Paul Cronan Case

16 Pages 4093 Words

I. LEGAL ANALYSIS – ISSUE ONE

Are AIDS patients such as Paul Cronan protected by the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)?

Rule:

According to the US Department of Justice, the ADA prohibits discrimination in all employment practices, including job application procedures, hiring, firing, advancement, compensation, training, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment. It applies to recruitment, advertising, tenure, layoff, leave, fringe benefits, and all other employment-related activities.

To secure protection from discrimination under the ADA, an individual first must show that she has 1) an impairment which 2) substantially limits 3) a major life activity, or that the individual is regarded as having such impairment by the person who is discriminating against her.

Analysis:

It is imperative to determine whether or not having contracted AIDS qualifies an individual for protection under the ADA. In 1998, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in the case Bradgon v. Abbott that individuals with HIV or AID are protected under the ADA. Although the Supreme Court stopped short of concluding that HIV is always, automatically, a disability for purposes of coverage under the ADA, it did note that the concept of "asymptomatic HIV" is something of a misnomer because of the virus' constant, destructive activity and therefore HIV is always an impairment under the ADA.

Conclusion:

By a vote of 5 to 4, the majority of the court concluded, that HIV represented an impairment which substantially limits reproduction, and that reproduction is a major life activity under the ADA. I agree with the courts decision in this case. This precedent should be extended to Cronan’s situation and provide him the necessary protection.

Under the terms of the ADA, Cronan’s rights were violated. O’Brian had the legal right to inform management about Cronan’s aliment due to the fact that the disease would cause him to be absen...