Sample Public Relations Paper on Comparing the Individuals with Disabilities Act and Americans with Disabilities Act

Comparing the Individuals with Disabilities Act and Americans with Disabilities Act

Abstract

“Provision 508” is a 1973 Rehabilitation Act section. All U.S. government agencies must create and use accessible information and communications technology (ICT). Federal law approved. “Information and communications technology” (ICT) include phones, call centers, electronic documents (like PDFs), multimedia content, software, and websites. Section 508 was enacted to eliminate information technology impediments, guarantee that people with disabilities have access to new opportunities, and spur the development of solutions that will help achieve these goals. Section 504 of the original Rehabilitation Act helped set the groundwork for the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act guarantees children with disabilities a free, appropriate public education—2004 legislation. From 1975 through 1990, it was called the Education for All Handicapped Children Act.

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

In 1990, the United States government approved the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), a civil rights legislation forbidding discrimination based on a person’s handicap. The ADA covers a significantly more extensive range of situations than Section 508, including the need for equal access to employment and physical venues (among other things) and its application to private and public sector businesses. According to the Department of Justice (DOJ) and precedent, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) applies to online materials. Title III of the “Americans with Disabilities Act,” forbids discrimination in “public accommodations.” Although it does not directly address web accessibility, courts have ruled that websites and other digital assets qualify as public accommodations. This implies that you may be sued for discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act if your website’s content is inaccessible.

Effects of non-compliance to ADA

Federal agencies risk losing money, and product businesses risk losing contracts if they fail to meet Section 508 online accessibility criteria. It is probable that even if your company is not a federal government contractor, you must still comply with the ADA by making your websites and online content accessible. Legal action against a business for failing to comply with the ADA may be costly and detrimental to its brand.

Without a doubt, the most severe consequence of failing to adhere to the ADA or Section 508 is the unfair exclusion of persons with disabilities from access to online products and services. Not to mention the damage is done to a company’s bottom line by alienating a customer base that, along with their social circles, accounts for nearly $13 trillion in annual consumer expenditure. While the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) can be seen as a macro law, which states some prohibitions of discrimination against people with disabilities in a variety of settings, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is a well-established law that aims to guarantee public and accessible education to individuals with disabilities, also taking into account the particular necessities of different populations with different conditions so these can be met as much as possible. In this way, this is the most salient distinction between the various legal codes.

What these two laws have in common, or where they converge, is the goal of providing people with disabilities with equal development opportunities across various settings, including the classroom, the workplace, and public and private life more generally (transportation, family, among others). Since excluding this demographic from opportunities may be a kind of segregation and hence discrimination, this issue is also addressed in the first and second laws.

The Americans with Disabilities Act was designed to protect disabled people from prejudice. The policy’s goal is to provide clear and comprehensive laws that will eliminate any injustices faced by individuals with disabilities. Furthermore, the system’s primary objective was to prevent the marginalization and isolation of persons with disabilities (Brooks, 2019). This policy ensures that persons with disabilities have the same opportunities as everyone else in terms of education, employment, political participation, and the ability to live freely. This policy also aims to equal job opportunities for people with disabilities. This process was designed to ensure that the rights of disabled people in the United States are not violated (Percy, 2018).

To realize the policy aims of the ADA, the state proposed certain services and initiatives. Every building in the country is required by law to adhere to the ADA’s standards for accessibility. This is in terms of its layout, architecture, and construction process. The ADA reviews all pedestrian amenities to ensure that everyone can use a building. Previously built structures that did not comply with ADA standards are modified so that they do (Blanck, 2019). The Equal Employment Opportunity Act serves as a guide for businesses and other organizations in the realm of employment. Trade unions advocate for workers with disabilities to ensure they are treated relatively regarding recruiting, firing, and promotion. Schools are designed to accommodate such needs to ensure that special-needs students have equal access to educational opportunities and may make academic progress (Almond, Currie & Duque, 2018). The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has mandated guidelines for expanding Video Relay Services (VRS) for use in telecommunications. The Department of Justice ensures that the ADA’s policy requirements are met (Percy, 2018). The department has ensured that all government and federal entities follow the rules when using state and local government services.

In line with IDEA, children between the ages of 3 and 21 who, according to a multidisciplinary team, fall under one or more of the 13 categories of particular disabilities and who require special education and associated assistance. Autism, deafness, deaf-blindness, hearing impairments, multiple disabilities, orthopedic impairments, other health impairments, significant emotional disturbance, particular learning challenges, speech or language impairments, traumatic brain injury, and visual impairments are some of the categories. Anyone with a physical or mental disability that significantly restricts one or more main living activities, has a history of such an impairment, or is thought to have such an impairment is eligible for 504 benefits. Walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning, working, taking care of oneself, and doing physical labor are major life activities.

Nonsectarian private schools are afforded ADA protections to the same extent as public schools, while religiously affiliated private schools and organizations are not. When Section 504 lawsuits were combined with ADA protections, everyone involved was better off. Eligible students with disabilities must be provided with reasonable accommodations to participate and benefit from all aspects of the educational experience. This includes any component of the particular education curriculum in the community and provides some vocational education or job placement. As an acronym for IDEA, To address their requirements, children with disabilities are entitled to “free, appropriate, public education.” If students need supplementary assistance to make the most of their individualized lesson plan, they may get them.

All states must provide a “complete educational opportunity” to all children with impairments. Individualized Education Program (IEP) documents must fulfill specified requirements under IDEA, including the number of attendees at IEP meetings and the types of information that must be included. The 504-Word Confusion Exposed To get a “suitable” education, students must receive the same level of instruction as their non-disabled peers. This might refer to both mainstream and specialized forms of schooling. Under Section 504, students are still eligible for relevant services even if they are not receiving special education. Following Section 504, a plan must be created; however, a formal written record is optional. A Section 504 written plan may be modeled after an Individualized Education Program (IEP) under IDEA. Many professionals advise getting together with a group of people who know the pupils well to outline the agreed-upon services.

While the ADA does not address procedural protections for students with disabilities in the classroom, it does spell out methods for filing complaints and the repercussions of failing to comply with administrative standards for services and employment. Parental notification about identification, assessment, and placement is required under IDEA. In addition, a formal request must be submitted before any relocation. The Act specifies what must be included in these notifications in writing. Parents must be notified of any identification, assessment, or placements under Section 504. Warnings should be made in writing, and advance notice is required only in case of a “substantial change” in the assignment. For example, compliance with Section 504 requirements might be achieved by adhering to the procedural protections established by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

In summary, While the ADA’s laws apply to physical locations, digital media, websites, and more, Section 508 details requirements for these and other areas, including policy and management, acquisition, content production, design and development, testing, and training tools and events. Any business that needs to comply with the more stringent requirements of regulations like Section 508 may do so by operating inside clearly delineated zones. The Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 508 work together to guarantee that no governmental or private entity would restrict Internet use by people with disabilities. However, these regulations symbolize the final endpoint on the road to an open internet. You may follow the WCAG guidelines to get there. You will fully comply with the law if you follow WCAG 2.1.

 

 

 

 

References:

Acemoglu, D., & Angrist, J. D. (2001). Consequences of employment protection? The case of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Journal of Political Economy109(5), 915-957. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/322836

Alam, N. H. (2014). Web Accessibility of the Higher Education Institute Websites Based on the World Wide Web Consortium and Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. University of Arkansas. https://search.proquest.com/openview/d0919d00bb226f5e3a5917dbb9c50c63/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750

Almond, D., Currie, J., & Duque, V. (2018). Childhood circumstances and adult outcomes: Act II. Journal of Economic Literature, 56(4), 1360-1446. https://www.aeaweb.org/doi/10.1257/jel.20171164

Blanck, P. (2019). Why America is Better Off Because of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Touro L. Rev., 35, 605.

Brooks, W. (2019). The Application of Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act to Employment Discrimination: Why the Circuits Have Gotten It Wrong. Touro L. Rev., 35, 73.

Gordon, M., & Keiser, S. (Eds.). (2000). Accommodations in higher education under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): A no-nonsense guide for clinicians, educators, administrators, and lawyers. Guilford Press. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Remedial and Special Education22(6), 324-334. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=odmAwR5sIxsC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=Gordon,+M.,+%26+Keiser,+S.+(Eds.).+(2000).&ots=nRXlgIeHcA&sig=PNAWamMnXi25pgcOW_RGIRTBTQQ

Percy, S. L. (2018). Disability, civil rights, and public policy: The politics of implementation. University of Alabama Press. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=Dq5UDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=Percy,+S.+L.+(2018).+&ots=xNdy9yBwvs&sig=y_Wl2HPqLXlgZEaCRccOut1TPr8

Katsiyannis, A., Yell, M. L., & Bradley, R. (2001). Reflections on the 25th anniversary of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Remedial and Special education22(6), 324–334. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/074193250102200602