A breast cancer survivor qualifies for protection by the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), the D.C. Circuit held in Adams v. Rice (No. 07-5101). The protection arose, the court concluded, because the illness and treatment had caused an enduring impairment to the plaintiff's "major life activity" of sexual relations.
The plaintiff, Adams, earned a position with the United States Foreign Service, one that required a medical clearance. Her medical clearance was revoked when she later reported a diagnosis of stage-one breast cancer. She underwent a successful treatment program, which included reconstructive surgery. Despite being cancer-free, her medical clearance was not reinstated and her job was lost. Adams claimed this violated her rights under anti-disability discrimination laws.
The court ruled that Adams had established that, despite being cancer-free, she continued to suffer a disability because of an ongoing impairment to her ability to engage in sexual relations. To reach that conclusion the court had to first decide whether engaging in sexual relations qualified as a "major life activity." Based on statutory text, Supreme Court precedent and applying a "hefty dose of common sense" the court concluded that "engaging in sexual relations qualifies as a major life activity."
While this case is testament first to Adams's bravery and the "common sense" of the court majority is to be acknowledged, it also serves as an illustration of how Supreme Court and other court rulings have so limited the Americans With Disabilities Act that its protections are ever difficult to define. Adams lost her job with the State Department because it regarded her as a liability (or at least a potential liability) since she was a breast cancer survivor. That she qualified for protection from disability discrimination in her employment as a Foreign Service officer based only on an ongoing impairment to her ability to engage in sexual relations indicates that Congress should act and restore a healthy dose of common sense to the protections afforded by the Americans With Disabilities Act by effectively repealing a number of misguided Supreme Court decisions.
