The Americans With Disabilities Act--the disabilities rights law passed five years ago--is one of those grand concepts, like communism, which simply has not worked in practice. Its problem is its very grandness.
Deborah Stone's book, "The Disabled State," outlines the fear and trepidation with which governments approach disabilities. Not only must disability be defined clearly, but the degrees of disability and the matching degree of support and special privileges must be carefully defined. Otherwise there will be a stampede of unemployed nondisabled people claiming permanent disabilities benefits that will threaten the solvency of the state and private business.
The disabilities act ignores this crucial problem, going so far as giving special protections to those associated with disabled people and those who may not be disabled but are viewed as such. Further, it makes no distinction between severe disabilities and disabilities that cause inconvenience.
Much criticism of the act dwells on the alleged cost to private businesses and local government. This is a puzzling claim since the act is not even being enforced. It is nearly impossible to find a qualified lawyer willing to file ADA suits to enforce the law and administrative complaints take years.
The more important criticism is how little effect the law has had on the severely disabled. Their rights have been co-opted by the minimally disabled. Let me give you three examples.
* Handicapped parking, one of the greatest boons to this writer's disabled life when it was instituted, has been co-opted by the minimally and nondisabled. A recent DMV study shows that 38% of the handicapped placards in the three largest California cities are used illegally. This figure would skyrocket if it included those who persuade their private doctors to improperly authorize placards for them.
* The California Department of Rehabilitation, facing tight funding and an anticipated wave of newly coined, intangible disabilities claiming ADA coverage--such as multiple chemical sensitivity claims--has admitted it cannot serve all disabled people who come to it. For the first time, the agency is seeking to establish an order of who gets its benefits, starting with the most severely disabled.
