Noble Step for Transgender Employees Protected Under the ADA
In 1980, the American Psychiatric Association added "Gender Identity Disorder" to its third volume of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM). Affecting approximately 0.014 percent of transgender persons, gender identity disorder or gender dysphoria is defined by the DSM as persistent cross-gender identification coupled with clinically significant distress in social, occupational or other important areas in functioning.
July 26, 2017 at 03:57 PM
6 minute read
In 1980, the American Psychiatric Association added “Gender Identity Disorder” to its third volume of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM). Affecting approximately 0.014 percent of transgender persons, gender identity disorder or gender dysphoria is defined by the DSM as persistent cross-gender identification coupled with clinically significant distress in social, occupational or other important areas in functioning.
Common complications of the disorder include depression, emotional distress, isolation and suicide. Although the number of transgender persons in the United States is difficult to measure, data compiled by the UCLA School of Law's Williams Institute, estimates that 1.4 million adults in the United States identify as transgender—meaning that as many as 20,000 Americans are struggling with gender identity disorder, and likely many more who do not report or self identify as transgender.
Despite its place in the DSM, gender identity disorder was historically exempt as a “disability” under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA explicitly exempts from its definition of disability “transvestism, transsexualism, pedophilia, exhibitionism, voyeurism, gender identity disorders not resulting from physical impairments or other sexual behavior disorders.” Remarkably, lawmakers at the time felt that allowing gender identity disorders to be protected under the ADA would result in protection for employees engaging in activities employers deemed to be “immoral.” However, in a less Neanderthal approach to gender identity, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania rejected an employer's motion to dismiss holding that, after being refused accommodation for gender identity disorder, a transgender employee sufficiently stated a claim under the ADA, see Blatt v. Cabela's Retail, No. 5:14-cv-04822 (E.D. Pa. May 17).
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All![The Forgotten Ballot: Expanding Voting Access for Incarcerated Populations The Forgotten Ballot: Expanding Voting Access for Incarcerated Populations](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/thelegalintelligencer/contrib/content/uploads/sites/402/2024/05/Laurie-Jubelirer-767x633.jpg)
The Forgotten Ballot: Expanding Voting Access for Incarcerated Populations
5 minute read![State-Sanctioned Discrimination: Title IX’s Expansive Loophole for Religious Institutions State-Sanctioned Discrimination: Title IX’s Expansive Loophole for Religious Institutions](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/thelegalintelligencer/contrib/content/uploads/sites/402/2024/03/Lindsay-Burrill-VanDellen-767x633.jpg)
State-Sanctioned Discrimination: Title IX’s Expansive Loophole for Religious Institutions
8 minute read![Guiding LGBTQ+ Clients on Safeguarding Their Rights and Protections in Uncertain Political Climates Guiding LGBTQ+ Clients on Safeguarding Their Rights and Protections in Uncertain Political Climates](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/thelegalintelligencer/contrib/content/uploads/sites/402/2024/01/Giampolo_Angela-767x633.jpg)
Guiding LGBTQ+ Clients on Safeguarding Their Rights and Protections in Uncertain Political Climates
6 minute read![Love and Resilience: The Evolving Story of LGBTQ+ Rights in America Love and Resilience: The Evolving Story of LGBTQ+ Rights in America](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/402/2024/01/Giampolo_Angela-767x633.jpg)
Trending Stories
- 1‘Blitzkrieg of Lawlessness’: Environmental Lawyers Decry EPA Spending Freeze
- 2Litera Acquires Workflow Management Provider Peppermint Technology
- 3'I Can't Do This': Judge Blocks $16M Alex Jones Settlement
- 4TikTok Opts Not to Take Section 230 Immunity Fight to U.S. Supreme Court
- 5Feasting, Pledging, and Wagering, Philly Attorneys Prepare for Super Bowl
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250