Are medical school admissions allowed to discriminate against people with disabilities?

[LocksmithJohn]

I am referring to the "technical standards" imposed by all medical schools, but specifically this document from Yale and this paragraph:

"In assessing applicants for admission, it is also appropriate to consider the applicant's current physical and emotional status, cumulative and progressive disability, and drug-induced impairments that may pose obstacles to the safe application of the student's knowledge and skills or prevent effective interaction with patients. Applicants will be reviewed individually and on a case-by-case basis. No otherwise qualified individual with a handicap will be excluded from admission. In accordance with University policy and as delineated by Federal and Connecticut law, the Medical School does not discriminate in admissions, educational programs, or employment against any individual on account of that individual's handicap or disability"

The first sentence seems to contradict the rest. Does Yale actually assess how an applicant's disability may progress in their admissions decision?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[wholeheartedly]

Most schools have some sort of statement like this.

Basically schools are required to provide reasonable accomations for people with disabilities, but reasonable is often up to the school to decide.

There are certain degrees of disability that would make it very difficult to do certain jobs. OTOH, people are coming up with some pretty clever accommodations for things too.

The ”may progress” statement could be refering to things known to become progressivley worse like Huntington’s or ALS?

 

[Mr.Smile12]

Yes: see review article: A Review of Legal Decisions Relevant to Technical Standards Used in Pharmacy School Admissions

 

[Goro]

It's not discrimination if you physically or mentally can't carry the necessary tasks of being a doctor.

 

[LocksmithJohn]

It's not discrimination if you physically or mentally can't carry the necessary tasks of being a doctor.

To be more specific, I am asking if schools are "allowed" to actively not select applicants who do presently adhere to all of the technical standards without accommodations, but who disclose in their application a disorder that may (but is increasingly unlikely to) require a change in the level of accommodations needed to meet these standards.

This question is prompted by the line from the document above indicating that Yale considers "cumulative and progressive disability" in their admissions decisions.

 

[Goro]

To be more specific, I am asking if schools are "allowed" to actively not select applicants who do presently adhere to all of the technical standards without accommodations, but who disclose in their application a disorder that may (but is increasingly unlikely to) require a change in the level of accommodations needed to meet these standards.

This question is prompted by the line from the document above indicating that Yale considers "cumulative and progressive disability" in their admissions decisions.

That's one for the lawyers, Alas

 

[wholeheartedly]

To be more specific, I am asking if schools are "allowed" to actively not select applicants who do presently adhere to all of the technical standards without accommodations, but who disclose in their application a disorder that may (but is increasingly unlikely to) require a change in the level of accommodations needed to meet these standards.

This question is prompted by the line from the document above indicating that Yale considers "cumulative and progressive disability" in their admissions decisions.

I really suspect the focus is things known to absolutely progress as I noted above, not things that might but probably won’t.

 

[Mr.Smile12]

To be more specific, I am asking if schools are "allowed" to actively not select applicants who do presently adhere to all of the technical standards without accommodations, but who disclose in their application a disorder that may (but is increasingly unlikely to) require a change in the level of accommodations needed to meet these standards.

This question is prompted by the line from the document above indicating that Yale considers "cumulative and progressive disability" in their admissions decisions.

Read the review I posted.

 

[Med Ed]

To be more specific, I am asking if schools are "allowed" to actively not select applicants who do presently adhere to all of the technical standards without accommodations, but who disclose in their application a disorder that may (but is increasingly unlikely to) require a change in the level of accommodations needed to meet these standards.

This question is prompted by the line from the document above indicating that Yale considers "cumulative and progressive disability" in their admissions decisions.

This is where "individually and on a case-by-case basis" comes in. As noted above, an applicant with Huntington's or ALS is unlikely to get traction, but the possible progression of an existing disorder may not be sufficient reason to deny admission. It will depend on the details.

 

[Goro]

To be more specific, I am asking if schools are "allowed" to actively not select applicants who do presently adhere to all of the technical standards without accommodations, but who disclose in their application a disorder that may (but is increasingly unlikely to) require a change in the level of accommodations needed to meet these standards.

This question is prompted by the line from the document above indicating that Yale considers "cumulative and progressive disability" in their admissions decisions.

I suggest posting in the Confidential Consult forum if you're willing to share what condition you're worried about

 

[LunaOri]

Some conditions (type 1 diabetes, certain vision or hearing disorders, spinal cord injuries) are not uncommon in medical school. Conditions that are likely to result in the inability to perform the necessary tasks of a physician would get much closer scrutiny.

 

[GoSpursGo]

To be more specific, I am asking if schools are "allowed" to actively not select applicants who do presently adhere to all of the technical standards without accommodations, but who disclose in their application a disorder that may (but is increasingly unlikely to) require a change in the level of accommodations needed to meet these standards.

This question is prompted by the line from the document above indicating that Yale considers "cumulative and progressive disability" in their admissions decisions.

As others have said, these cases have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Nobody wants to exclude someone from school based on a disability that can be managed, but at the same time nobody wants to let someone into med school only to find that their disability makes it impossible to progress in school. Only when considered in a case-by-case context can someone really make that determination.

@futureapppsy2 may have something to add.

 

[Mr.Smile12]

AAMC has lent its support for Doctors with Disabilities (Doctors with Disabilities Push for Change as Long COVID Affects Their Workforce). I have to find the recent press release on this, but there are many articles that give examples where those with disabilities were admitted. Misconception, misinformation, and myths: Premed students with disabilities

Also for a resource: Society for Physicians with Disabilities

 

[Radishguy]

It would be interesting to see an admission decision that specifically mentioned a disability as the reason for giving the R. I would suspect that any school denying someone because of fears of a disability would either give a different or no reason at all. Just as an employer could not hire an applicant for a million different reasons, the same applies to medical schools. The issue comes about when there is a recognizable pattern- over 10 years, 100 applicants with X diagnosis applied and only none (or significantly less than the same percentages applied to the general population) were accepted. At that point, and only at that point, would you see some legal intervention. However, by the time your case saw the desk of the ultimate judiciary, you’d probably be pretty set in whatever backup career you settled on.

 

[Goro]

It would be interesting to see an admission decision that specifically mentioned a disability as the reason for giving the R. I would suspect that any school denying someone because of fears of a disability would either give a different or no reason at all. Just as an employer could not hire an applicant for a million different reasons, the same applies to medical schools. The issue comes about when there is a recognizable pattern- over 10 years, 100 applicants with X diagnosis applied and only none (or significantly less than the same percentages applied to the general population) were accepted. At that point, and only at that point, would you see some legal intervention. However, by the time your case saw the desk of the ultimate judiciary, you’d probably be pretty set in whatever backup career you settled on.

I can give you an example, but unfortunately this would probably doxx me in my school.

Let's just say that the candidate had a disability that would have made them impossible to perform osteopathic manipulative medicine