The Interaction of Legislation, Public Attitudes, and Access to Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities

Abstract

Introduction The population of Americans with disabilities has risen dramatically in the last quarter century, increasing by 37% between 1966 and 1976 alone (DeJong & Lifchez, 1983). Recent estimates of the size of the population of this country's citizens with disabilities range from 35 million (DeJong & Lifchez, 1983; Gartner & Joe, 1987) to recent Congressional estimate of 43 million persons (U.S. Congress, 1990). Members of this expanding population are more than twice as likely as their nondisabled peers to be poor (DeJong & Lifchez, 1983; Louis Harris & Associates, 1986). Much of this poverty among persons with disabilities can be attributed to insufficient employment opportunities. For example, in 1986 only 33% of citizens with disabilities between the ages of 16 and 64 were working, while two-thirds of those unemployed indicated an interest in working (Louis Hams & Associates, 1986). These statistics become even more negative when compounded with the reality that individuals with disabilities who are employed tend to earn substantially less than their nondisabled counterparts (Jackman, 1983). Insufficient or underemployment opportunities and consequent inadequate income can create shut-in status for many persons with disabilities. Therefore, not surprisingly, citizens with disabilities are found to have significantly fewer opportunities than their nondisabled counterparts to participate in social activities, such as attendance at movies and sporting events, or even eating out in restaurants (Louis Hams & Associates, 1986). These problems of poverty, unemployment and underemployment, and associated social isolation are, in part, attributable to denial of basic civil rights to citizens with disabilities. This paper addresses the notion of rights of persons with disabilities and examines the barriers in our society that thwart their realization. The integral part that negative, stereotypical attitudes toward this emerging minority play in this process will be delineated. An examination of the Americans with Disabilities Act (P.L. 101-336) and its promise of meaningful equal opportunity and full social participation for citizens with disabilities will be discussed. Finally, the authors will examine how the passage of the ADA will significantly improve the attitudes of the nondisabled majority toward this emerging minority. Disability The opportunities that citizens enjoy in this country are guaranteed by certain legal rights. Prior to the enactment of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, equal opportunity rights for citizens with disabilities were legislatively unprotected. With the passage of Section 504 of Title V of this historic act, often called the Bill of Rights for citizens with disabilities, persons with disabilities were recognized as being the target of discrimination and their civil rights were at least partially protected by law (Jackman, 1983; Rubin & Roessler, 1987). While the 1973 act considerably narrowed the discrepancy between the opportunities afforded citizens with and without disabilities in our society, many barriers to equal opportunity still exist for the former group. The foremost barrier to equal opportunity is an insidious obstacle: negative attitudes and unfounded beliefs, invisible and often disguised. This barrier has greatly limited the opportunities of individuals with disabilities throughout history (Rubenfeld, 1988). Bogdan and Biklen (1977) describe this prejudice as handicapism, and define it as a set of assumptions and practices that promote the differential and unequal treatment of people because of apparent or assumed physical, mental, or behavioral differences. A second significant barrier is created by the ineffectual, often paternalistic public policy concerning disability issues. These two barriers are intimately related, and their impact upon the opportunities afforded individuals with disabilities is substantial. …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 13 citations exist upstream.