I've had to testify by subpoena (i.e. had no choice) in a somewhat unrelated ADA discrimination case against my employer, and had to be cautious about identifying retaliation for it.
So, with all that, I can be certain in telling you, based on all the research and other work I've done, and professional contacts I've made, that I know it isn't those with HIV, mental illness, drug/alcohol addictions, and behavioral disabilities... the ones targeted by the Texas GOP as the ones who are "abusing the ADA."
The vast majority of abuses and law suits under the ADA do not come from those mentioned in above in the TX Platform, but from money grubbing attorneys who find money grubbing wheelchair user who will go up and down a business corridor and file suit after suit for alleged inaccessibility and claim "pain & suffering" and "mental anguish" because of things like a toilet handle on the wrong side of the toilet, or a ramped entrance is 5' farther from the doors than the parking area, or a parking space with a 3' sign instead of a 6' sign, as it should be. These are the abuses. If your toilet handle IS on the wrong side, you can fight it in court and lose, having to pay your attorney and the attorney fees of the person who was "discriminated" against.... OR you can settle and pay the plaintiff's fees and monetary "damages" and the hope you have enough left to actually fix the problem before the next assembly-line plaintiff comes in.
The Texas GOP Platform inaccurately portraying homosexuality as a disability is nothing but a way to turn the public against the ADA in general... ("My God! Can you believe what this ridiculous law protects!!??" Get rid of it, Senator/Congressman, if you want my vote!") Do you really think people will READ the law? Or just acept what lawmakers tell them? Hell, regardless of your opinions of the USA Patriot Act, the fact is that lawmakers didn't even read the law before they approved it because their constituents thought the parts they heard would protect them from terrorists! Whether it does or not doesn't matter... They voted for it so they wouldn't get booted out of officve by pissed off constituents. Same thing with the ADA... Convince people of something, true or not, and THEY determine a representatives position, support, or vote for/against it.
** In the ADA, the definitions include many people, even those who may not consider themselves disabled but who the general public, businesses, and employers may consider disabled:
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS. 42 USC 12102
(2) Disability. The term disability means, with respect to an individual
(A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially
limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual;
(B) a record of such an impairment; or
(C) being regarded as having such an impairment.
and,
(8) Qualified individual with a disability. The term qualified individual with a disability means an individual with a disability who, with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the essential functions of the employment position that such individualholds or desires. For the purposes of this title, consideration shall be given to the employers judgment as to what functions of a job are essential, and if an employer has prepared a written description before advertising or interviewing applicants for the job, this description shall be considered evidence of the essential functions of the job.
** Those who need assistance or modifications to perform a job, are offered the protection of being assured access to a "reasonable accommodation." On average, every study thus far has shown that the average reasonable accommodation costs an employer less than $200. (Giving someone a wheelchair is not a reasonabble accommodation... that's a personal item.)
(9) Reasonable accommodation. The term reasonable accommodation may
include
(A) making existing facilities used by employees
readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities; and
(B) job restructuring, part-time or modified work
schedules, reassignment to a vacant position, acquisition or modification
of equipment or devices, appropriate adjustment or modifications of examinations,
training materials or policies, the provision of qualified readers or interpreters,
and other similar accommodations for individuals with disabilities.
** The provisions of the ADA with regard to HIV/AIDS actually protect the general public from these and other communicable diseases (see below). Eliminating HIV/AIDS from the definitions may, in fact, be dangerous to everyone if someone is not disabled and not afforded the protection of a reasonable accommodation under the Act.
SEC. 103. DEFENSES. 42 USC 12113.
(d) List of Infectious and Communicable Diseases.
(1) In general. The Secretary of Health and Human Services,
not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act, shall
(A) review all infectious and communicable
diseases which may be transmitted through handling the food supply;
(B) publish a list of infectious and
communicable diseases which are transmitted through handling the food supply;
(C) publish the methods by which such
diseases are transmitted; and
(D) widely disseminate such information
regarding the list of diseases and their modes of transmissability to the
general public.
** Such list shall be updated annually.
(2) Applications. In any case in which an individual has an infectious or communicable disease that is transmitted to others through the handling of food, that is included on the list developed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services under paragraph (1), and which cannot be eliminated by reasonable accommodation, a covered entity may refuse to assign or continue to assign such individual to a job involving food handling.
** The ADA also protects those associated with people with a disability or regarded as having a disability. Under "Public Accommodations," it specifically prohibits discriminating against a person who is associated with someone with a disability. Same goes for jobs...
SEC. 302. PROHIBITION OF DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS. 42
USC 12182.
(a) General Rule
(1) General Prohibition
(E) (E) Association. It shall be discriminatory
to exclude or otherwise deny equal goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages, accommodations, or other opportunities to an individual or
entity because of the known disability of an individual with whom the
individual or entity is known to have a relationship or association.
Ok... Wrapping Up
---------------------------
So, if YOU have HIV/AIDS and it "substantially limits one or more of the major life activities" (i.e. having to take a longer work break to take medications, for instance, would be an accommodation for such a situation if you agree to work earlier and later to make up on-duty hours) ... you are disabled or regarded as being disabled even if you don't consider yourself disabled.
Now, if your spouse applies for a job and is turned down because he/she might have to take care of you longer at home if/when you get ill, he/she has also been discriminated against by being associated with you because you have HIV/AIDS or another communicable disease.
If you get fired because you ask for leave to care for your spouse during some critical period of their mental impairment (another group the TX GOP wants removed from definitions of "disabled")... but a person who asks for leave to care for a family member beginning chemotherapy is not fired, then you are discriminated against because you are associated with a person with a disability.
Educate yourselves while it's still in effect! Then decide. Once it's gone, it's tough to get it back!
Best Wishes to All!
Tod
