After the plaintiff establishes a prima facie case, the burden of production then shifts to the defendant “to articulate some legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason” for its decision. Then, the burden shifts back to the plaintiff to show that the defendant’s articulated reasons are mere pretext for discrimination. However, employers can assert various defenses for defending a disability discrimination claim. This includes undue hardship if reasonable accommodation cannot be made and the business necessity defense. This also includes the direct threat defense, which is discussed in Part II.B below.
Since its enactment in 1990, however, the ADA has failed to protect many individuals with disabilities in part because of a misunderstanding …show more content…
Arline. Following Arline, Congress codified the Rehabilitation Act’s direct threat defense and incorporated into the ADA. In Arline, after a school discharged Gene Arline, an elementary school teacher, after he relapsed from tuberculosis for the third time, Arline brought suit against the school under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. The issues were whether tuberculosis is a contagious disease under the meaning of “handicapped,” and if so, whether Arline was “otherwise qualified” to teach elementary school. After concluding Arline was a handicapped individual, the Supreme Court remanded the case to the district court to determine whether she is otherwise qualified to perform the job of a teacher. While the Supreme Court determined that courts should defer to the reasonable medical judgment of public health officials, it did not address whether courts should defer to the reasonable medical judgments of physicians on which an employer …show more content…
The inquiry needed to be based on “reasonable medical judgments given the state of medical knowledge.” The Court also identified four factors to consider in assessing whether a risk of harm is significant: (1) duration of risk, (2) nature and severity of the potential harm, (3) the likelihood that the potential harm will occur and (4) the imminence of the potential harm. Employers use these four factors in its determination of whether an individual poses a significant risk. The two-part direct threat standard along with the four criteria to consider that was set forth in Arline was expressly included when Congress enacted the ADA and served as the framework in the ADA’s direct threat
Since its enactment in 1990, however, the ADA has failed to protect many individuals with disabilities in part because of a misunderstanding …show more content…
Arline. Following Arline, Congress codified the Rehabilitation Act’s direct threat defense and incorporated into the ADA. In Arline, after a school discharged Gene Arline, an elementary school teacher, after he relapsed from tuberculosis for the third time, Arline brought suit against the school under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. The issues were whether tuberculosis is a contagious disease under the meaning of “handicapped,” and if so, whether Arline was “otherwise qualified” to teach elementary school. After concluding Arline was a handicapped individual, the Supreme Court remanded the case to the district court to determine whether she is otherwise qualified to perform the job of a teacher. While the Supreme Court determined that courts should defer to the reasonable medical judgment of public health officials, it did not address whether courts should defer to the reasonable medical judgments of physicians on which an employer …show more content…
The inquiry needed to be based on “reasonable medical judgments given the state of medical knowledge.” The Court also identified four factors to consider in assessing whether a risk of harm is significant: (1) duration of risk, (2) nature and severity of the potential harm, (3) the likelihood that the potential harm will occur and (4) the imminence of the potential harm. Employers use these four factors in its determination of whether an individual poses a significant risk. The two-part direct threat standard along with the four criteria to consider that was set forth in Arline was expressly included when Congress enacted the ADA and served as the framework in the ADA’s direct threat