To meet the ADA’s definition of “disabled,” an individual must actually satisfy a number of technical, definitional criteria.
The ADA defines “disability” as “(a) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of an individual; (b) a record of having such impairment; (c) or being regarded as having such impairment.”
The ADA does not change the ADA’s basic definition of “disability” as an impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, a record of such an impairment, or being regarded as having such an impairment. But it changes the way it should be interpreted in several ways. The EEOC provides the ADA:
- directs EEOC to revise that portion of its regulations defining the term “substantially limits;”
- expands the definition of the “major life activities” by including two non-exhaustive lists:
- the first list includes many activities that the EEOC has recognized (e.g., walking) as well as activities that EEOC has not specifically recognized (e.g., reading, bending, and communicating);
- the second list includes major bodily functions (e.g., “functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, endocrine, and reproductive functions”);
- states that mitigating measures other than “ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses” shall not be considered in assessing whether an individual has a disability;
- clarifies that an impairment that is episodic or in remission is a disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when active;
- changes the definition of “regarded as” so that it no longer requries a showing that the employer perceived the individual to be substantially limited in a major life activitiy, and instead says that an applicant or employee is “regarded as” disabled if he or she is subject to an action prohibited by the ADA (e.g., failure to hire or termination) based on an impairment that is not transitory and minor;
- provides that individuals covered only under the “regarded as” prong are not entitled to reasonable accommodation.
Having a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of an individual.
This definition requires the individual to satisfy three additional definitional criteria:
(1) “physical or mental impairment”
(2) “substantially limits”
(3) “major life activities”
As a practical matter, determining whether a person has a physical or mental impairment in many instances is based on whether the person has been diagnosed with some type of disease, an injury, developmental delay, or what is generally considered to be a debilitating condition. The condition may be physical, mental, or intellectual.
Examples of such conditions may include HIV, tuberculosis, diabetes, schizophrenia, loss of a limb or an eye, IQ of lower than 70-75 and so on. The duration of the disease or injury is significant in meeting the definition of “impairment” for a disabilities-discrimination claim. Short-term conditions that generally are resolved, like colds, broken legs, and occasional feelings of depression, have not been found to be
Thus, once a person satisfies the first element of “disability,” that he has a physical or mental impairment, he must next demonstrate as well that this impairment “substantially limits him in a major life activity.” An apparent court-created exception to this general rule may be the HIV condition, which the U.S. Supreme Court indicated was “inherently disabling” in the Bragdon v. Abbott case.
What is a “major life activity” for purposes of the ADA?
EEOC regulations specifically list some activities, such as caring for one’s self, performing manual tasks, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning and working. Other major life activities not listed in the regulations have also been recognized by the EEOC or the courts, which most recently defined a major life activity as “activities that are of central importance to most people’s daily lives” in the Toyota v. Williams case. Major life activities can include the ability to reproduce and, in some circumstances, the ability to interact with others.
To be considered to be disabled, a person must be “substantially limited” in her ability to perform a major life activity. While this term is not defined in the EEOC regulations concerning the ADA, the requirement appears to be met in cases where a person can show that she is substantially or severely restricted in her ability to perform the major life activity in question. One area where the courts have clarified what is meant by “substantially limited” is in their treatment of the major life activity of “work.” It is now clear from case law that for a person to be substantially limited in the major life activity of “work,” more is required than a demonstration of a physical or mental inability to perform a particular job. Rather, she must prove an inability to perform a broad class of jobs, or a number of jobs in various classes, due to an impairment, in comparison to jobs that can be performed by non-disabled persons with similar training and skills.
The EEOC, and many courts, initially took the position that a disability should properly be determined by the person’s limitations in the absence of corrective devices, such as glasses, or hearing aids, or medications. However, in the Sutton case discussed in the text, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the determination of whether or not a person was disabled must be made considering the limitations of the condition when allowing for available corrective measures. Thus, for example, a person with 20/20 vision without glasses will no longer be viewed as being disabled if she can correct her vision to 20/20 by wearing glasses.
Under the ADA, whether an impairment substantially limits a major life activity is determined “without regard to the effects of any mitigating measures.” Impairment that is in remission or occurs intermittently can still be a disability as long as it substantially limits a major life activity when it occurs.
Having a record of a disability
Satisfying the “disability” element of a disability discrimination claim may also be accomplished if a person can show that he has a record of having a “disability” in the past, even if he no longer suffers from such disability. Note that having a record of a disability means more than having a record of having suffered from a diagnosed physical or mental impairment. The employer must know that the prior condition substantially limited the person in a major life activity. The Arline case discussed in the text is a good example of this requirement, as it discusses not only that the plaintiff suffered from the diagnosed condition of tuberculosis, but also that she had been substantially limited in the major life activity of breathing, evidenced by her hospitalization for impaired breathing.
Being regarded as having a disability
The third way of proving that an individual has a disability is to demonstrate that the employer regarded the individual as having a disability when it took an adverse employment action against him, even though in fact the individual did not suffer from any disability. On the level of public policy, this aspect of the definition of disability in the ADA was intended to combat stereotyping of persons who suffer from some visible or diagnosed condition that does not actually limit them in performing jobs, but are wrongly perceived by others as being so limited with the result that they suffer employment discrimination. This definition of disability protects both persons who have impairments but in fact are not substantially limited in their ability to perform jobs for employers, and persons who are believed by an employer to have an impairment when in fact they do not. An example of the first type of person perceived to be disabled would be a person who has a skin disease and is not hired by an employer into a job involving outside work because the employer wrongly believes that the person is medically unable to tolerate sun exposure, when in fact such exposure is irrelevant to her condition. An example of the second type of person is one who is fired because the employer believes that he has HIV, but the employee in fact does not have the condition.
The ADA provides better clarification with this element. A plaintiff must show that the employer regarded him as having an impairment and regarded him as being substantially limited in a major life activity due to the impairment.