TY - JOUR
T1 - ADA-based accommodations in higher education
T2 - A survey of clinicians about documentation requirements and diagnostic standards
AU - Gordon, Michael
AU - Lewandowski, Lawrence
AU - Murphy, Kevin
AU - Dempsey, Kim
PY - 2002
Y1 - 2002
N2 - The expansion of the number of students requesting accommodations in postsecondary settings compels clinicians to become knowledgeable about the legal definitions and documentation requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Because the law is relatively new, courts and regulatory agencies have only recently begun to clarify what constitutes a disability. In this study, 147 clinicians completed a questionnaire developed to assess their understanding of the law and the diagnostic approaches they used to justify claims of learning disability (LD), attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and psychiatric disability. Whereas the clinicians agreed on certain points (e.g., the right of institutions to formulate specific policies regarding documentation), they substantially disagreed on several fundamental issues. Clinician consensus was lowest on items that asked about the basic intent of the law, the metrics for assessing impairment, and the criteria for assessing ADHD in adulthood. Judged against the legislative history of the ADA and the body of regulatory rulings and legal decisions, many clinicians' responses showed a need for clarification regarding the distinction between special education law and the antidiscrimination intent of the ADA. The respondents also expressed a nearly uniform wish for more training in this fast-growing area of clinical practice.
AB - The expansion of the number of students requesting accommodations in postsecondary settings compels clinicians to become knowledgeable about the legal definitions and documentation requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Because the law is relatively new, courts and regulatory agencies have only recently begun to clarify what constitutes a disability. In this study, 147 clinicians completed a questionnaire developed to assess their understanding of the law and the diagnostic approaches they used to justify claims of learning disability (LD), attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and psychiatric disability. Whereas the clinicians agreed on certain points (e.g., the right of institutions to formulate specific policies regarding documentation), they substantially disagreed on several fundamental issues. Clinician consensus was lowest on items that asked about the basic intent of the law, the metrics for assessing impairment, and the criteria for assessing ADHD in adulthood. Judged against the legislative history of the ADA and the body of regulatory rulings and legal decisions, many clinicians' responses showed a need for clarification regarding the distinction between special education law and the antidiscrimination intent of the ADA. The respondents also expressed a nearly uniform wish for more training in this fast-growing area of clinical practice.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036637892&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036637892&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/00222194020350040601
DO - 10.1177/00222194020350040601
M3 - Article
C2 - 15493244
AN - SCOPUS:0036637892
SN - 0022-2194
VL - 35
SP - 357
EP - 363
JO - Journal of learning disabilities
JF - Journal of learning disabilities
IS - 4
ER -