tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9380316.post-60271692359520231922007-05-25T14:09:00.000-07:002007-05-25T14:09:00.000-07:00As a person who has spent my entire professional life working as an advocate with persons with disabilities, mostly mental retardation, I am appalled at this decision. We work very hard to help people identify and realize their dreams. Clearly, this man has done so, at least in so far as driving and working represent his dreams. It bothers me that the judges don't see communication, socialzation, and learning as "major life activities". Would they be willing to forgo these activities? Communication is central to all that humans do! Perhaps the man so dismissively described by these judges could assist them in learning what "major life activity" means. He clearly has a better grasp of it than they do! It appears that the judges feel that only those persons confined to institutions are covered by the ADA. They have already ruled that if one's disability is substantially corrected by on-going medication, one is not disabled. Of course, if one is unable to obtain the medication because one's job is gone and car repossessed, too bad. There is still no disability because, if one would only take the medication, the disability could be cured! Such circular reasoning!Helenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08814363403636820790noreply@blogger.com