Opinion ID: 2994586
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Some of the typical responsibilities of a

Text: Psychologist I include performing the initial assessment of those in need of mental health services, and providing group and individual therapy, as well as crisis intervention. The position of Psychologist I is considered a direct care position because direct interaction with patients is an essential function of the job. Therefore, all direct care staff members are specifically trained to handle patients who display unpredictable violent tendencies. Due to his asthma, Webb again took a leave of absence until 1996. On July 8, 1996, he made a request for accommodation from Choate because his ability to breathe, walk, and work was impaired by his asthma, osteoporosis, and weakened immune system. Webb requested: (1) a well-ventilated office removed from asbestos or fibrous insulating material; (2) adherence to job position duties; (3) an immediately accessible, lockable storage unit for medication; (4) an immediately accessible, lockable refrigeration unit for storage of medication and liquid that must be kept cool; (5) permission to attend doctor appointments with prior notification; (6) prior notice of application of insecticide, disinfectant or other chemical with a strong odor to the work area and permission to avoid that area for 24 hours following application; (7) exemption from intentional contact with patients displaying violent behavior; and (8) exemption from intentional contact with patients known to have infectious conditions. After consideration and discussion, Choate accommodated Webb’s first six requests. Choate, however, denied Webb’s requests for exemption from intentional contact with patients known to be violent and/or have infectious conditions. The basis for Choate’s refusal was that the position of Psychologist I required significant direct contact with patients who displayed unpredictable violent behavior. Further, the nurses at Choate confirmed that the impaired communication skills of most patients made it difficult to discover whether incoming patients were carrying any infectious diseases. Webb filed suit under the ADA because Choate refused these two requests. Webb argued that the requests could be reasonably accommodated. For example, Webb suggested that his contact with contagious patients could be postponed until the infectious stage had passed. Also, he proposed that other members of the direct care staff could intervene if there were any sudden violent outbursts by patients in his care. According to Webb, his request was merely to be exempted from intentional contact from patients known to be violent and/or infectious. He claims that he is willing to accept the risk of unintentional interaction with patients whose conditions are unknown. Both Webb and Choate filed motions for summary judgment, and the district court granted Choate’s motion. The district court found that Webb was not a qualified individual with a disability under the ADA, and further, even if Webb were a qualified individual, that Choate had reasonably accommodated him.