Mitigating Measures and the ADA

There has recently been a lot of sensational misinformation among the internet-based hearing loss community about recent Equal Employment Opportunity Commission decisions regarding the use of mitigating devices and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

The scuttlebutt is that the EEOC recently ruled that if you use a hearing aid or cochlear implant, you are no longer disabled and therefore not protected by the ADA. This is a misinterpretation of the EEOC ruling and NOT TRUE.

What the EEOC did say was that, to be in compliance with last year's Supreme Court rulings, organizations must now CONSIDER the use of assistive devices in determining the applicability of the ADA. If you use an assistive device that enables you to function in a "normal" manner, you may be considered "not disabled" and therefore not protected by the ADA. However, if your assistive device does not provide "normal" function, the ADA still protects you.

Eyeglasses provide a useful analogy. Most people who wear eyeglasses are not protected by the ADA, because they are able to function in an essentially normal manner with their glasses. However, people whose vision is not correctable to normal using glasses are still disabled and still protected by the ADA, even if they use their glasses. The same reasoning applies to hearing aids, cochlear implants, and assistive listening devices.

In 1999, the Supreme Court ruled in Sutton v. United Airlines, Inc., and Murphy v. United Parcel Service, Inc., that the determination of whether an individual has a current disability under the ADA must be made by considering any mitigating measures that a person uses to eliminate or reduce the effects of an impairment. The EEOC's final rule rescinds parts of its Interpretive Guidance, which had stated that mitigating measures should not be considered in determining whether an individual has a disability.

In my opinion, the EEOC's ruling is an example of common sense at work.