Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T20:20:10.586Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Disability & ADA: Disparate Insurance Coverage for Physical and Psychological Disabilities Does Not Violate ADA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Nicklas A. Akers
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In Kimber v. Thiokol Corp., 196 F.3d 1092 (10th Cit. 1999), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit upheld a U.S. District Court's grant of summary judgment against an employee's claim that an employeroperated disability insurance plan, which offered different levels of compensation for disabilities due to mental and physical conditions, violated Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The Court of Appeals found that (1) the Thiokol plan administrator's interpretations of the plan were not arbitrary and capricious, and that (2) the plan's different treatment of disabilities caused by physical and mental conditions did not violate the ADA.

Type
Article
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , Spring 2000 , pp. 92 - 94
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

42 U.S.C. § 12101–12213 (Supp. II 1997)Google Scholar
42 U.S.C. § 12101(b) (Supp. II 1997) (“It is the purpose of this chapter: (1) to provide a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities. …)Google Scholar
42 U.S.C. § 12117 (Supp. II 1997)Google Scholar
42 U.S.C. § 12112(a) (Supp. II 1997)Google Scholar
29 U.S.C. § 1001–1461 (Supp. II 1997)Google Scholar
Charter Canyon Treatment Ctr. v. Pool Co., 153 F.3d 1132, 1135(10th Cir. 1998); Kimber, 196 F.3d at 1100.Google Scholar
Kimber, 196 F.3d at 1098Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at 1099Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at 1100.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Ford v. Schering-Plough Corp., 145 F.3d 601 (3rd Cir. 1998), cert. den'd. 119 S.Ct. 608 (1999) (Title I does not require equal treatment of mental and physical disability in employee operated plan, Title III, relating to public accommodations, does not apply to such plans.)Google Scholar
Lewis v. Kmart Corp., 180 F.3d 166 (4th Cir.1999) (Title I does not prohibit employer or its insurance company from offering different physical and mental disability coverage)Google Scholar
Parker v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 121 F.3d 1006 (6th Cir. 1997) (en banc) cert. denied 522 U.S. 1084 (1998) (Title I does not prohibit employer or its insurance company to offer equal benefits for physical and mental disability; Title III does not apply to employer.)Google Scholar
EEOC v. CNA Ins. Co., 96 F.3d 1039 (7th Cir. 1996) (Insurance company offering plan to its own employees not prohibited by Title I from offering different benefits for physical and mental disability); “Few, if any mental health advocates have thought that the result they would like to see had been there all along in the ADA.” Id. at 1044.Google Scholar
Krauel v. Iowa Methodist Med. Ctr., 95 Fed.3d 674 (8th Cir. 1996) (Employer health benefit plan may exclude funding for infertility treatment under ADA Title I and Title VII.)Google Scholar
Kimber, 196 F.3d at 1101, quoting Ford, 145 F.3d at 608.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Kimber, 196 F.3d at 1101, quoting EEOC v. CNA Ins. Co., 96 F.3d 1039, 1044 (7th Cir.1996)Google Scholar
Kimber, 196 F.3d at 1102, quoting Ford, 145 F.3d at 608Google Scholar
Kimber, 196 F.3d at 1102, quoting Modderno v. King, 82 F.3d 1059, 1061 (D.C.Cir.1996) (Rehab. Act does not prohibit US Foreign Service Benefit Fund from offering different health insurance benefit for physical and mental illness.)Google Scholar
Bragdon v. Abbot, 524 U.S. 624, 631 (1998)Google Scholar
Dr.Sacher, David, Preface, in Mental Health: A Report of the Surgeon General (1999), (Visited Feb. 21, 2000) <http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/mentalhealth/home.html>>Google Scholar
Shalala, Donna, Message from Donna E. Shalala, Secretary of Health and Human Services, in, Mental Health: A Report of the Surgeon General (1999), (Visited Feb. 21 2000) <http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/mentalhealth/home.html>Google Scholar
Weyer v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 198 F.3d 1104 (9th Cir.2000) (citing Kimber at 1116) (Neither employer or insurance company prohibited by Title I from offering different physical and mental disability benefits, Title III does not apply to insurance company.)Google Scholar