Stadium sightlines and wheelchair patrons: Case studies in implementation of the ADA

Abstract

Title III of the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act was passed to end discrimination against persons with disabilities, to provide “functional equality” and to make buildings accessible. This public policy was aimed at integrating persons with disabilities into the mainstream. But, persons with disabilities, “social watchdogs” and governmental agencies have had to go to court to ensure compliance from private and governmental organizations charged by law to supply the services.Through a study of two court cases, one involving the MCI Center in Washington, D.C., and the second the Rose Garden in Portland, Ore., we focus on public policy and its effectiveness and reach two major conclusions. First, we suggest that American public policy using law as an instrument can lead to vagueness in its formulation and ambiguity in its implementation. Second, we highlight the lessons that can be learned from a review of these court decisions and argue that persons concerned with shaping public policy have to attend assiduously to clarity in formulation of the law, the manner in which courts interpret laws and administrative guidelines, since this is often as much a political process as rote application of juridical principles and precedents.

Citation

Mazumdar, S. and Geis, G. (2000), "Stadium sightlines and wheelchair patrons: Case studies in implementation of the ADA", Altman, B.M. and Barnartt, S.N. (Ed.) Expanding the Scope of Social Science Research on Disability (Research in Social Science and Disability, Vol. 1), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 205-234. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1479-3547(00)80011-1