Compensation Model: Addressing People With Disabilities

As the 25th anniversary of the signing of the Americans with Disabilities Act approaches later this month, it is clear that many of the fears of the business community failed to materialize. In the first five years of the act, there was no wave of business failures tied to compliance; no wave of unqualified applicants whom businesses were forced to hire; no wave of workers suddenly claiming disability due to a bad back; and no wave of lawsuits that inundated businesses with the burden of undue legal costs. (ADA.gov, 1995). In fact, tax subsidies provided in the act helped many businesses afford to make necessary access accommodations as well as to provide other reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities, and the positive ramifications have been considerable. Up to 45 percent of the disabled population now hold jobs and are contributing to the economy, (Brault, 2012).

Today’s society is different in its thinking when dealing with people with disabilities. There had to be many changes made in its labeling, and approach when dealing with people who may have physical/mental differences. The ostracize behavior that people were known to disturb in society has changed a great deal, due to the many federal laws that have been put in place to insure the well-being of people that have disabilities. In 1972, one very well-known case is Mill vs Board of Education of the District of Columbia this case address how the constituted rights of students were not being meet by not providing them with a public education.” Many disabled children had been excluded from public education prior to 1975,24 Congress, through the Act, sought initially to set up a process by which states would find children in need of educational services and bring them into the system”(Kotler, p.491,2014).

I agree with what Campbell claimed in her book. American people often can’t help but be trapped in social assistance if they don’t have the essential skill to survive.

According to Peter Singer, disabled individuals can not enjoy the same level of well-being as their nondisabled counterparts. In this paper, I will disagree with the notion presented by Peter Singer and prove that disabled people do in fact attain the same level of wellbeing. Firstly, by drawing on Dan Moller’s argument that people have the ability to adapt their circumstances and secondly, draw on Jean Kazez and Harriet Mcbryde Johnson's arguments which refute peter singer's notion.

4)Long-term outcomes “Independence and a higher salary for individuals with disabilities will reduce the financial burdens and stress for family members and caregivers,” the following must be met to achieve this outcome.

Developmentally disabled individuals for many years were not assured the basic rights afforded nondisabled people. People with mental disabilities and illnesses were relegated to the status of second-class citizens, and therefore few services were provided to aid in improving their daily lives. Nonetheless, many families of mentally disabled children continued to raise them in their own homes”

In nineteen ninety Congress passed the Americans with Disabilities Act. This act was established in order to eliminate discrimination of people with disabilities and to break down barriers in society that limits the freedom a disabled person. According to Section 2 Subsection A part one, "some 43,000,000 Americans have one or more physical or mental disabilities, and this number is increasing as the population as a whole is growing older." As the number suggests there are a lot of people that would be classified as disabled making this act very important. This paper will look at the Americans with Disabilities Act as how it pertains to helping people with disabilities based on who is covered, what are their rights, and what legal actions

Ultimately, the system of disability can be seen as an unjust system that is reinforced

To the average American, the notion that structural inequity within US government creates disadvantages for those in marginalized groups comes as no surprise. Citizens generally acknowledge race, gender, and class as key determinants in one’s social standing. However, what is often overlooked are the structural benefits of being abled within the US- both physically and developmentally. The disabled population starts at a disadvantage from the onset of disability onward, regardless of class. However, being of a higher socioeconomic status creates an excess of privilege not typically witnessed within low income communities. Despite a variety of federal programs implemented, we’ve yet been able to effectively care for the disabled population within low income communities. While public policy attempts to provide services to keep this population employed, healthy and safe it is (typically) unsuccessful. The social costs incurred by disability are fundamentally abetted by structural inequity in the American political system.

People with disabilities have to face more within the health care system and obtaining access to care. Disability is not the same as poor health, persons with disabilities are less likely to work or have to work less hours and many have to obtain employer-sponsored health insurance. My paper focuses on access to health care for persons with disabilities (for me it is Multiple Sclerosis). In this paper I will discuss utilization and cost of services, and health insurance coverage of persons with disabilities.

The author does not give any evidence on why the government should provide a free and appropriate to individuals with disabilities. The author did use a lot of Ethos, sections from the law. But the author is definitely lack of logos, and especially no pathos or emotion to if those with disabilities do not get a free appropriate

The policy topic that I have decided to address is Invisible Disabilities, because this is a huge social problem. In our society a person with a disability is primarily recognized from when you look at someone and you can visibly confirm that they are disabled. Visible disabilities are what most people think of when they think of someone who is disabled: for instance someone in a wheelchair. The truth is, not all disabilities are physically visible, and generates negative attitudes towards persons who suffer from them. Some invisible disabilities include learning disabilities, brain injuries, epilepsy, narcolepsy, and so many more.

Growing up in modern society, we already know that having any kind of handicap, physical or mental, limits an individual’s social, economic, and class mobility throughout their life due to a number of factors, including stereotypes and prejudice held by modern society. In my paper I will be arguing that employment assistance for mentally ill persons does not currently provide enough support for the rapidly increasing number of participants on employment and welfare support programs. I will first address the issues faced my mentally disabled persons every day in the workplace and I will dispel the myths commonly held about the mentally ill and their abilities. I will then discuss the different types of employment support currently offered

As I am reading through the paper, I am 100% agree with most of the point discussed by the author. Because, I came from a place where disability is not an issue for the Government. Therefore, no help is available for these people no matter their conditions. Besides, there is no advocates, and no funds available as well to help. Learning about such program is very interesting and challenging.

Finally Nussbaum talks about how even the value of people with disabilities should be enacted. This means that they are capable of being educated and have a rewarding career. According to this approach, their value should constitute to their basic capability and as well as their expansion. However, in many cases people with disabilities are not always included at the beginning of a social contract. This includes education, although the capability approach helps those disabled by illiteracy in developing it still does not justify the fact that they still at the bottom of the threshold. In a philosophical journal by Lorella Terzi she argues that according to egalitarian John Rawls’s principles of justice,” should be applied to the necessary promotion