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

42 U.S.C. § 12101–12213 (Supp. II 1997)

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. …)

42 U.S.C. § 12117 (Supp. II 1997)

42 U.S.C. § 12112(a) (Supp. II 1997)

29 U.S.C. § 1001–1461 (Supp. II 1997)

Charter Canyon Treatment Ctr. v. Pool Co. , 153 F.3d 1132, 1135(10^th Cir. 1998); Kimber, 196 F.3d at 1100.

Kimber, 196 F.3d at 1098

Id. at 1099

Id. at 1100.

Ford v. Schering-Plough Corp., 145 F.3d 601 (3^rd 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.)

Lewis v. Kmart Corp., 180 F.3d 166 (4^th Cir.1999) (Title I does not prohibit employer or its insurance company from offering different physical and mental disability coverage)

Parker v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 121 F.3d 1006 (6^th 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.)

EEOC v. CNA Ins. Co., 96 F.3d 1039 (7^th 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.

Krauel v. Iowa Methodist Med. Ctr., 95 Fed.3d 674 (8^th Cir. 1996) (Employer health benefit plan may exclude funding for infertility treatment under ADA Title I and Title VII.)

Kimber, 196 F.3d at 1101, quoting Ford, 145 F.3d at 608.

Kimber, 196 F.3d at 1101, quoting EEOC v. CNA Ins. Co., 96 F.3d 1039, 1044 (7^th Cir.1996)

Kimber, 196 F.3d at 1102, quoting Ford, 145 F.3d at 608

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.)

Bragdon v. Abbot, 524 U.S. 624, 631 (1998)

Sacher David Dr. , Preface, in Mental Health: A Report of the Surgeon General (1999), (Visited Feb. 21, 2000) <http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/mentalhealth/home.html>

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>

Weyer v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 198 F.3d 1104 (9^th 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.)