NCJ Number
112471
Journal
Creighton Law Review Volume: 21 Issue: 3 Dated: (1987-1988) Pages: 943-964
Date Published
1988
Length
22 pages
Annotation
Until recently, it has been unclear whether section 504 of the Federal Rehabilitation Act applies to persons with AIDS; and in addition, has not been clear whether a person who is infected with the AIDS virus is considered handicapped for the purposes of the Act and, if handicapped, nevertheless qualified for employment.
Abstract
The article provides background on and analysis of the statute and regulations developed to implement the statute by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. In interpreting the statute as it relates to AIDS victims, the U.S. Department of Justice concluded in 1986 that Congress did not intend the Act to protect those suffering from communicable diseases such as AIDS. The Justice Department memorandum also concluded that while a full-blown AIDS infection was a handicap, lesser degrees of the illness required individual scrutiny to determine if they were handicapping. The Justice Department memorandum also argued that a person with AIDS would probably not be otherwise qualified and therefore could be justifiably denied employment. However, in School Board of Nassau County v. Arline, the U.S. Supreme Court held that one who has a debilitating disease that is communicable is handicapped under the Federal Rehabilitation Act. A case relating AIDS to the Act is Thomas v. Atascadero Unified School District, in which a child infected with HIV was held to be handicapped under the Act. 208 footnotes.