The Americans with Disabilities Act, originally enacted in 1990, has provided a sweeping protection for the rights of people with disabilities, ranging from blindness and paralysis to even diabetes. The law is so broad, however, that defining its parameters has created challenge for public and business administrators as well as for the courts. When it comes to sports, some accommodations are clear, but others are still being determined as cases move forward.
Basics
The ADA is federal law in the U.S. The ADA involves employment, transportation, public services, accommodations and telecommunications. It guarantees persons with disabilities the equal opportunity to these areas fundamental life services. The ADA requires that people with disabilities be included in the activities of society, without discrimination. This may require that they are accommodated with special design, facilities or services.
Background
The act grew out of Civil Rights legislation of the 1960s, as individuals with disabilities sought the types of legal protections to ensure equal opportunity under the law, as had previous disadvantaged groups such as racial minorities and women. The ADA goes further, however, than requiring that organizations cease discrimination. It also requires that, if necessary, they adapt to provide equal opportunities, within the scope of their resources.
Sports Impact
The ADA has challenged sports managers in accommodating people with disabilities, according to the North American Society for Sports Management. Sports conflict with the ADA tends to fall in three areas: stadium design, competition rules and eligibility rules. Regarding stadium design, issues include providing wheelchair accessibility, location of seats and ensuring sight lines over patrons who stand. The justice department has provided guidelines and assistance for resolving these issues.
Decision Framework
Regarding rules of eligibility and competition, guidance for analyzing disputes has been determined by court cases. One case in particular, PGA Tour Inc. v. Martin, provides the framework for evaluating accommodation requests. A provider may refuse to make the modification if it "fundamentally alters" the program or its services. In several cases that have cited this provision, the issue comes down to what is a "fundamental alteration," a determination that is still evolving.
Member Comments