经验雷达下的ADA表达规律初探

IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Virginia Law Review Pub Date : 2004-04-09 DOI:10.2307/3202418
M. Stein
{"title":"经验雷达下的ADA表达规律初探","authors":"M. Stein","doi":"10.2307/3202418","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While enacting the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Senators Harkin and Kennedy each proclaimed its passage as an \"emancipation proclamation\" for people with disabilities. Fourteen years later, one wonders just how much (if at all) the disabled have been emancipated. One way to gauge whether social and economic empowerment has increased for people with disabilities after the ADA's passage, is to examine their employment experiences. To date, empirical studies of post-ADA disabled employees' labor market participation, are less than encouraging. Notably, two well-publicized empirical studies of the relative post-ADA employment effects on workers with disabilities find a reduction in their employment rate, concurrent with either a neutral or beneficial effect on their wages. These studies have sparked a growing debate among scholars who either support or challenge their findings. Nonetheless, even those economists seeking to explain the available data within the context of broader economic effects, concede that post-ADA disability-related employment (broadly defined) has not dramatically improved. At the same time, plaintiffs asserting ADA Title I employment discrimination claims in the federal courts have a lower win-loss rate than any other group excepting prisoner rights litigants. Specifically, an American Bar Association report found that employers prevailed in more than 92 percent of Title I cases between 1992 and 1997. Although a number of reasons may contribute to this phenomenon, the overall impression is dire. Thus, from a purely qualitative perspective, empirical analysis indicates that the ADA is not fulfilling its promise of empowering workers with disabilities. By contrast, David Engle & Frank Munger's thoughtful book, Rights of Inclusion: Law and Identity in the Life Stories of Americans with Disabilities (Rights of Inclusion), applies a non-economic metric to the question of whether the ADA is \"working,\" and in so doing provides an alternative appraisal of the statute's efficacy. Utilizing qualitative analysis, Engle & Munger interviewed workers with disabilities who had never asserted disability-related employment discrimination claims. They conclude that the ADA's mere presence has changed disabled persons' identities by creating a vision of work-capable people who can be successful and vibrant employees if given the opportunity, including proper accommodations, to demonstrate these abilities. At the same time, Engle & Munger argue that the putative employment rights embodied in the ADA can only be brought to fruition if people with disabilities understand and embrace the statute’s normative aspirations. Their assessment of the ADA, as well as their subsequent proposal for a \"new theory\" of rights that can properly encompass the dynamics of disability identity formation, are therefore both internal, and contextual, to those individuals whose life stories are presented in Rights of Inclusion. This Essay seeks to bridge the inquiries made by the two normally exclusive disciplines of economics (the external, quantitative empirical radar) and sociology (the internal, qualitative assessment of rights discourse), by presenting a third path: an initial expressive law analysis of the ADA (examining the phenomena that exist beneath the empirical radar). That approach considers how (external) law can influence (internal) individual behavior by altering broader social norms, an approach not addressed in Rights of Inclusion. In considering those precepts, I am particularly interested in building on the expressive law gloss presented in Alex Geisinger's \"belief change\" theory, which identifies and models a process through which regulations can affect norms and preferences. Part I sets forth the disability life stories chronicled by Engle & Munger, and the conclusions they draw from those experiences about the nature of identity and rights theory. Next, Part II describes the general goals of expressive law scholarship, and adumbrates Alex Geisinger's \"belief change\" theory. Part III depicts existing socio-legal norms on the disabled, and the aspirations contained in the ADA. Part IV then sets forth a preliminary expressive law analysis of the ADA. The Essay concludes by reinterpreting, from an expressive law perspective, some of the disability life stories portrayed in Rights of Inclusion.","PeriodicalId":47840,"journal":{"name":"Virginia Law Review","volume":"90 1","pages":"1151"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2004-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/3202418","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Under the Empirical Radar: An Initial Expressive Law Analysis of the ADA\",\"authors\":\"M. Stein\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/3202418\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"While enacting the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Senators Harkin and Kennedy each proclaimed its passage as an \\\"emancipation proclamation\\\" for people with disabilities. Fourteen years later, one wonders just how much (if at all) the disabled have been emancipated. One way to gauge whether social and economic empowerment has increased for people with disabilities after the ADA's passage, is to examine their employment experiences. To date, empirical studies of post-ADA disabled employees' labor market participation, are less than encouraging. Notably, two well-publicized empirical studies of the relative post-ADA employment effects on workers with disabilities find a reduction in their employment rate, concurrent with either a neutral or beneficial effect on their wages. These studies have sparked a growing debate among scholars who either support or challenge their findings. Nonetheless, even those economists seeking to explain the available data within the context of broader economic effects, concede that post-ADA disability-related employment (broadly defined) has not dramatically improved. At the same time, plaintiffs asserting ADA Title I employment discrimination claims in the federal courts have a lower win-loss rate than any other group excepting prisoner rights litigants. Specifically, an American Bar Association report found that employers prevailed in more than 92 percent of Title I cases between 1992 and 1997. Although a number of reasons may contribute to this phenomenon, the overall impression is dire. Thus, from a purely qualitative perspective, empirical analysis indicates that the ADA is not fulfilling its promise of empowering workers with disabilities. By contrast, David Engle & Frank Munger's thoughtful book, Rights of Inclusion: Law and Identity in the Life Stories of Americans with Disabilities (Rights of Inclusion), applies a non-economic metric to the question of whether the ADA is \\\"working,\\\" and in so doing provides an alternative appraisal of the statute's efficacy. Utilizing qualitative analysis, Engle & Munger interviewed workers with disabilities who had never asserted disability-related employment discrimination claims. They conclude that the ADA's mere presence has changed disabled persons' identities by creating a vision of work-capable people who can be successful and vibrant employees if given the opportunity, including proper accommodations, to demonstrate these abilities. At the same time, Engle & Munger argue that the putative employment rights embodied in the ADA can only be brought to fruition if people with disabilities understand and embrace the statute’s normative aspirations. Their assessment of the ADA, as well as their subsequent proposal for a \\\"new theory\\\" of rights that can properly encompass the dynamics of disability identity formation, are therefore both internal, and contextual, to those individuals whose life stories are presented in Rights of Inclusion. This Essay seeks to bridge the inquiries made by the two normally exclusive disciplines of economics (the external, quantitative empirical radar) and sociology (the internal, qualitative assessment of rights discourse), by presenting a third path: an initial expressive law analysis of the ADA (examining the phenomena that exist beneath the empirical radar). That approach considers how (external) law can influence (internal) individual behavior by altering broader social norms, an approach not addressed in Rights of Inclusion. In considering those precepts, I am particularly interested in building on the expressive law gloss presented in Alex Geisinger's \\\"belief change\\\" theory, which identifies and models a process through which regulations can affect norms and preferences. Part I sets forth the disability life stories chronicled by Engle & Munger, and the conclusions they draw from those experiences about the nature of identity and rights theory. Next, Part II describes the general goals of expressive law scholarship, and adumbrates Alex Geisinger's \\\"belief change\\\" theory. Part III depicts existing socio-legal norms on the disabled, and the aspirations contained in the ADA. Part IV then sets forth a preliminary expressive law analysis of the ADA. The Essay concludes by reinterpreting, from an expressive law perspective, some of the disability life stories portrayed in Rights of Inclusion.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47840,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Virginia Law Review\",\"volume\":\"90 1\",\"pages\":\"1151\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2004-04-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/3202418\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Virginia Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/3202418\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Virginia Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/3202418","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

在制定《美国残疾人法案》(ADA)时,参议员哈金和肯尼迪各自宣称该法案的通过是残疾人的“解放宣言”。14年后,人们不禁要问,究竟有多少(如果有的话)残疾人得到了解放。衡量《美国残疾人法》通过后,残疾人的社会和经济赋权是否有所增加的一种方法是考察他们的就业经历。到目前为止,对《美国残疾人法》后残疾员工的劳动力市场参与的实证研究并不令人鼓舞。值得注意的是,两项广为人知的关于《美国残疾人法》实施后对残疾工人就业影响的实证研究发现,他们的就业率下降了,同时对他们的工资产生了中性或有益的影响。这些研究在支持或质疑其发现的学者之间引发了越来越多的争论。然而,即使是那些试图在更广泛的经济影响背景下解释现有数据的经济学家,也承认《美国残疾人法》颁布后,与残疾有关的就业(广义定义)并没有显著改善。与此同时,原告在联邦法院主张《美国残疾人法》第一章就业歧视的胜诉率比除囚犯权利诉讼外的任何其他群体都要低。具体来说,美国律师协会(American Bar Association)的一份报告发现,在1992年至1997年期间,雇主在超过92%的第一修正案案件中获胜。尽管造成这一现象的原因可能有很多,但总的印象是可怕的。因此,从纯粹的定性角度来看,实证分析表明,《美国残疾人法》并没有履行其赋予残疾工人权力的承诺。相比之下,大卫·恩格尔和弗兰克·芒格的思想著作《包容的权利:美国残疾人生活故事中的法律和身份》(《包容的权利》)采用了一种非经济的衡量标准来衡量《美国残疾人法》是否“有效”,并以此提供了对该法规效力的另一种评估。利用定性分析,Engle & Munger采访了从未声称与残疾有关的就业歧视索赔的残疾工人。他们的结论是,《美国残疾人法》的存在改变了残疾人的身份,创造了一种有工作能力的人的形象,如果给予机会,包括适当的便利,他们可以成为成功和充满活力的员工,展示这些能力。与此同时,恩格尔和芒格认为,《美国残疾人法》中所体现的假定就业权利只有在残疾人理解并接受法规的规范性愿望的情况下才能实现。因此,他们对《美国残疾人法》的评估,以及他们随后提出的关于权利的“新理论”的建议,可以恰当地涵盖残疾身份形成的动态,对于那些生活故事在《包容性权利》中呈现的个人来说,既是内部的,也是背景的。本文试图通过提出第三条路径,将经济学(外部的、定量的实证雷达)和社会学(内部的、定性的权利话语评估)这两个通常相互排斥的学科所做的调查联系起来:对《美国法》进行初步的表达性法律分析(检查存在于实证雷达之下的现象)。这种方法考虑了(外部)法律如何通过改变更广泛的社会规范来影响(内部)个人行为,这是《包容权》中没有涉及的方法。在考虑这些规则时,我特别感兴趣的是建立在Alex Geisinger的“信念变化”理论中提出的表达性法律光泽的基础上,该理论确定并模拟了一个过程,通过这个过程,法规可以影响规范和偏好。第一部分阐述了恩格尔和芒格记录的残疾人生活故事,以及他们从这些经历中得出的关于身份和权利理论本质的结论。其次,第二部分描述了表达法学研究的总体目标,并对亚历克斯·盖辛格的“信念改变”理论进行了概述。第三部分描述了现有的关于残疾人的社会法律规范,以及《美国残疾人法》所载的愿望。第四部分对《美国残疾人法》的表达法进行了初步分析。文章最后从表达法的角度重新解读了《包容权》中一些残疾人的生活故事。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Under the Empirical Radar: An Initial Expressive Law Analysis of the ADA
While enacting the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Senators Harkin and Kennedy each proclaimed its passage as an "emancipation proclamation" for people with disabilities. Fourteen years later, one wonders just how much (if at all) the disabled have been emancipated. One way to gauge whether social and economic empowerment has increased for people with disabilities after the ADA's passage, is to examine their employment experiences. To date, empirical studies of post-ADA disabled employees' labor market participation, are less than encouraging. Notably, two well-publicized empirical studies of the relative post-ADA employment effects on workers with disabilities find a reduction in their employment rate, concurrent with either a neutral or beneficial effect on their wages. These studies have sparked a growing debate among scholars who either support or challenge their findings. Nonetheless, even those economists seeking to explain the available data within the context of broader economic effects, concede that post-ADA disability-related employment (broadly defined) has not dramatically improved. At the same time, plaintiffs asserting ADA Title I employment discrimination claims in the federal courts have a lower win-loss rate than any other group excepting prisoner rights litigants. Specifically, an American Bar Association report found that employers prevailed in more than 92 percent of Title I cases between 1992 and 1997. Although a number of reasons may contribute to this phenomenon, the overall impression is dire. Thus, from a purely qualitative perspective, empirical analysis indicates that the ADA is not fulfilling its promise of empowering workers with disabilities. By contrast, David Engle & Frank Munger's thoughtful book, Rights of Inclusion: Law and Identity in the Life Stories of Americans with Disabilities (Rights of Inclusion), applies a non-economic metric to the question of whether the ADA is "working," and in so doing provides an alternative appraisal of the statute's efficacy. Utilizing qualitative analysis, Engle & Munger interviewed workers with disabilities who had never asserted disability-related employment discrimination claims. They conclude that the ADA's mere presence has changed disabled persons' identities by creating a vision of work-capable people who can be successful and vibrant employees if given the opportunity, including proper accommodations, to demonstrate these abilities. At the same time, Engle & Munger argue that the putative employment rights embodied in the ADA can only be brought to fruition if people with disabilities understand and embrace the statute’s normative aspirations. Their assessment of the ADA, as well as their subsequent proposal for a "new theory" of rights that can properly encompass the dynamics of disability identity formation, are therefore both internal, and contextual, to those individuals whose life stories are presented in Rights of Inclusion. This Essay seeks to bridge the inquiries made by the two normally exclusive disciplines of economics (the external, quantitative empirical radar) and sociology (the internal, qualitative assessment of rights discourse), by presenting a third path: an initial expressive law analysis of the ADA (examining the phenomena that exist beneath the empirical radar). That approach considers how (external) law can influence (internal) individual behavior by altering broader social norms, an approach not addressed in Rights of Inclusion. In considering those precepts, I am particularly interested in building on the expressive law gloss presented in Alex Geisinger's "belief change" theory, which identifies and models a process through which regulations can affect norms and preferences. Part I sets forth the disability life stories chronicled by Engle & Munger, and the conclusions they draw from those experiences about the nature of identity and rights theory. Next, Part II describes the general goals of expressive law scholarship, and adumbrates Alex Geisinger's "belief change" theory. Part III depicts existing socio-legal norms on the disabled, and the aspirations contained in the ADA. Part IV then sets forth a preliminary expressive law analysis of the ADA. The Essay concludes by reinterpreting, from an expressive law perspective, some of the disability life stories portrayed in Rights of Inclusion.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
3.80%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Virginia Law Review is a journal of general legal scholarship published by the students of the University of Virginia School of Law. The continuing objective of the Virginia Law Review is to publish a professional periodical devoted to legal and law-related issues that can be of use to judges, practitioners, teachers, legislators, students, and others interested in the law. First formally organized on April 23, 1913, the Virginia Law Review today remains one of the most respected and influential student legal periodicals in the country.
期刊最新文献
The God Cure: Spirituality as Therapy. Designing Business Forms to Pursue Social Goals Isolated Lambdoid Craniosynostosis. Unconstitutionally Illegitimate Discrimination Sovereign Immunity and the Constitutional Text
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1