July #25 : Control Issues - by Laurence R. Helfer

POZ - Health, Life and HIV
Subscribe to:
POZ magazine
Newsletters
Join POZ: Facebook MySpace Twitter Pinterest
Tumblr Google+ Flickr MySpace
POZ Personals
Sign In / Join
Username:
Password:

Back to home » Archives » POZ Magazine issues




Table of Contents

Tommy Morrison Wants You To Believe

Tom Coburn Talks AIDS

True Colors

Dances with Wolff

Mother Mary

S.O.S.

At Least, a Cure for Crypto?

AIDS Zen: Sports and Exercise

Masturbation Manifesto

Medal Man: Jim Howley (POZ December 1994/January 1995)

Cyclic antidepressants

Vitaly Vitamin

Work Your Booty

An Exercise in Utility

Go with Your Gut

Positoid: Let It Bleed

Health: Water Sports

Sex: How to be a Sex Goddess

Sean Goes Hetero

Control Issues

Dissent in the House



Most Popular Lessons

The HIV Life Cycle

Shingles

Herpes Simplex Virus

Syphilis & Neurosyphilis

Treatments for Opportunistic Infections (OIs)

What is AIDS & HIV?

Hepatitis & HIV


email print

July 1997

Control Issues

by Laurence R. Helfer

Your health's back. Now you may lose your disability protection

A sea change in the perception of HIV is under way. It's well known by now that three-drug protease cocktails dramatically improve the health of many who, just yesterday it seems, were gravely ill. But less widely reported is the effect these drugs may have on the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability. Anyone worried about keeping a job, obtaining health care or accessing government programs should know how to help ensure the act continues to make HIV-based bias illegal.

The issue is, should a disability be measured with or without considering whether the person's illness can be controlled by medication? The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the government agency charged with interpreting the ADA, believes that disability status should be determined "without regard to mitigating measures such as medicines." Early federal court decisions agreed, based on the view that HIV infection leads to progressive illness and death. But in the last year, several judges have changed course, arguing that a drug-controlled illness is not a disability if it does not limit major life activities. Under these rulings, plaintiffs with diabetes, high blood pressure and vision problems have failed to qualify as disabled. But other courts still respect the EEOC interpretation, and the Supreme Court will likely soon decide to resolve the conflict.

Although no court has considered this issue as it applies to HIV, the new, stricter reading raises a red flag. Now that the protease drugs can reduce virus to undetectable levels, employers may also try to argue that without HIV in the blood, there is no illness or disability. There are a number of ways that HIV positive people who believe they have been discriminated against can fight back. HIV is not (yet) a drug-controlled illness like diabetes: The new treatments are still in their infancy, and whether their effects will last remains unknown. For some people, the drugs pack little or no anti-HIV punch, or cause intolerable side effects. As a result, people on protease who continue to have OIs or side effects that limit their activities will not be barred from bringing a lawsuit.

But what if the cocktail makes symptoms vanish? One way around the problem is to show past AIDS-related disability. The ADA protects not only the currently disabled but those who have a history of impairment yet are not currently ill. So if the drugs work their magic, a record of past illness may itself be enough to claim ADA protection. Even some conservative federal judges stress the act's focus on the "intermittent manifestation" of OIs rather than on HIV infection per se.

The ADA also protects people who do not meet the definition of disability but are "regarded as" disabled and discriminated against as a result. This aspect of the statute is designed to dispel baseless stereotypes about illness and disease that harm in the same way as racism and sexism. If an employer, health care professional or government official treats an asymptomatic HIV positive person as if he or she is disabled, all ADA remedies for illegal discrimination apply with full force.

Like many features of the post-protease environment, the legal landscape remains fluid. But as the courts continue to debate the issue, and the drugs' long-term effects become clearer, one thing is certain: HIV positive people, whatever their health status, should know their rights under the ADA and use every available argument to battle bias.


Scroll down to comment on this story.





Name:

(will display; 2-50 characters)

Email:

(will NOT display)

City:

(will display; optional)

Comment (500 characters left):

(Note: The POZ team reviews all comments before they are posted. Please do not include either ":" or "@" in your comment. The opinions expressed by people providing comments are theirs alone. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Smart + Strong, which is not responsible for the accuracy of any of the information supplied by people providing comments.)

Comments require captcha.
Please enter this number for verification:

| Posting Rules



Hide comments

Previous Comments:


         

[Go to top]

Facebook Twitter Google+ MySpace YouTube Tumblr Flickr Instagram
Quick Links
Current Issue

HIV Testing
Safer Sex
Find a Date
Newly Diagnosed
HIV 101
Disclosing Your Status
Starting Treatment
Help Paying for Meds
Search for the Cure
POZ Stories
POZ Opinion
POZ Exclusives
Read the Blogs
Visit the Forums
Job Listings
Events Calendar
POZ on Twitter

Ask POZ Pharmacist

Talk to Us
Poll
Have you ever been diagnosed with diabetes or pre-diabetes?
Yes
No

Survey
Pop Watch

more surveys
Contact Us
We welcome your comments!
[ about Smart + Strong | about POZ | POZ advisory board | partner links | advertising policy | advertise/contact us | site map]
© 2014 Smart + Strong. All Rights Reserved. Terms of use and Your privacy.
Smart + Strong® is a registered trademark of CDM Publishing, LLC.