Bridging the Physical-Mental Gap: An Empirical Look at the Impact of Mental Illness Stigma on ADA Outcomes
Tennessee Law Review
A plaintiff who seeks redress for disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act must first show that he or she is "disabled" within the meaning of the statute. There is no question that all plaintiffs have experienced difficulty in making this showing as a result of several Supreme Court decisions narrowing the definition of "disability. "Many scholars have argued that courts do not appreciate the social construction of disability and focus too much attention on medical diagnoses and functional limitations rather than the impact of societal attitudes and prejudices. Some scholars have gone further, however, to theorize that individuals alleging mental impairments face even greater challenges than physically-impaired litigants in this regard, in large part because of the persistent stigma attached to group members by many Americans, including judges. This Article represents one of the first attempts to ascertain empirically whether mentally-impaired litigants experiencing psychiatric disorders are disadvantaged vis-à-vis those with physical impairments in establishing membership in the protected class under the ADA.
Wendy F. Hensel & Gregory Todd Jones, Bridging the Physical-Mental Gap: An Empirical Look at the Impact of Mental Illness Stigma on ADA Outcomes, 73 Tenn. L. Rev. 47 (2005).
Institutional Repository Citation
Hensel, Wendy F. and Jones, Gregory Todd, "Bridging the Physical-Mental Gap: An Empirical Look at the Impact of Mental Illness Stigma on ADA Outcomes" (2005). Faculty Publications By Year. 255.
This document is currently not available here.