and build tiered videos. The initial scope of this library first covers treatment for head and neck (H&N) malignancies. We created the script and structure of each video with approval from the H&N service chief at our institution. Once scripts were finalized, the storyboard for each video was created on ToonBoom Storyboard Pro, combining the script with a given animation frame, broken down by the timing of each panel. Animation was then completed by our animator using Adobe Animate, and professional voiceover work was recorded for the audio track in a sound booth. The final video was edited to combine the animation with the audio track. Each step as outlined above was successfully performed, with the completion of scriptwriting, storyboarding, animation, and voiceover audio for the first step of a video "Skin Care Management" highlighting radiation dermatitis, which can be viewed here: www.rachel-cooley.com/ucla-oncology. The remaining aspects of the library of topics are actively under production; the framework includes "What is radiation treatment?", "Controlling pain", "Optimizing nutrition", and "Reducing oral sores". In addition, scripts are being translated into the top most commonly spoken non-English languages in LA County, with Spanish being the first priority. Spanish audio voiceover work, and closed captioning in English and Spanish, will closely follow. The animated videos with language and accessibility adaptations will provide value to the radiation oncology community by easing patient apprehension surrounding radiation treatment, increasing patient adherence to toxicity management regimens to lessen the rate and severity of side effects, and strengthening trust and enhancing communication between patients and providers. The library will grow beyond H&N cancer to other sites of disease. They can eventually be transferred for use at other institutions through partnerships and academic collaboration, and tailored to match each provider and each community's need. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This document is a response to a research letter discussing the residency match process for medical school applicants with disabilities. The author, who became paraplegic at a young age, emphasizes the importance of strong mentorship for medical students with disabilities. They share their personal experience of being supported and empowered by mentors throughout their academic and professional journey. The author highlights the need for formal mentoring programs, especially in low- and middle-income countries, and emphasizes the value of a mentor-mentee relationship that fosters a friendly and open atmosphere of dialogue. [Extracted from the article]

"A bove all, the [Americans with Disabilities Act] is about one clear and forth-right message: That discrimination of any kind has no place in America.... Discrimination no longer has a [...]

Table of Contents I. Foreword II. Introduction III. Background A. History and Scope of the ADA B. Age of the Internet: Access for the Visually Impaired C. (Un)Accessible: Continuing Barriers [...]