Opinion ID: 485713
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Epilepsy as a Handicap Under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973

Text: The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 provides: 9 No otherwise qualified handicapped individual in the United States ... shall, solely by reason of his handicap, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance or under any program or activity conducted by an Executive agency.... 10 29 U.S.C. Sec. 794 (emphasis added). 11 The district court held that Reynolds was not handicapped for purposes of the Rehabilitation Act, because she has never shown that her epilepsy prevented her from performing the physical tasks involved in her job, i.e., sitting at a desk, preparing forms, typing, and answering the telephone. In so holding, the district court confused the definition of handicapped individual with the definition of otherwise qualified individual. To fall within the protection of 29 U.S.C. Sec. 794, an individual must be both handicapped and otherwise qualified. The Supreme Court has defined an otherwise qualified individual as one who is able to meet all of a program's requirements in spite of his handicap. Southeastern Community College v. Davis, 442 U.S. 397, 406, 99 S.Ct. 2361, 2367, 60 L.Ed.2d 980 (1979) (hearing impaired applicant not qualified to enter nurse training program). 29 U.S.C. Sec. 706(7) defines a handicapped individual. Section 706(7)(B) provides: 12 [T]he term handicapped individual means ... any person who (i) has a physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more of such person's major life activities, (ii) has a record of such an impairment, or (iii) is regarded as having such an impairment. 13 The district court's approach would preclude any otherwise qualified individual from being classified as handicapped because, under its analysis, anyone who could meet all of a job's requirements, and therefore was otherwise qualified, would not be handicapped. Reynolds is otherwise qualified. She may also be handicapped. A plaintiff need not prove that she is incapable of doing her job to prove that she is handicapped. 14 Contrary to the district court's holding, epileptics are handicapped individuals. In Mantolete v. Bolger, 767 F.2d 1416, 1421-23 (9th Cir.1985), this court determined that epileptics are handicapped individuals for purposes of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Although Mantolete involved an epileptic who was denied employment, its rationale applies with equal force to an epileptic who is discharged from employment. 15 Other courts that have faced this issue have also held that epilepsy is a handicap for purposes of the Rehabilitation Act. E.g., Akers v. Bolton, 531 F.Supp. 300, 315 (D.Kan.1981); Drennon v. Philadelphia Gen. Hosp., 428 F.Supp. 809, 815 (E.D.Pa.1977); Smith v. Adm'r. of Veterans Affairs, 32 Fair Employment Practice Cases (BNA) 986, 989 (C.D.Cal.1983); Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, U.S. Department of Labor v. Ford Motor Co., 3, Recommended Decision and Order, Case No. 80-OFCCP-32, 3 (Oct. 4, 1985). 16 The Rehabilitation Act defines a handicapped individual as one who (i) has a physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more of such person's major life activities.... 29 U.S.C. Sec. 706(7)(B). The regulations promulgated under the Act define major life activities as functions, such as caring for one's self, performing manual tasks, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning, and working. 29 C.F.R. Sec. 1613.702(c). 17 Reynolds's epilepsy substantially limits her ability to work. Even though medication controls her seizures, federal and state regulations and policies restrict the types of jobs available to her. People with any history of epilepsy are ineligible to drive trucks in interstate commerce. 49 C.F.R. Sec. 391.41(b)(8). Epileptics are ineligible for hazardous jobs in the federal civil service unless they have been seizure-free without medication for two years. Office of Personnel Management, Handbook of Selective Placement of Persons with Physical and Mental Handicaps in Federal Civil Service Employment, OPM Doc. 125-11-3, 63 (1981). The military will not consider applications from epileptics until they have been seizure-free without medication for five years. Many states render epileptics ineligible for driver's licenses unless they have been seizure-free for a specified period. Epilepsy Foundation of America, Legal Rights of Persons with Epilepsy 7 (1985). Unable to drive to work, many epileptics have severely limited job opportunities. The unemployment rate among fully employable epileptics is more than two times the national average. The underemployment rate for epileptics is perhaps higher still. Commission for the Control of Epilepsy and Its Consequences, United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1 Plan for Nationwide Action on Epilepsy, 85 (1977). 18 Both the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the decisions of the courts that have interpreted it lead to the inescapable conclusion that epilepsy is a handicap. Therefore, Reynolds qualifies as a handicapped individual. 19