When cases of parents killing or abusing disabled children hit the media, it’s common to see these parents treated sympathetically. Reports typically discuss how they were “pushed to the breaking point” or “under too much stress,” dehumanizing the victims or seeming to forget them altogether.
Look closely at the footnotes, and you’ll see that new EEOC guidelines related to workplace pregnancy discrimination say employers who fail to cover birth control could be guilty of employment discrimination.
The Roberts Court is poised to clarify what employers must do to accommodate pregnant workers on the job. This could be terrible news.
In attempting to reverse troubling unemployment trends among persons with disabilities, disability rights advocacy groups are looking to the health-care sector as a solution.
Even with a packed docket, the Roberts Court could find room to take up important cases on pregnant workers’ rights as well as a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade.
In addition to cases on abortion clinic buffer zones and legislative prayer, the Roberts Court may take up the question of whether, and when, employers must make temporary employment accommodations for pregnant workers.
Though many thought this issue was settled in the 1980s, a school system in Arkansas has demanded to know the HIV status of three siblings, saying their behavior poses a risk to students and staff.
Democrats introduced a bill designed to remedy pregnancy discrimination in the workplace. Will any Republicans support it?
A new ploy to close down a local clinic that provides abortions was rejected by the federal government.
Like many people with a developmentally disabled family member I welcome the introduction of the needs of the developmentally disabled into national policy debates. But we need policies and funding, not promises.