In a message dated 10/19/00 9:03:45 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
<<<Also, does it protect people who
may encounter discrimination because of their association with disabled
people? >>
Yes.
<< US federal anti discriimination law as cited by Claudia - does it cover
HIV, AIDS and similar infectious diseases?
Yes, usually. Although you have to show a "substantial limitation" in a
"major life activity," and this has raised some issues for persons with
asymptomatic HIV. Some courts have said that persons with asymptomatic HIV
are substantially limited in sexual relations and in interacting with others
due to stigma. Some courts (including the US Supreme Court) have said that a
person with HIV may be substantially limited in reproduction due to the
chance that the virus may be passed on to the child. That case was a
challenge brought by a woman within childbearing years. Other courts have
said that this only applies to people with HIV who want to have children, so
have said that a man or woman with HIV who has never expressed an interest in
having children is not disabled. (Hun?) Lawyers have argued that persons
with HIV are limited in the major life activity fighting infections, but I
haven't seen a court adopt that. To me, persons with HIV are living with a
life-threatening and life-long condition, so should be protected. But
because of the "major life activity" framework, that concept has to be framed
as the major life activity is life itself, or the major life activity is
planning into the future, or the major life activity is life expectancy, or
something like that . . .
Claudia
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|